{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_45305/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_45305","id":"gutenberg_45305","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/45305","summary":null,"tags":["Apologetics -- Early works to 1800","Category: Classics of Literature","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Kingdom of God -- Early works to 1800"],"text":"TO SUBSCRIBERS.\n\n\n    MESSRS. CLARK have much pleasure in publishing the first issue\n           of Translations of the Writings of ST. AUGUSTINE:\n\n                          THE 'CITY OF GOD,'\n\n                            IN TWO VOLUMES.\n\nThey believe this will prove not the least valuable of their various\nSeries, and no pains will be spared to make it so. The Editor has\nsecured a most competent staff of Translators, and every care is\nbeing taken to secure not only accuracy but elegance.\n\nThe Works of ST. AUGUSTINE to be included in the Series are (in\naddition to the 'CITY OF GOD'):--\n\n    All the TREATISES in the PELAGIAN, and the four leading TREATISES\n        in the DONATIST CONTROVERSY.\n\n    The TREATISES against FAUSTUS the Manich\u00e6an; on CHRISTIAN\n        DOCTRINE; the TRINITY; the HARMONY OF THE EVANGELISTS; the\n        SERMON ON THE MOUNT.\n\n    Also, the LECTURES on the GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN, the CONFESSIONS,\n        a SELECTION from the LETTERS, the RETRACTATIONS, the\n        SOLILOQUIES, and SELECTIONS from the PRACTICAL TREATISES.\n\nAll these works are of first-rate importance, and only a small\nproportion of them have yet appeared in an English dress. The SERMONS\nand the COMMENTARIES ON THE PSALMS having been already given by\nthe Oxford Translators, it is not intended, at least in the first\ninstance, to publish them.\n\nThe Series will include a LIFE OF ST. AUGUSTINE, by ROBERT RAINY,\nD.D., Professor of Church History, New College, Edinburgh.\n\nThe Series will probably extend to Sixteen or Eighteen Volumes. The\nPublishers will be glad to receive the _Names_ of Subscribers as\nearly as possible.\n\nSUBSCRIPTION: Four Volumes for a Guinea, _payable in advance_, as in\nthe case of the ANTE-NICENE SERIES (24s. when not paid in advance).\n\nIt is understood that Subscribers are bound to take at least the\nbooks of the first two years. Each Volume will be sold separately at\n(on an average) 10s. 6d. each volume.\n\nThe second issue will be ready in a few months, and will probably\ncomprise:--The Volume on the DONATIST CONTROVERSY, translated by the\nRev. J. R. KING, Vicar of St. Peter's in the East, Oxford; and the\nFirst Volume of the TREATISES in the PELAGIAN CONTROVERSY, translated\nby Rev. PETER HOLMES, D.D., Rural Dean, etc., Plymouth.\n\nThey trust the Subscribers to the ANTE-NICENE LIBRARY will continue\ntheir Subscription to this Series, and they hope to be favoured with\nan early remittance of the Subscription.\n\n\n\n\n                               THE WORKS\n\n\n                                  OF\n\n\n                          AURELIUS AUGUSTINE,\n                           BISHOP OF HIPPO.\n\n\n                         _A NEW TRANSLATION._\n\n\n                            =Edited by the=\n                        REV. MARCUS DODS, M.A.\n\n\n                               VOL. II.\n                           THE CITY OF GOD,\n                              VOLUME II.\n\n\n                              EDINBURGH:\n                   T. & T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.\n                              MDCCCLXXI.\n\n\n\n\n                      PRINTED BY MURRAY AND GIBB,\n                                  FOR\n                       T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH.\n\n                LONDON,        HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO.\n                DUBLIN,        JOHN ROBERTSON AND CO.\n                NEW YORK,      C. SCRIBNER AND CO.\n\n\n\n\n                                  THE\n\n\n                             CITY OF GOD.\n\n\n\n\n                          =Translated by the=\n\n                        REV. MARCUS DODS, M.A.\n\n\n\n\n                              VOLUME II.\n\n\n\n\n                              EDINBURGH:\n\n                   T. & T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.\n\n                              MDCCCLXXI.\n\n\n\n\nOf the following Work, Books IV. XVII. and XVIII. have been\ntranslated by the Rev. GEORGE WILSON, Glenluce; Books V. VI. VII. and\nVIII. by the Rev. J. J. SMITH.\n\n\n\n\n                               CONTENTS.\n\n\n                               BOOK XIV.\n\n                                                                PAGE\n\n  Of the punishment and results of man's first sin, and of the\n      propagation of man without lust, 1\n\n                               BOOK XV.\n\n  The progress of the earthly and heavenly cities traced by the\n      sacred history, 49\n\n                               BOOK XVI.\n\n  The history of the city of God from Noah to the time of the kings\n      of Israel, 104\n\n                              BOOK XVII.\n\n  The history of the city of God from the times of the prophets to\n      Christ, 165\n\n                              BOOK XVIII.\n\n  A parallel history of the earthly and heavenly cities from the\n      time of Abraham to the end of the world, 217\n\n                               BOOK XIX.\n\n  A review of the philosophical opinions regarding the Supreme\n      Good, and a comparison of these opinions with the Christian\n      belief regarding happiness, 293\n\n                               BOOK XX.\n\n  Of the last judgment, and the declarations regarding it in the Old\n      and New Testaments, 345\n\n                               BOOK XXI.\n\n  Of the eternal punishment of the wicked in hell, and of the\n      various objections urged against it, 413\n\n                              BOOK XXII.\n\n  Of the eternal happiness of the saints, the resurrection of the\n      body, and the miracles of the early Church, 472\n\n\n\n\n                           THE CITY OF GOD.\n\n\n                          BOOK FOURTEENTH.[1]\n\n                               ARGUMENT.\n\n  AUGUSTINE AGAIN TREATS OF THE SIN OF THE FIRST MAN, AND TEACHES\n      THAT IT IS THE CAUSE OF THE CARNAL LIFE AND VICIOUS AFFECTIONS\n      OF MAN. ESPECIALLY HE PROVES THAT THE SHAME WHICH ACCOMPANIES\n      LUST IS THE JUST PUNISHMENT OF THAT DISOBEDIENCE, AND INQUIRES\n      HOW MAN, IF HE HAD NOT SINNED, WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE WITHOUT\n      LUST TO PROPAGATE HIS KIND.\n\n\n  1. _That the disobedience of the first man would have plunged all\n      men into the endless misery of the second death, had not the\n      grace of God rescued many._\n\nWe have already stated in the preceding books that God, desiring\nnot only that the human race might be able by their similarity of\nnature to associate with one another, but also that they might be\nbound together in harmony and peace by the ties of relationship, was\npleased to derive all men from one individual, and created man with\nsuch a nature that the members of the race should not have died, had\nnot the two first (of whom the one was created out of nothing, and\nthe other out of him) merited this by their disobedience; for by them\nso great a sin was committed, that by it the human nature was altered\nfor the worse, and was transmitted also to their posterity, liable\nto sin and subject to death. And the kingdom of death so reigned\nover men, that the deserved penalty of sin would have hurled all\nheadlong even into the second death, of which there is no end, had\nnot the undeserved grace of God saved some therefrom. And thus it\nhas come to pass, that though there are very many and great nations\nall over the earth, whose rites and customs, speech, arms, and dress,\nare distinguished by marked differences, yet there are no more than\ntwo kinds of human society, which we may justly call two cities,\naccording to the language of our Scriptures. The one consists of\nthose who wish to live after the flesh, the other of those who wish\nto live after the spirit; and when they severally achieve what they\nwish, they live in peace, each after their kind.\n\n\n  2. _Of carnal life, which is to be understood not only of living\n      in bodily indulgence, but also of living in the vices of the\n      inner man._\n\nFirst, we must see what it is to live after the flesh, and what to live\nafter the spirit. For any one who either does not recollect, or does\nnot sufficiently weigh, the language of sacred Scripture, may, on first\nhearing what we have said, suppose that the Epicurean philosophers\nlive after the flesh, because they place man's highest good in bodily\npleasure; and that those others do so who have been of opinion that in\nsome form or other bodily good is man's supreme good; and that the mass\nof men do so who, without dogmatizing or philosophizing on the subject,\nare so prone to lust that they cannot delight in any pleasure save\nsuch as they receive from bodily sensations: and he may suppose that\nthe Stoics, who place the supreme good of men in the soul, live after\nthe spirit; for what is man's soul, if not spirit? But in the sense of\nthe divine Scripture both are proved to live after the flesh. For by\nflesh it means not only the body of a terrestrial and mortal animal, as\nwhen it says, \"All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind\nof flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, another\nof birds,\"[2] but it uses this word in many other significations; and\namong these various usages, a frequent one is to use flesh for man\nhimself, the nature of man taking the part for the whole, as in the\nwords, \"By the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified;\"[3]\nfor what does he mean here by \"no flesh\" but \"no man?\" And this,\nindeed, he shortly after says more plainly: \"No man shall be justified\nby the law;\"[4] and in the Epistle to the Galatians, \"Knowing that a\nman is not justified by the works of the law.\" And so we understand\nthe words, \"And the Word was made flesh,\"[5]--that is, man, which some\nnot accepting in its right sense, have supposed that Christ had not a\nhuman soul.[6] For as the whole is used for the part in the words of\nMary Magdalene in the Gospel, \"They have taken away my Lord, and I know\nnot where they have laid Him,\"[7] by which she meant only the flesh\nof Christ, which she supposed had been taken from the tomb where it\nhad been buried, so the part is used for the whole, flesh being named,\nwhile man is referred to, as in the quotations above cited.\n\nSince, then, Scripture uses the word flesh in many ways, which there\nis not time to collect and investigate, if we are to ascertain what\nit is to live after the flesh (which is certainly evil, though the\nnature of flesh is not itself evil), we must carefully examine that\npassage of the epistle which the Apostle Paul wrote to the Galatians,\nin which he says, \"Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which\nare these: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,\nidolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife,\nseditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings,\nand such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told\nyou in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit\nthe kingdom of God.\"[8] This whole passage of the apostolic epistle\nbeing considered, so far as it bears on the matter in hand, will\nbe sufficient to answer the question, what it is to live after the\nflesh. For among the works of the flesh which he said were manifest,\nand which he cited for condemnation, we find not only those which\nconcern the pleasure of the flesh, as fornications, uncleanness,\nlasciviousness, drunkenness, revellings, but also those which, though\nthey be remote from fleshly pleasure, reveal the vices of the soul.\nFor who does not see that idolatries, witchcrafts, hatreds, variance,\nemulations, wrath, strife, heresies, envyings, are vices rather of\nthe soul than of the flesh? For it is quite possible for a man to\nabstain from fleshly pleasures for the sake of idolatry or some\nheretical error; and yet, even when he does so, he is proved by this\napostolic authority to be living after the flesh; and in abstaining\nfrom fleshly pleasure, he is proved to be practising damnable works\nof the flesh. Who that has enmity has it not in his soul? or who\nwould say to his enemy, or to the man he thinks his enemy, You have a\nbad flesh towards me, and not rather, You have a bad spirit towards\nme? In fine, if any one heard of what I may call \"carnalities,\" he\nwould not fail to attribute them to the carnal part of man; so no\none doubts that \"animosities\" belong to the soul of man. Why then\ndoes the doctor of the Gentiles in faith and verity call all these\nand similar things works of the flesh, unless because, by that mode\nof speech whereby the part is used for the whole, he means us to\nunderstand by the word flesh the man himself?\n\n\n  3. _That sin is caused not by the flesh, but by the soul, and\n      that the corruption contracted from sin is not sin, but sin's\n      punishment._\n\nBut if any one says that the flesh is the cause of all vices and\nill conduct, inasmuch as the soul lives wickedly only because it is\nmoved by the flesh, it is certain he has not carefully considered\nthe whole nature of man. For \"the corruptible body, indeed, weigheth\ndown the soul.\"[9] Whence, too, the apostle, speaking of this\ncorruptible body, of which he had shortly before said, \"though our\noutward man perish,\"[10] says, \"We know that if our earthly house\nof this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an\nhouse not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we\ngroan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which\nis from heaven: if so be that being clothed we shall not be found\nnaked. For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened:\nnot for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality\nmight be swallowed up in life.\"[11] We are then burdened with this\ncorruptible body; but knowing that the cause of this burdensomeness\nis not the nature and substance of the body, but its corruption, we\ndo not desire to be deprived of the body, but to be clothed with\nits immortality. For then, also, there will be a body, but it shall\nno longer be a burden, being no longer corruptible. At present,\nthen, \"the corruptible body presseth down the soul, and the earthly\ntabernacle weigheth down the mind that museth upon many things,\"\nnevertheless they are in error who suppose that all the evils of the\nsoul proceed from the body.\n\nVirgil, indeed, seems to express the sentiments of Plato in the\nbeautiful lines, where he says,--\n\n          \"A fiery strength inspires their lives,\n           An essence that from heaven derives,\n           Though clogged in part by limbs of clay,\n           And the dull 'vesture of decay;'\"[12]\n\nbut though he goes on to mention the four most common mental\nemotions,--desire, fear, joy, sorrow,--with the intention of showing\nthat the body is the origin of all sins and vices, saying,--\n\n          \"Hence wild desires and grovelling fears,\n           And human laughter, human tears,\n           Immured in dungeon-seeming night,\n           They look abroad, yet see no light,\"[13]\n\nyet we believe quite otherwise. For the corruption of the body,\nwhich weighs down the soul, is not the cause but the punishment of\nthe first sin; and it was not the corruptible flesh that made the\nsoul sinful, but the sinful soul that made the flesh corruptible.\nAnd though from this corruption of the flesh there arise certain\nincitements to vice, and indeed vicious desires, yet we must not\nattribute to the flesh all the vices of a wicked life, in case we\nthereby clear the devil of all these, for he has no flesh. For though\nwe cannot call the devil a fornicator or drunkard, or ascribe to\nhim any sensual indulgence (though he is the secret instigator and\nprompter of those who sin in these ways), yet he is exceedingly\nproud and envious. And this viciousness has so possessed him, that\non account of it he is reserved in chains of darkness to everlasting\npunishment.[14] Now these vices, which have dominion over the devil,\nthe apostle attributes to the flesh, which certainly the devil has\nnot. For he says \"hatred, variance, emulations, strife, envying\" are\nthe works of the flesh; and of all these evils pride is the origin\nand head, and it rules in the devil though he has no flesh. For\nwho shows more hatred to the saints? who is more at variance with\nthem? who more envious, bitter, and jealous? And since he exhibits\nall these works, though he has no flesh, how are they works of the\nflesh, unless because they are the works of man, who is, as I said,\nspoken of under the name of flesh? For it is not by having flesh,\nwhich the devil has not, but by living according to himself,--that\nis, according to man,--that man became like the devil. For the devil\ntoo, wished to live according to himself when he did not abide in the\ntruth; so that when he lied, this was not of God, but of himself, who\nis not only a liar, but the father of lies, he being the first who\nlied, and the originator of lying as of sin.\n\n\n  4. _What it is to live according to man, and what to live according\n                               to God._\n\nWhen, therefore, man lives according to man, not according to God,\nhe is like the devil. Because not even an angel might live according\nto an angel, but only according to God, if he was to abide in the\ntruth, and speak God's truth and not his own lie. And of man, too,\nthe same apostle says in another place, \"If the truth of God hath\nmore abounded through my lie;\"[15]--\"my lie,\" he said, and \"God's\ntruth.\" When, then, a man lives according to the truth, he lives\nnot according to himself, but according to God; for He was God who\nsaid, \"I am the truth.\"[16] When, therefore, man lives according to\nhimself,--that is, according to man, not according to God,--assuredly\nhe lives according to a lie; not that man himself is a lie, for\nGod is his author and creator, who is certainly not the author and\ncreator of a lie, but because man was made upright, that he might not\nlive according to himself, but according to Him that made him,--in\nother words, that he might do His will and not his own; and not to\nlive as he was made to live, that is a lie. For he certainly desires\nto be blessed even by not living so that he may be blessed. And what\nis a lie if this desire be not? Wherefore it is not without meaning\nsaid that all sin is a lie. For no sin is committed save by that\ndesire or will by which we desire that it be well with us, and shrink\nfrom it being ill with us. That, therefore, is a lie which we do in\norder that it may be well with us, but which makes us more miserable\nthan we were. And why is this, but because the source of man's\nhappiness lies only in God, whom he abandons when he sins, and not in\nhimself, by living according to whom he sins?\n\nIn enunciating this proposition of ours, then, that because some live\naccording to the flesh and others according to the spirit there have\narisen two diverse and conflicting cities, we might equally well\nhave said, \"because some live according to man, others according to\nGod.\" For Paul says very plainly to the Corinthians, \"For whereas\nthere is among you envying and strife, are ye not carnal, and walk\naccording to man?\"[17] So that to walk according to man and to be\ncarnal are the same; for by _flesh_, that is, by a part of man, man\nis meant. For before he said that those same persons were animal whom\nafterwards he calls carnal, saying, \"For what man knoweth the things\nof a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things\nof God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received\nnot the spirit of this world, but the Spirit which is of God; that\nwe might know the things which are freely given to us of God. Which\nthings also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth,\nbut which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with\nspiritual. But the animal man perceiveth not the things of the Spirit\nof God; for they are foolishness unto him.\"[18] It is to men of this\nkind, then, that is, to animal men, he shortly after says, \"And I,\nbrethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto\ncarnal.\"[19] And this is to be interpreted by the same usage, a part\nbeing taken for the whole. For both the soul and the flesh, the\ncomponent parts of man, can be used to signify the whole man; and so\nthe animal man and the carnal man are not two different things, but\none and the same thing, viz. man living according to man. In the same\nway it is nothing else than men that are meant either in the words,\n\"By the deeds of the law there shall no _flesh_ be justified;\"[20]\nor in the words, \"Seventy-five _souls_ went down into Egypt with\nJacob.\"[21] In the one passage, \"no flesh\" signifies \"no man;\" and\nin the other, by \"seventy-five souls\" seventy-five men are meant.\nAnd the expression, \"not in words which man's wisdom teacheth,\" might\nequally be \"not in words which fleshly wisdom teacheth;\" and the\nexpression, \"ye walk according to man,\" might be \"according to the\nflesh.\" And this is still more apparent in the words which followed:\n\"For while one saith, I am of Paul, and another, I am of Apollos,\nare ye not men?\" The same thing which he had before expressed by \"ye\nare animal,\" \"ye are carnal,\" he now expresses by \"ye are men;\" that\nis, ye live according to man, not according to God, for if you lived\naccording to Him, you should be gods.\n\n\n  5. _That the opinion of the Platonists regarding the nature of\n      body and soul is not so censurable as that of the Manich\u00e6ans,\n      but that even it is objectionable, because it ascribes the\n      origin of vices to the nature of the flesh._\n\nThere is no need, therefore, that in our sins and vices we accuse\nthe nature of the flesh to the injury of the Creator, for in its own\nkind and degree the flesh is good; but to desert the Creator good,\nand live according to the created good, is not good, whether a man\nchoose to live according to the flesh, or according to the soul,\nor according to the whole human nature, which is composed of flesh\nand soul, and which is therefore spoken of either by the name flesh\nalone, or by the name soul alone. For he who extols the nature of\nthe soul as the chief good, and condemns the nature of the flesh as\nif it were evil, assuredly is fleshly both in his love of the soul\nand hatred of the flesh; for these his feelings arise from human\nfancy, not from divine truth. The Platonists, indeed, are not so\nfoolish as, with the Manich\u00e6ans, to detest our present bodies as an\nevil nature;[22] for they attribute all the elements of which this\nvisible and tangible world is compacted, with all their qualities,\nto God their Creator. Nevertheless, from the death-infected members\nand earthly construction of the body they believe the soul is\nso affected, that there are thus originated in it the diseases\nof desires, and fears, and joy, and sorrow, under which four\nperturbations, as Cicero[23] calls them, or passions, as most prefer\nto name them with the Greeks, is included the whole viciousness of\nhuman life. But if this be so, how is it that \u00c6neas in Virgil, when\nhe had heard from his father in Hades that the souls should return\nto bodies, expresses surprise at this declaration, and exclaims:\n\n          \"O father! and can thought conceive\n           That happy souls this realm would leave,\n                      And seek the upper sky,\n           With sluggish clay to reunite?\n           This direful longing for the light,\n                      Whence comes it, say, and why?\"[24]\n\nThis direful longing, then, does it still exist even in that boasted\npurity of the disembodied spirits, and does it still proceed from the\ndeath-infected members and earthly limbs? Does he not assert that,\nwhen they begin to long to return to the body, they have already been\ndelivered from all these so-called pestilences of the body? From\nwhich we gather that, were this endlessly alternating purification\nand defilement of departing and returning souls as true as it is most\ncertainly false, yet it could not be averred that all culpable and\nvicious motions of the soul originate in the earthly body; for, on\ntheir own showing, \"this direful longing,\" to use the words of their\nnoble exponent, is so extraneous to the body, that it moves the soul\nthat is purged of all bodily taint, and is existing apart from any\nbody whatever, and moves it, moreover, to be embodied again. So that\neven they themselves acknowledge that the soul is not only moved to\ndesire, fear, joy, sorrow, by the flesh, but that it can also be\nagitated with these emotions at its own instance.\n\n\n   6. _Of the character of the human will which makes the affections\n                     of the soul right or wrong._\n\nBut the character of the human will is of moment; because, if it is\nwrong, these motions of the soul will be wrong, but if it is right,\nthey will be not merely blameless, but even praiseworthy. For the\nwill is in them all; yea, none of them is anything else than will.\nFor what are desire and joy but a volition of consent to the things\nwe wish? And what are fear and sadness but a volition of aversion\nfrom the things which we do not wish? But when consent takes the form\nof seeking to possess the things we wish, this is called desire; and\nwhen consent takes the form of enjoying the things we wish, this\nis called joy. In like manner, when we turn with aversion from that\nwhich we do not wish to happen, this volition is termed fear; and\nwhen we turn away from that which has happened against our will, this\nact of will is called sorrow. And generally in respect of all that\nwe seek or shun, as a man's will is attracted or repelled, so it is\nchanged and turned into these different affections. Wherefore the\nman who lives according to God, and not according to man, ought to\nbe a lover of good, and therefore a hater of evil. And since no one\nis evil by nature, but whoever is evil is evil by vice, he who lives\naccording to God ought to cherish towards evil men a perfect hatred,\nso that he shall neither hate the man because of his vice, nor love\nthe vice because of the man, but hate the vice and love the man. For\nthe vice being cursed, all that ought to be loved, and nothing that\nought to be hated, will remain.\n\n\n   7. _That the words love and regard_ (amor _and_ dilectio) _are in\n       Scripture used indifferently of good and evil affection._\n\nHe who resolves to love God, and to love his neighbour as himself, not\naccording to man but according to God, is on account of this love said\nto be of a good will; and this is in Scripture more commonly called\ncharity, but it is also, even in the same books, called love. For the\napostle says that the man to be elected as a ruler of the people must\nbe a lover of good.[25] And when the Lord Himself had asked Peter,\n\"Hast thou a regard for me (_diligis_) more than these?\" Peter replied,\n\"Lord, Thou knowest that I love (_amo_) Thee.\" And again a second time\nthe Lord asked not whether Peter loved (_amaret_) Him, but whether he\nhad a regard (_diligeret_) for Him, and he again answered, \"Lord, Thou\nknowest that I love (_amo_) Thee.\" But on the third interrogation the\nLord Himself no longer says, \"Hast thou a regard (_diligis_) for me,\"\nbut \"Lovest thou (_amas_) me?\" And then the evangelist adds, \"Peter was\ngrieved because He said unto him the third time, Lovest thou (_amas_)\nme?\" though the Lord had not said three times but only once, \"Lovest\nthou (_amas_) me?\" and twice \"_Diligis me?_\" from which we gather\nthat, even when the Lord said \"_diligis_,\" He used an equivalent for\n\"_amas_.\" Peter, too, throughout used one word for the one thing,\nand the third time also replied, \"Lord, Thou knowest all things, Thou\nknowest that I love (_amo_) Thee.\"[26]\n\nI have judged it right to mention this, because some are of opinion\nthat charity or regard (_dilectio_) is one thing, love (_amor_)\nanother. They say that _dilectio_ is used of a good affection, _amor_\nof an evil love. But it is very certain that even secular literature\nknows no such distinction. However, it is for the philosophers to\ndetermine whether and how they differ, though their own writings\nsufficiently testify that they make great account of love (_amor_)\nplaced on good objects, and even on God Himself. But we wished to\nshow that the Scriptures of our religion, whose authority we prefer\nto all writings whatsoever, make no distinction between _amor_,\n_dilectio_, and _caritas_; and we have already shown that _amor_\nis used in a good connection. And if any one fancy that _amor_ is\nno doubt used both of good and bad loves, but that _dilectio_ is\nreserved for the good only, let him remember what the psalm says, \"He\nthat loveth (_diligit_) iniquity hateth his own soul;\"[27] and the\nwords of the Apostle John, \"If any man love (_diligere_) the world,\nthe love (_dilectio_) of the Father is not in him.\"[28] Here you have\nin one passage _dilectio_ used both in a good and a bad sense. And\nif any one demands an instance of _amor_ being used in a bad sense\n(for we have already shown its use in a good sense), let him read\nthe words, \"For men shall be lovers (_amantes_) of their own selves,\nlovers (_amatores_) of money.\"[29]\n\nThe right will is, therefore, well-directed love, and the wrong will\nis ill-directed love. Love, then, yearning to have what is loved,\nis desire; and having and enjoying it, is joy; fleeing what is\nopposed to it, it is fear; and feeling what is opposed to it, when\nit has befallen it, it is sadness. Now these motions are evil if\nthe love is evil; good if the love is good. What we assert let us\nprove from Scripture. The apostle \"desires to depart, and to be with\nChrist.\"[30] And, \"My soul desired to long for Thy judgments;\"[31]\nor if it is more appropriate to say, \"My soul longed to desire Thy\njudgments.\" And, \"The desire of wisdom bringeth to a kingdom.\"[32]\nYet there has always obtained the usage of understanding desire\nand concupiscence in a bad sense if the object be not defined. But\njoy is used in a good sense: \"Be glad in the Lord, and rejoice,\nye righteous.\"[33] And, \"Thou hast put gladness in my heart.\"[34]\nAnd, \"Thou wilt fill me with joy with Thy countenance.\"[35] Fear is\nused in a good sense by the apostle when he says, \"Work out your\nsalvation with fear and trembling.\"[36] And, \"Be not high-minded, but\nfear.\"[37] And, \"I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled\nEve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from\nthe simplicity that is in Christ.\"[38] But with respect to sadness,\nwhich Cicero prefers to call sickness (_\u00e6gritudo_), and Virgil pain\n(_dolor_) (as he says, \"_Dolent gaudentque_\"[39]), but which I prefer\nto call sorrow, because sickness and pain are more commonly used to\nexpress bodily suffering,--with respect to this emotion, I say, the\nquestion whether it can be used in a good sense is more difficult.\n\n\n  8. _Of the three perturbations, which the Stoics admitted in the\n      soul of the wise man to the exclusion of grief or sadness,\n      which the manly mind ought not to experience._\n\nThose emotions which the Greeks call \u03b5\u1f50\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03b9, and which Cicero\ncalls _constanti\u00e6_, the Stoics would restrict to three; and,\ninstead of three \"perturbations\" in the soul of the wise man, they\nsubstituted severally, in place of desire, will; in place of joy,\ncontentment; and for fear, caution; and as to sickness or pain,\nwhich we, to avoid ambiguity, preferred to call sorrow, they denied\nthat it could exist in the mind of a wise man. Will, they say, seeks\nthe good, for this the wise man does. Contentment has its object in\ngood that is possessed, and this the wise man continually possesses.\nCaution avoids evil, and this the wise man ought to avoid. But sorrow\narises from evil that has already happened; and as they suppose that\nno evil can happen to the wise man, there can be no representative of\nsorrow in his mind. According to them, therefore, none but the wise\nman wills, is contented, uses caution; and that the fool can do no\nmore than desire, rejoice, fear, be sad. The former three affections\nCicero calls _constanti\u00e6_, the last four _perturbationes_. Many,\nhowever, call these last _passions_; and, as I have said, the Greeks\ncall the former \u03b5\u1f50\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03b9, and the latter \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7. And when I made a\ncareful examination of Scripture to find whether this terminology was\nsanctioned by it, I came upon this saying of the prophet: \"There is\nno contentment to the wicked, saith the Lord;\"[40] as if the wicked\nmight more properly rejoice than be contented regarding evils, for\ncontentment is the property of the good and godly. I found also\nthat verse in the Gospel: \"Whatsoever ye would that men should do\nunto you, do ye even so unto them;\"[41] which seems to imply that\nevil or shameful things may be the object of desire, but not of\nwill. Indeed, some interpreters have added \"good things\" to make the\nexpression more in conformity with customary usage, and have given\nthis meaning, \"Whatsoever good deeds that ye would that men should\ndo unto you.\" For they thought that this would prevent any one from\nwishing other men to provide him with unseemly, not to say shameful,\ngratifications,--luxurious banquets, for example,--on the supposition\nthat if he returned the like to them he would be fulfilling this\nprecept. In the Greek Gospel, however, from which the Latin is\ntranslated, \"good\" does not occur, but only, \"All things whatsoever\nye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto them,\" and,\nas I believe, because \"good\" is already included in the word \"would;\"\nfor He does not say \"desire.\"\n\nYet though we may sometimes avail ourselves of these precise\nproprieties of language, we are not to be always bridled by them; and\nwhen we read those writers against whose authority it is unlawful\nto reclaim, we must accept the meanings above mentioned in passages\nwhere a right sense can be educed by no other interpretation, as in\nthose instances we adduced partly from the prophet, partly from the\nGospel. For who does not know that the wicked exult with joy? Yet\n\"there is no _contentment_ for the wicked, saith the Lord.\" And how\nso, unless because contentment, when the word is used in its proper\nand distinctive significance, means something different from joy? In\nlike manner, who would deny that it were wrong to enjoin upon men\nthat whatever they desire others to do to them they should themselves\ndo to others, lest they should mutually please one another by shameful\nand illicit pleasure? And yet the precept, \"Whatsoever ye _would_ that\nmen should do unto you, do ye even so to them,\" is very wholesome\nand just. And how is this, unless because the will is in this place\nused strictly, and signifies that will which cannot have evil for its\nobject? But ordinary phraseology would not have allowed the saying,\n\"Be unwilling to make any manner of lie,\"[42] had there not been also\nan evil will, whose wickedness separates it from that which the angels\ncelebrated, \"Peace on earth, of good will to men.\"[43] For \"good\" is\nsuperfluous if there is no other kind of will but good will. And why\nshould the apostle have mentioned it among the praises of charity as\na great thing, that \"it rejoices not in iniquity,\" unless because\nwickedness does so rejoice? For even with secular writers these words\nare used indifferently. For Cicero, that most fertile of orators, says,\n\"I desire, conscript fathers, to be merciful.\"[44] And who would be\nso pedantic as to say that he should have said \"I will\" rather than\n\"I desire,\" because the word is used in a good connection? Again,\nin Terence, the profligate youth, burning with wild lust, says, \"I\nwill nothing else than Philumena.\"[45] That this \"will\" was lust is\nsufficiently indicated by the answer of his old servant which is there\nintroduced: \"How much better were it to try and banish that love from\nyour heart, than to speak so as uselessly to inflame your passion still\nmore!\" And that contentment was used by secular writers in a bad sense,\nthat verse of Virgil testifies, in which he most succinctly comprehends\nthese four perturbations,--\n\n          \"Hence they fear and desire, grieve and are content.\"[46]\n\nThe same author had also used the expression, \"the evil contentments\nof the mind.\"[47] So that good and bad men alike will, are cautious,\nand contented; or, to say the same thing in other words, good and bad\nmen alike desire, fear, rejoice, but the former in a good, the latter\nin a bad fashion, according as the will is right or wrong. Sorrow\nitself, too, which the Stoics would not allow to be represented in\nthe mind of the wise man, is used in a good sense, and especially in\nour writings. For the apostle praises the Corinthians because they\nhad a godly sorrow. But possibly some one may say that the apostle\ncongratulated them because they were penitently sorry, and that such\nsorrow can exist only in those who have sinned. For these are his\nwords: \"For I perceive that the same epistle hath made you sorry,\nthough it were but for a season. Now I rejoice, not that ye were made\nsorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance; for ye were made sorry\nafter a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing.\nFor godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented\nof, but the sorrow of the world worketh death. For, behold, this\nselfsame thing that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness\nit wrought in you!\"[48] Consequently the Stoics may defend themselves\nby replying,[49] that sorrow is indeed useful for repentance of sin,\nbut that this can have no place in the mind of the wise man, inasmuch\nas no sin attaches to him of which he could sorrowfully repent,\nnor any other evil the endurance or experience of which could make\nhim sorrowful. For they say that Alcibiades (if my memory does not\ndeceive me), who believed himself happy, shed tears when Socrates\nargued with him, and demonstrated that he was miserable because he\nwas foolish. In his case, therefore, folly was the cause of this\nuseful and desirable sorrow, wherewith a man mourns that he is what\nhe ought not to be. But the Stoics maintain not that the fool, but\nthat the wise man, cannot be sorrowful.\n\n\n      9. _Of the perturbations of the soul which appear as right\n               affections in the life of the righteous._\n\nBut so far as regards this question of mental perturbations, we have\nanswered these philosophers in the ninth book[50] of this work,\nshowing that it is rather a verbal than a real dispute, and that they\nseek contention rather than truth. Among ourselves, according to the\nsacred Scriptures and sound doctrine, the citizens of the holy city of\nGod, who live according to God in the pilgrimage of this life, both\nfear and desire, and grieve and rejoice. And because their love is\nrightly placed, all these affections of theirs are right. They fear\neternal punishment, they desire eternal life; they grieve because\nthey themselves groan within themselves, waiting for the adoption,\nthe redemption of their body;[51] they rejoice in hope, because\nthere \"shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death\nis swallowed up in victory.\"[52] In like manner they fear to sin,\nthey desire to persevere; they grieve in sin, they rejoice in good\nworks. They fear to sin, because they hear that \"because iniquity\nshall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.\"[53] They desire to\npersevere, because they hear that it is written, \"He that endureth to\nthe end shall be saved.\"[54] They grieve for sin, hearing that \"If we\nsay that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in\nus.\"[55] They rejoice in good works, because they hear that \"the Lord\nloveth a cheerful giver.\"[56] In like manner, according as they are\nstrong or weak, they fear or desire to be tempted, grieve or rejoice in\ntemptation. They fear to be tempted, because they hear the injunction,\n\"If a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual restore such\nan one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also\nbe tempted.\"[57] They desire to be tempted, because they hear one of\nthe heroes of the city of God saying, \"Examine me, O Lord, and tempt\nme: try my reins and my heart.\"[58] They grieve in temptations, because\nthey see Peter weeping;[59] they rejoice in temptations, because they\nhear James saying, \"My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into\ndivers temptations.\"[60]\n\nAnd not only on their own account do they experience these emotions,\nbut also on account of those whose deliverance they desire and whose\nperdition they fear, and whose loss or salvation affects them with\ngrief or with joy. For if we who have come into the Church from among\nthe Gentiles may suitably instance that noble and mighty hero who\nglories in his infirmities, the teacher (_doctor_) of the nations in\nfaith and truth, who also laboured more than all his fellow-apostles,\nand instructed the tribes of God's people by his epistles, which\nedified not only those of his own time, but all those who were to be\ngathered in,--that hero, I say, and athlete of Christ, instructed\nby Him, anointed of His Spirit, crucified with Him, glorious in\nHim, lawfully maintaining a great conflict on the theatre of this\nworld, and being made a spectacle to angels and men,[61] and pressing\nonwards for the prize of his high calling,[62]--very joyfully do we\nwith the eyes of faith behold him rejoicing with them that rejoice,\nand weeping with them that weep;[63] though hampered by fightings\nwithout and fears within;[64] desiring to depart and to be with\nChrist;[65] longing to see the Romans, that he might have some fruit\namong them as among other Gentiles;[66] being jealous over the\nCorinthians, and fearing in that jealousy lest their minds should\nbe corrupted from the chastity that is in Christ;[67] having great\nheaviness and continual sorrow of heart for the Israelites,[68]\nbecause they, being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about\nto establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves\nunto the righteousness of God;[69] and expressing not only his\nsorrow, but bitter lamentation over some who had formally sinned and\nhad not repented of their uncleanness and fornications.[70]\n\nIf these emotions and affections, arising as they do from the love\nof what is good and from a holy charity, are to be called vices,\nthen let us allow these emotions which are truly vices to pass under\nthe name of virtues. But since these affections, when they are\nexercised in a becoming way, follow the guidance of right reason,\nwho will dare to say that they are diseases or vicious passions?\nWherefore even the Lord Himself, when He condescended to lead a\nhuman life in the form of a slave, had no sin whatever, and yet\nexercised these emotions where He judged they should be exercised.\nFor as there was in Him a true human body and a true human soul, so\nwas there also a true human emotion. When, therefore, we read in the\nGospel that the hard-heartedness of the Jews moved Him to sorrowful\nindignation,[71] that He said, \"I am glad for your sakes, to the\nintent ye may believe,\"[72] that when about to raise Lazarus He\neven shed tears,[73] that He earnestly desired to eat the passover\nwith His disciples,[74] that as His passion drew near His soul was\nsorrowful,[75] these emotions are certainly not falsely ascribed\nto Him. But as He became man when it pleased Him, so, in the grace\nof His definite purpose, when it pleased Him He experienced those\nemotions in His human soul.\n\nBut we must further make the admission, that even when these affections\nare well regulated, and according to God's will, they are peculiar\nto this life, not to that future life we look for, and that often we\nyield to them against our will. And thus sometimes we weep in spite\nof ourselves, being carried beyond ourselves, not indeed by culpable\ndesire, but by praiseworthy charity. In us, therefore, these affections\narise from human infirmity; but it was not so with the Lord Jesus, for\neven His infirmity was the consequence of His power. But so long as we\nwear the infirmity of this life, we are rather worse men than better if\nwe have none of these emotions at all. For the apostle vituperated and\nabominated some who, as he said, were \"without natural affection.\"[76]\nThe sacred Psalmist also found fault with those of whom he said, \"I\nlooked for some to lament with me, and there was none.\"[77] For to\nbe quite free from pain while we are in this place of misery is only\npurchased, as one of this world's literati perceived and remarked,[78]\nat the price of blunted sensibilities both of mind and body. And\ntherefore that which the Greeks call \u1f00\u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, and what the Latins would\ncall, if their language would allow them, \"impassibilitas,\" if it be\ntaken to mean an impassibility of spirit and not of body, or, in other\nwords, a freedom from those emotions which are contrary to reason\nand disturb the mind, then it is obviously a good and most desirable\nquality, but it is not one which is attainable in this life. For the\nwords of the apostle are the confession, not of the common herd, but\nof the eminently pious, just, and holy men: \"If we say we have no sin,\nwe deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.\"[79] When there\nshall be no sin in a man, then there shall be this \u1f00\u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1. At present\nit is enough if we live without crime; and he who thinks he lives\nwithout sin puts aside not sin, but pardon. And if that is to be called\napathy, where the mind is the subject of no emotion, then who would not\nconsider this insensibility to be worse than all vices? It may, indeed,\nreasonably be maintained that the perfect blessedness we hope for shall\nbe free from all sting of fear or sadness; but who that is not quite\nlost to truth would say that neither love nor joy shall be experienced\nthere? But if by apathy a condition be meant in which no fear terrifies\nnor any pain annoys, we must in this life renounce such a state if we\nwould live according to God's will, but may hope to enjoy it in that\nblessedness which is promised as our eternal condition.\n\nFor that fear of which the Apostle John says, \"There is no fear in\nlove; but perfect love casteth out fear, because fear hath torment.\nHe that feareth is not made perfect in love,\"[80]--that fear is not\nof the same kind as the Apostle Paul felt lest the Corinthians should\nbe seduced by the subtlety of the serpent; for love is susceptible\nof this fear, yea, love alone is capable of it. But the fear which\nis not in love is of that kind of which Paul himself says, \"For ye\nhave not received the spirit of bondage again to fear.\"[81] But as\nfor that \"clean fear which endureth for ever,\"[82] if it is to exist\nin the world to come (and how else can it be said to endure for\never?), it is not a fear deterring us from evil which may happen,\nbut preserving us in the good which cannot be lost. For where the\nlove of acquired good is unchangeable, there certainly the fear\nthat avoids evil is, if I may say so, free from anxiety. For under\nthe name of \"clean fear\" David signifies that will by which we\nshall necessarily shrink from sin, and guard against it, not with\nthe anxiety of weakness, which fears that we may strongly sin, but\nwith the tranquillity of perfect love. Or if no kind of fear at all\nshall exist in that most imperturbable security of perpetual and\nblissful delights, then the expression, \"The fear of the Lord is\nclean, enduring for ever,\" must be taken in the same sense as that\nother, \"The patience of the poor shall not perish for ever.\"[83] For\npatience, which is necessary only where ills are to be borne, shall\nnot be eternal, but that which patience leads us to will be eternal.\nSo perhaps this \"clean fear\" is said to endure for ever, because that\nto which fear leads shall endure.\n\nAnd since this is so,--since we must live a good life in order to\nattain to a blessed life,--a good life has all these affections\nright, a bad life has them wrong. But in the blessed life eternal\nthere will be love and joy, not only right, but also assured; but\nfear and grief there will be none. Whence it already appears in some\nsort what manner of persons the citizens of the city of God must be\nin this their pilgrimage, who live after the spirit, not after the\nflesh,--that is to say, according to God, not according to man,--and\nwhat manner of persons they shall be also in that immortality whither\nthey are journeying. And the city or society of the wicked, who\nlive not according to God, but according to man, and who accept the\ndoctrines of men or devils in the worship of a false and contempt\nof the true divinity, is shaken with those wicked emotions as by\ndiseases and disturbances. And if there be some of its citizens who\nseem to restrain and, as it were, temper those passions, they are\nso elated with ungodly pride, that their disease is as much greater\nas their pain is less. And if some, with a vanity monstrous in\nproportion to its rarity, have become enamoured of themselves because\nthey can be stimulated and excited by no emotion, moved or bent by\nno affection, such persons rather lose all humanity than obtain true\ntranquillity. For a thing is not necessarily right because it is\ninflexible, nor healthy because it is insensible.\n\n\n      10. _Whether it is to be believed that our first parents in\n    Paradise, before they sinned, were free from all perturbation._\n\nBut it is a fair question, whether our first parent or first parents\n(for there was a marriage of two), before they sinned, experienced\nin their animal body such emotions as we shall not experience in\nthe spiritual body when sin has been purged and finally abolished.\nFor if they did, then how were they blessed in that boasted place\nof bliss, Paradise? For who that is affected by fear or grief can\nbe called absolutely blessed? And what could those persons fear\nor suffer in such affluence of blessings, where neither death nor\nill-health was feared, and where nothing was wanting which a good\nwill could desire, and nothing present which could interrupt man's\nmental or bodily enjoyment? Their love to God was unclouded, and\ntheir mutual affection was that of faithful and sincere marriage;\nand from this love flowed a wonderful delight, because they always\nenjoyed what was loved. Their avoidance of sin was tranquil; and,\nso long as it was maintained, no other ill at all could invade them\nand bring sorrow. Or did they perhaps desire to touch and eat the\nforbidden fruit, yet feared to die; and thus both fear and desire\nalready, even in that blissful place, preyed upon those first of\nmankind? Away with the thought that such could be the case where\nthere was no sin! And, indeed, this is already sin, to desire those\nthings which the law of God forbids, and to abstain from them through\nfear of punishment, not through love of righteousness. Away, I say,\nwith the thought, that before there was any sin, there should already\nhave been committed regarding that fruit the very sin which our Lord\nwarns us against regarding a woman: \"Whosoever looketh on a woman\nto lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his\nheart.\"[84] As happy, then, as were these our first parents, who\nwere agitated by no mental perturbations, and annoyed by no bodily\ndiscomforts, so happy should the whole human race have been, had\nthey not introduced that evil which they have transmitted to their\nposterity, and had none of their descendants committed iniquity\nworthy of damnation; but this original blessedness continuing\nuntil, in virtue of that benediction which said, \"Increase and\nmultiply,\"[85] the number of the predestined saints should have been\ncompleted, there would then have been bestowed that higher felicity\nwhich is enjoyed by the most blessed angels,--a blessedness in which\nthere should have been a secure assurance that no one would sin, and\nno one die; and so should the saints have lived, after no taste of\nlabour, pain, or death, as now they shall live in the resurrection,\nafter they have endured all these things.\n\n\n     11. _Of the fall of the first man, in whom nature was created\n            good, and can be restored only by its Author._\n\nBut because God foresaw all things, and was therefore not ignorant\nthat man also would fall, we ought to consider this holy city in\nconnection with what God foresaw and ordained, and not according to\nour own ideas, which do not embrace God's ordination. For man, by\nhis sin, could not disturb the divine counsel, nor compel God to\nchange what He had decreed; for God's foreknowledge had anticipated\nboth,--that is to say, both how evil the man whom He had created good\nshould become, and what good He Himself should even thus derive from\nhim. For though God is said to change His determinations (so that in\na tropical sense the Holy Scripture says even that God repented[86]),\nthis is said with reference to man's expectation, or the order of\nnatural causes, and not with reference to that which the Almighty had\nforeknown that He would do. Accordingly God, as it is written, made\nman upright,[87] and consequently with a good will. For if he had\nnot had a good will, he could not have been upright. The good will,\nthen, is the work of God; for God created him with it. But the first\nevil will, which preceded all man's evil acts, was rather a kind of\nfalling away from the work of God to its own works than any positive\nwork. And therefore the acts resulting were evil, not having God, but\nthe will itself for their end; so that the will or the man himself,\nso far as his will is bad, was as it were the evil tree bringing\nforth evil fruit. Moreover, the bad will, though it be not in harmony\nwith, but opposed to nature, inasmuch as it is a vice or blemish,\nyet it is true of it as of all vice, that it cannot exist except in\na nature, and only in a nature created out of nothing, and not in\nthat which the Creator has begotten of Himself, as He begot the Word,\nby whom all things were made. For though God formed man of the dust\nof the earth, yet the earth itself, and every earthly material, is\nabsolutely created out of nothing; and man's soul, too, God created\nout of nothing, and joined to the body, when He made man. But evils\nare so thoroughly overcome by good, that though they are permitted\nto exist, for the sake of demonstrating how the most righteous\nforesight of God can make a good use even of them, yet good can exist\nwithout evil, as in the true and supreme God Himself, and as in every\ninvisible and visible celestial creature that exists above this murky\natmosphere; but evil cannot exist without good, because the natures\nin which evil exists, in so far as they are natures, are good. And\nevil is removed, not by removing any nature, or part of a nature,\nwhich had been introduced by the evil, but by healing and correcting\nthat which had been vitiated and depraved. The will, therefore, is\nthen truly free, when it is not the slave of vices and sins. Such was\nit given us by God; and this being lost by its own fault, can only\nbe restored by Him who was able at first to give it. And therefore\nthe truth says, \"If the Son shall make you free, ye shall be free\nindeed;\"[88] which is equivalent to saying, If the Son shall save\nyou, ye shall be saved indeed. For He is our Liberator, inasmuch as\nHe is our Saviour.\n\nMan then lived with God for his rule in a paradise at once physical\nand spiritual. For neither was it a paradise only physical for the\nadvantage of the body, and not also spiritual for the advantage of\nthe mind; nor was it only spiritual to afford enjoyment to man by his\ninternal sensations, and not also physical to afford him enjoyment\nthrough his external senses. But obviously it was both for both ends.\nBut after that proud and therefore envious angel (of whose fall I\nhave said as much as I was able in the eleventh and twelfth books\nof this work, as well as that of his fellows, who, from being God's\nangels, became his angels), preferring to rule with a kind of pomp of\nempire rather than to be another's subject, fell from the spiritual\nParadise, and essaying to insinuate his persuasive guile into the\nmind of man, whose unfallen condition provoked him to envy now that\nhimself was fallen, he chose the serpent as his mouthpiece in that\nbodily Paradise in which it and all the other earthly animals were\nliving with those two human beings, the man and his wife, subject to\nthem, and harmless; and he chose the serpent because, being slippery,\nand moving in tortuous windings, it was suitable for his purpose.\nAnd this animal being subdued to his wicked ends by the presence and\nsuperior force of his angelic nature, he abused as his instrument,\nand first tried his deceit upon the woman, making his assault upon\nthe weaker part of that human alliance, that he might gradually\ngain the whole, and not supposing that the man would readily give\near to him, or be deceived, but that he might yield to the error of\nthe woman. For as Aaron was not induced to agree with the people\nwhen they blindly wished him to make an idol, and yet yielded to\nconstraint; and as it is not credible that Solomon was so blind as\nto suppose that idols should be worshipped, but was drawn over to\nsuch sacrilege by the blandishments of women; so we cannot believe\nthat Adam was deceived, and supposed the devil's word to be truth,\nand therefore transgressed God's law, but that he by the drawings of\nkindred yielded to the woman, the husband to the wife, the one human\nbeing to the only other human being. For not without significance\ndid the apostle say, \"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being\ndeceived was in the transgression;\"[89] but he speaks thus, because\nthe woman accepted as true what the serpent told her, but the man\ncould not bear to be severed from his only companion, even though\nthis involved a partnership in sin. He was not on this account less\nculpable, but sinned with his eyes open. And so the apostle does not\nsay, \"He did not sin,\" but \"He was not deceived.\" For he shows that\nhe sinned when he says, \"By one man sin entered into the world,\"[90]\nand immediately after more distinctly, \"In the likeness of Adam's\ntransgression.\" But he meant that those are deceived who do not judge\nthat which they do to be sin; but he knew. Otherwise how were it\ntrue \"Adam was not deceived?\" But having as yet no experience of the\ndivine severity, he was possibly deceived in so far as he thought\nhis sin venial. And consequently he was not deceived as the woman\nwas deceived, but he was deceived as to the judgment which would be\npassed on his apology: \"The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she\ngave me, and I did eat.\"[91] What need of saying more? Although they\nwere not both deceived by credulity, yet both were entangled in the\nsnares of the devil, and taken by sin.\n\n\n                12. _Of the nature of man's first sin._\n\nIf any one finds a difficulty in understanding why other sins do\nnot alter human nature as it was altered by the transgression of\nthose first human beings, so that on account of it this nature is\nsubject to the great corruption we feel and see, and to death,\nand is distracted and tossed with so many furious and contending\nemotions, and is certainly far different from what it was before\nsin, even though it were then lodged in an animal body,--if, I say,\nany one is moved by this, he ought not to think that that sin was a\nsmall and light one because it was committed about food, and that\nnot bad nor noxious, except because it was forbidden; for in that\nspot of singular felicity God could not have created and planted any\nevil thing. But by the precept He gave, God commended obedience,\nwhich is, in a sort, the mother and guardian of all the virtues\nin the reasonable creature, which was so created that submission\nis advantageous to it, while the fulfilment of its own will in\npreference to the Creator's is destruction. And as this commandment\nenjoining abstinence from one kind of food in the midst of great\nabundance of other kinds was so easy to keep,--so light a burden to\nthe memory,--and, above all, found no resistance to its observance\nin lust, which only afterwards sprung up as the penal consequence of\nsin, the iniquity of violating it was all the greater in proportion\nto the ease with which it might have been kept.\n\n\n     13. _That in Adam's sin an evil will preceded the evil act._\n\nOur first parents fell into open disobedience because already they\nwere secretly corrupted; for the evil act had never been done had not\nan evil will preceded it. And what is the origin of our evil will but\npride? For \"pride is the beginning of sin.\"[92] And what is pride\nbut the craving for undue exaltation? And this is undue exaltation,\nwhen the soul abandons Him to whom it ought to cleave as its end,\nand becomes a kind of end to itself. This happens when it becomes\nits own satisfaction. And it does so when it falls away from that\nunchangeable good which ought to satisfy it more than itself. This\nfalling away is spontaneous; for if the will had remained stedfast in\nthe love of that higher and changeless good by which it was illumined\nto intelligence and kindled into love, it would not have turned away\nto find satisfaction in itself, and so become frigid and benighted;\nthe woman would not have believed the serpent spoke the truth, nor\nwould the man have preferred the request of his wife to the command\nof God, nor have supposed that it was a venial transgression to\ncleave to the partner of his life even in a partnership of sin. The\nwicked deed, then,--that is to say, the transgression of eating the\nforbidden fruit,--was committed by persons who were already wicked.\nThat \"evil fruit\"[93] could be brought forth only by \"a corrupt\ntree.\" But that the tree was evil was not the result of nature; for\ncertainly it could become so only by the vice of the will, and vice\nis contrary to nature. Now, nature could not have been depraved by\nvice had it not been made out of nothing. Consequently, that it is\na nature, this is because it is made by God; but that it falls away\nfrom Him, this is because it is made out of nothing. But man did not\nso fall away[94] as to become absolutely nothing; but being turned\ntowards himself, his being became more contracted than it was when he\nclave to Him who supremely is. Accordingly, to exist in himself, that\nis, to be his own satisfaction after abandoning God, is not quite to\nbecome a nonentity, but to approximate to that. And therefore the\nholy Scriptures designate the proud by another name, \"self-pleasers.\"\nFor it is good to have the heart lifted up, yet not to one's self,\nfor this is proud, but to the Lord, for this is obedient, and can\nbe the act only of the humble. There is, therefore, something in\nhumility which, strangely enough, exalts the heart, and something\nin pride which debases it. This seems, indeed, to be contradictory,\nthat loftiness should debase and lowliness exalt. But pious humility\nenables us to submit to what is above us; and nothing is more exalted\nabove us than God; and therefore humility, by making us subject to\nGod, exalts us. But pride, being a defect of nature, by the very\nact of refusing subjection and revolting from Him who is supreme,\nfalls to a low condition; and then comes to pass what is written:\n\"Thou castedst them down when they lifted up themselves.\"[95] For\nhe does not say, \"when they had been lifted up,\" as if first they\nwere exalted, and then afterwards cast down; but \"when they lifted\nup themselves\" even then they were cast down,--that is to say,\nthe very lifting up was already a fall. And therefore it is that\nhumility is specially recommended to the city of God as it sojourns\nin this world, and is specially exhibited in the city of God, and\nin the person of Christ its King; while the contrary vice of pride,\naccording to the testimony of the sacred writings, specially rules\nhis adversary the devil. And certainly this is the great difference\nwhich distinguishes the two cities of which we speak, the one\nbeing the society of the godly men, the other of the ungodly, each\nassociated with the angels that adhere to their party, and the one\nguided and fashioned by love of self, the other by love of God.\n\nThe devil, then, would not have ensnared man in the open and manifest\nsin of doing what God had forbidden, had man not already begun to live\nfor himself. It was this that made him listen with pleasure to the\nwords, \"Ye shall be as gods,\"[96] which they would much more readily\nhave accomplished by obediently adhering to their supreme and true\nend than by proudly living to themselves. For created gods are gods\nnot by virtue of what is in themselves, but by a participation of the\ntrue God. By craving to be more, man becomes less; and by aspiring\nto be self-sufficing, he fell away from Him who truly suffices him.\nAccordingly, this wicked desire which prompts man to please himself as\nif he were himself light, and which thus turns him away from that light\nby which, had he followed it, he would himself have become light,--this\nwicked desire, I say, already secretly existed in him, and the open\nsin was but its consequence. For that is true which is written, \"Pride\ngoeth before destruction, and before honour is humility;\"[97] that is\nto say, secret ruin precedes open ruin, while the former is not counted\nruin. For who counts exaltation ruin, though no sooner is the Highest\nforsaken than a fall is begun? But who does not recognise it as ruin,\nwhen there occurs an evident and indubitable transgression of the\ncommandment? And consequently, God's prohibition had reference to such\nan act as, when committed, could not be defended on any pretence of\ndoing what was righteous.[98] And I make bold to say that it is useful\nfor the proud to fall into an open and indisputable transgression, and\nso displease themselves, as already, by pleasing themselves, they had\nfallen. For Peter was in a healthier condition when he wept and was\ndissatisfied with himself, than when he boldly presumed and satisfied\nhimself. And this is averred by the sacred Psalmist when he says, \"Fill\ntheir faces with shame, that they may seek Thy name, O Lord;\"[99] that\nis, that they who have pleased themselves in seeking their own glory\nmay be pleased and satisfied with Thee in seeking Thy glory.\n\n\n  14. _Of the pride in the sin, which was worse than the sin itself._\n\nBut it is a worse and more damnable pride which casts about for\nthe shelter of an excuse even in manifest sins, as these our first\nparents did, of whom the woman said, \"The serpent beguiled me, and I\ndid eat;\" and the man said, \"The woman whom Thou gavest to be with\nme, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.\"[100] Here there is no\nword of begging pardon, no word of entreaty for healing. For though\nthey do not, like Cain, deny that they have perpetrated the deed, yet\ntheir pride seeks to refer its wickedness to another,--the woman's\npride to the serpent, the man's to the woman. But where there is a\nplain transgression of a divine commandment, this is rather to accuse\nthan to excuse oneself. For the fact that the woman sinned on the\nserpent's persuasion, and the man at the woman's offer, did not make\nthe transgression less, as if there were any one whom we ought rather\nto believe or yield to than God.\n\n\n  15. _Of the justice of the punishment with which our first parents\n                 were visited for their disobedience._\n\nTherefore, because the sin was a despising of the authority of\nGod,--who had created man; who had made him in His own image; who had\nset him above the other animals; who had placed him in Paradise; who\nhad enriched him with abundance of every kind and of safety; who had\nlaid upon him neither many, nor great, nor difficult commandments,\nbut, in order to make a wholesome obedience easy to him, had given\nhim a single very brief and very light precept by which He reminded\nthat creature whose service was to be free that He was Lord,--it was\njust that condemnation followed, and condemnation such that man, who\nby keeping the commandments should have been spiritual even in his\nflesh, became fleshly even in his spirit; and as in his pride he had\nsought to be his own satisfaction, God in His justice abandoned him\nto himself, not to live in the absolute independence he affected, but\ninstead of the liberty he desired, to live dissatisfied with himself\nin a hard and miserable bondage to him to whom by sinning he had\nyielded himself, doomed in spite of himself to die in body as he had\nwillingly become dead in spirit, condemned even to eternal death (had\nnot the grace of God delivered him) because he had forsaken eternal\nlife. Whoever thinks such punishment either excessive or unjust\nshows his inability to measure the great iniquity of sinning where\nsin might so easily have been avoided. For as Abraham's obedience is\nwith justice pronounced to be great, because the thing commanded, to\nkill his son, was very difficult, so in Paradise the disobedience\nwas the greater, because the difficulty of that which was commanded\nwas imperceptible. And as the obedience of the second Man was the\nmore laudable because He became obedient even \"unto death,\"[101] so\nthe disobedience of the first man was the more detestable because he\nbecame disobedient even unto death. For where the penalty annexed\nto disobedience is great, and the thing commanded by the Creator is\neasy, who can sufficiently estimate how great a wickedness it is, in\na matter so easy, not to obey the authority of so great a power, even\nwhen that power deters with so terrible a penalty?\n\nIn short, to say all in a word, what but disobedience was the\npunishment of disobedience in that sin? For what else is man's\nmisery but his own disobedience to himself, so that in consequence\nof his not being willing to do what he could do, he now wills to do\nwhat he cannot? For though he could not do all things in Paradise\nbefore he sinned, yet he wished to do only what he could do, and\ntherefore he could do all things he wished. But now, as we recognise\nin his offspring, and as divine Scripture testifies, \"Man is like\nto vanity.\"[102] For who can count how many things he wishes which\nhe cannot do, so long as he is disobedient to himself, that is, so\nlong as his mind and his flesh do not obey his will? For in spite\nof himself his mind is both frequently disturbed, and his flesh\nsuffers, and grows old, and dies; and in spite of ourselves we suffer\nwhatever else we suffer, and which we would not suffer if our nature\nabsolutely and in all its parts obeyed our will. But is it not the\ninfirmities of the flesh which hamper it in its service? Yet what\ndoes it matter _how_ its service is hampered, so long as the fact\nremains, that by the just retribution of the sovereign God whom we\nrefused to be subject to and serve, our flesh, which was subjected\nto us, now torments us by insubordination, although our disobedience\nbrought trouble on ourselves, not upon God? For He is not in need of\nour service as we of our body's; and therefore what we did was no\npunishment to Him, but what we receive is so to us. And the pains\nwhich are called bodily are pains of the soul in and from the body.\nFor what pain or desire can the flesh feel by itself and without\nthe soul? But when the flesh is said to desire or to suffer, it is\nmeant, as we have explained, that the man does so, or some part of\nthe soul which is affected by the sensation of the flesh, whether\na harsh sensation causing pain, or gentle, causing pleasure. But\npain in the flesh is only a discomfort of the soul arising from the\nflesh, and a kind of shrinking from its suffering, as the pain of\nthe soul which is called sadness is a shrinking from those things\nwhich have happened to us in spite of ourselves. But sadness is\nfrequently preceded by fear, which is itself in the soul, not in the\nflesh; while bodily pain is not preceded by any kind of fear of the\nflesh, which can be felt in the flesh before the pain. But pleasure\nis preceded by a certain appetite which is felt in the flesh like\na craving, as hunger and thirst and that generative appetite which\nis most commonly identified with the name \"lust,\" though this is the\ngeneric word for all desires. For anger itself was defined by the\nancients as nothing else than the lust of revenge;[103] although\nsometimes a man is angry even at inanimate objects which cannot feel\nhis vengeance, as when one breaks a pen, or crushes a quill that\nwrites badly. Yet even this, though less reasonable, is in its way\na lust of revenge, and is, so to speak, a mysterious kind of shadow\nof [the great law of] retribution, that they who do evil should\nsuffer evil. There is therefore a lust for revenge, which is called\nanger; there is a lust of money, which goes by the name of avarice;\nthere is a lust of conquering, no matter by what means, which is\ncalled opinionativeness; there is a lust of applause, which is named\nboasting. There are many and various lusts, of which some have names\nof their own, while others have not. For who could readily give a\nname to the lust of ruling, which yet has a powerful influence in the\nsoul of tyrants, as civil wars bear witness?\n\n\n  16. _Of the evil of lust,--a word which, though applicable to many\n       vices, is specially appropriated to sexual uncleanness._\n\nAlthough, therefore, lust may have many objects, yet when no object\nis specified, the word lust usually suggests to the mind the lustful\nexcitement of the organs of generation. And this lust not only takes\npossession of the whole body and outward members, but also makes\nitself felt within, and moves the whole man with a passion in which\nmental emotion is mingled with bodily appetite, so that the pleasure\nwhich results is the greatest of all bodily pleasures. So possessing\nindeed is this pleasure, that at the moment of time in which it is\nconsummated, all mental activity is suspended. What friend of wisdom\nand holy joys, who, being married, but knowing, as the apostle says,\n\"how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour, not in the\ndisease of desire, as the Gentiles who know not God,\"[104] would\nnot prefer, if this were possible, to beget children without this\nlust, so that in this function of begetting offspring the members\ncreated for this purpose should not be stimulated by the heat of\nlust, but should be actuated by his volition, in the same way as his\nother members serve him for their respective ends? But even those\nwho delight in this pleasure are not moved to it at their own will,\nwhether they confine themselves to lawful or transgress to unlawful\npleasures; but sometimes this lust importunes them in spite of\nthemselves, and sometimes fails them when they desire to feel it, so\nthat though lust rages in the mind, it stirs not in the body. Thus,\nstrangely enough, this emotion not only fails to obey the legitimate\ndesire to beget offspring, but also refuses to serve lascivious lust;\nand though it often opposes its whole combined energy to the soul\nthat resists it, sometimes also it is divided against itself, and\nwhile it moves the soul, leaves the body unmoved.\n\n\n   17. _Of the nakedness of our first parents, which they saw after\n                     their base and shameful sin._\n\nJustly is shame very specially connected with this lust; justly,\ntoo, these members themselves, being moved and restrained not at\nour will, but by a certain independent autocracy, so to speak, are\ncalled \"shameful.\" Their condition was different before sin. For as\nit is written, \"They were naked and were not ashamed,\"[105]--not that\ntheir nakedness was unknown to them, but because nakedness was not\nyet shameful, because not yet did lust move those members without the\nwill's consent; not yet did the flesh by its disobedience testify\nagainst the disobedience of man. For they were not created blind,\nas the unenlightened vulgar fancy;[106] for Adam saw the animals to\nwhom he gave names, and of Eve we read, \"The woman saw that the tree\nwas good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes.\"[107] Their\neyes, therefore, were open, but were not open to this, that is to\nsay, were not observant so as to recognise what was conferred upon\nthem by the garment of grace, for they had no consciousness of their\nmembers warring against their will. But when they were stripped of\nthis grace,[108] that their disobedience might be punished by fit\nretribution, there began in the movement of their bodily members a\nshameless novelty which made nakedness indecent: it at once made them\nobservant and made them ashamed. And therefore, after they violated\nGod's command by open transgression, it is written: \"And the eyes\nof them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and\nthey sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.\"[109]\n\"The eyes of them both were opened,\" not to see, for already they\nsaw, but to discern between the good they had lost and the evil into\nwhich they had fallen. And therefore also the tree itself which they\nwere forbidden to touch was called the tree of the knowledge of good\nand evil from this circumstance, that if they ate of it it would\nimpart to them this knowledge. For the discomfort of sickness reveals\nthe pleasure of health. \"They knew,\" therefore, \"that they were\nnaked,\"--naked of that grace which prevented them from being ashamed\nof bodily nakedness while the law of sin offered no resistance to\ntheir mind. And thus they obtained a knowledge which they would have\nlived in blissful ignorance of, had they, in trustful obedience to\nGod, declined to commit that offence which involved them in the\nexperience of the hurtful effects of unfaithfulness and disobedience.\nAnd therefore, being ashamed of the disobedience of their own flesh,\nwhich witnessed to their disobedience while it punished it, \"they\nsewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons,\" that is,\ncinctures for their privy parts; for some interpreters have rendered\nthe word by _succinctoria_. _Campestria_ is, indeed, a Latin word,\nbut it is used of the drawers or aprons used for a similar purpose by\nthe young men who stripped for exercise in the _campus_; hence those\nwho were so girt were commonly called _campestrati_. Shame modestly\ncovered that which lust disobediently moved in opposition to the\nwill which was thus punished for its own disobedience. Consequently\nall nations, being propagated from that one stock, have so strong an\ninstinct to cover the shameful parts, that some barbarians do not\nuncover them even in the bath, but wash with their drawers on. In the\ndark solitudes of India also, though some philosophers go naked, and\nare therefore called gymnosophists, yet they make an exception in the\ncase of these members, and cover them.\n\n\n       18. _Of the shame which attends all sexual intercourse._\n\nLust requires for its consummation darkness and secrecy; and this\nnot only when unlawful intercourse is desired, but even such\nfornication as the earthly city has legalized. Where there is no\nfear of punishment, these permitted pleasures still shrink from the\npublic eye. Even where provision is made for this lust, secrecy also\nis provided; and while lust found it easy to remove the prohibitions\nof law, shamelessness found it impossible to lay aside the veil of\nretirement. For even shameless men call this shameful; and though\nthey love the pleasure, dare not display it. What! does not even\nconjugal intercourse, sanctioned as it is by law for the propagation\nof children, legitimate and honourable though it be, does it not seek\nretirement from every eye? Before the bridegroom fondles his bride,\ndoes he not exclude the attendants, and even the paranymphs, and such\nfriends as the closest ties have admitted to the bridal chamber?\nThe greatest master of Roman eloquence says, that all right actions\nwish to be set in the light, _i.e._ desire to be known. This right\naction, however, has such a desire to be known, that yet it blushes\nto be seen. Who does not know what passes between husband and wife\nthat children may be born? Is it not for this purpose that wives are\nmarried with such ceremony? And yet, when this well-understood act\nis gone about for the procreation of children, not even the children\nthemselves, who may already have been born to them, are suffered to\nbe witnesses. This right action seeks the light, in so far as it\nseeks to be known, but yet dreads being seen. And why so, if not\nbecause that which is by nature fitting and decent is so done as to\nbe accompanied with a shame-begetting penalty of sin?\n\n\n    19. _That it is now necessary, as it was not before man sinned,\n   to bridle anger and lust by the restraining influence of wisdom._\n\nHence it is that even the philosophers who have approximated to the\ntruth have avowed that anger and lust are vicious mental emotions,\nbecause, even when exercised towards objects which wisdom does not\nprohibit, they are moved in an ungoverned and inordinate manner, and\nconsequently need the regulation of mind and reason. And they assert\nthat this third part of the mind is posted as it were in a kind of\ncitadel, to give rule to these other parts, so that, while it rules and\nthey serve, man's righteousness is preserved without a breach.[110]\nThese parts, then, which they acknowledge to be vicious even in a wise\nand temperate man, so that the mind, by its composing and restraining\ninfluence, must bridle and recall them from those objects towards which\nthey are unlawfully moved, and give them access to those which the\nlaw of wisdom sanctions,--that anger, _e.g._, may be allowed for the\nenforcement of a just authority, and lust for the duty of propagating\noffspring,--these parts, I say, were not vicious in Paradise before\nsin, for they were never moved in opposition to a holy will towards\nany object from which it was necessary that they should be withheld\nby the restraining bridle of reason. For though now they are moved in\nthis way, and are regulated by a bridling and restraining power, which\nthose who live temperately, justly, and godly exercise, sometimes with\nease, and sometimes with greater difficulty, this is not the sound\nhealth of nature, but the weakness which results from sin. And how is\nit that shame does not hide the acts and words dictated by anger or\nother emotions, as it covers the motions of lust, unless because the\nmembers of the body which we employ for accomplishing them are moved,\nnot by the emotions themselves, but by the authority of the consenting\nwill? For he who in his anger rails at or even strikes some one, could\nnot do so were not his tongue and hand moved by the authority of the\nwill, as also they are moved when there is no anger. But the organs\nof generation are so subjected to the rule of lust, that they have no\nmotion but what it communicates. It is this we are ashamed of; it is\nthis which blushingly hides from the eyes of onlookers. And rather\nwill a man endure a crowd of witnesses when he is unjustly venting his\nanger on some one, than the eye of one man when he innocently copulates\nwith his wife.\n\n\n            20. _Of the foolish beastliness of the Cynics._\n\nIt is this which those canine or cynic[111] philosophers have\noverlooked, when they have, in violation of the modest instincts\nof men, boastfully proclaimed their unclean and shameless opinion,\nworthy indeed of dogs, viz., that as the matrimonial act is\nlegitimate, no one should be ashamed to perform it openly, in the\nstreet or in any public place. Instinctive shame has overborne this\nwild fancy. For though it is related[112] that Diogenes once dared to\nput his opinion in practice, under the impression that his sect would\nbe all the more famous if his egregious shamelessness were deeply\ngraven in the memory of mankind, yet this example was not afterwards\nfollowed. Shame had more influence with them, to make them blush\nbefore men, than error to make them affect a resemblance to dogs. And\npossibly, even in the case of Diogenes, and those who did imitate\nhim, there was but an appearance and pretence of copulation, and not\nthe reality. Even at this day there are still Cynic philosophers to\nbe seen; for these are Cynics who are not content with being clad\nin the _pallium_, but also carry a club; yet no one of them dares\nto do this that we speak of. If they did, they would be spat upon,\nnot to say stoned, by the mob. Human nature, then, is without doubt\nashamed of this lust; and justly so, for the insubordination of these\nmembers, and their defiance of the will, are the clear testimony\nof the punishment of man's first sin. And it was fitting that this\nshould appear specially in those parts by which is generated that\nnature which has been altered for the worse by that first and great\nsin,--that sin from whose evil connection no one can escape, unless\nGod's grace expiate in him individually that which was perpetrated to\nthe destruction of all in common, when all were in one man, and which\nwas avenged by God's justice.\n\n\n  21. _That man's transgression did not annul the blessing of fecundity\n      pronounced upon man before he sinned, but infected it with the\n      disease of lust._\n\nFar be it, then, from us to suppose that our first parents in\nParadise felt that lust which caused them afterwards to blush and\nhide their nakedness, or that by its means they should have fulfilled\nthe benediction of God, \"Increase and multiply and replenish the\nearth;\"[113] for it was after sin that lust began. It was after sin\nthat our nature, having lost the power it had over the whole body,\nbut not having lost all shame, perceived, noticed, blushed at, and\ncovered it. But that blessing upon marriage, which encouraged them to\nincrease and multiply and replenish the earth, though, it continued\neven after they had sinned, was yet given before they sinned, in\norder that the procreation of children might be recognised as part of\nthe glory of marriage, and not of the punishment of sin. But now, men\nbeing ignorant of the blessedness of Paradise, suppose that children\ncould not have been begotten there in any other way than they know\nthem to be begotten now, _i.e._ by lust, at which even honourable\nmarriage blushes; some not simply rejecting, but sceptically deriding\nthe divine Scriptures, in which we read that our first parents,\nafter they sinned, were ashamed of their nakedness, and covered it;\nwhile others, though they accept and honour Scripture, yet conceive\nthat this expression, \"Increase and multiply,\" refers not to carnal\nfecundity, because a similar expression is used of the soul in the\nwords, \"Thou wilt multiply me with strength in my soul;\"[114] and\nso, too, in the words which follow in Genesis, \"And replenish the\nearth, and subdue it,\" they understand by the earth the body which\nthe soul fills with its presence, and which it rules over when it\nis multiplied in strength. And they hold that children could no\nmore then than now be begotten without lust, which, after sin, was\nkindled, observed, blushed for, and covered; and even that children\nwould not have been born in Paradise, but only outside of it, as in\nfact it turned out. For it was after they were expelled from it that\nthey came together to beget children, and begot them.\n\n\n    22. _Of the conjugal union as it was originally instituted and\n                           blessed by God._\n\nBut we, for our part, have no manner of doubt that to increase and\nmultiply and replenish the earth in virtue of the blessing of God,\nis a gift of marriage as God instituted it from the beginning before\nman sinned, when He created them male and female,--in other words,\ntwo sexes manifestly distinct. And it was this work of God on which\nHis blessing was pronounced. For no sooner had Scripture said, \"Male\nand female created He them,\"[115] than it immediately continues, \"And\nGod blessed them, and God said unto them, Increase, and multiply,\nand replenish the earth, and subdue it,\" etc. And though all these\nthings may not unsuitably be interpreted in a spiritual sense, yet\n\"male and female\" cannot be understood of two things in one man,\nas if there were in him one thing which rules, another which is\nruled; but it is quite clear that they were created male and female,\nwith bodies of different sexes, for the very purpose of begetting\noffspring, and so increasing, multiplying, and replenishing the\nearth; and it is great folly to oppose so plain a fact. It was not\nof the spirit which commands and the body which obeys, nor of the\nrational soul which rules and the irrational desire which is ruled,\nnor of the contemplative virtue which is supreme and the active which\nis subject, nor of the understanding of the mind and the sense of the\nbody, but plainly of the matrimonial union by which the sexes are\nmutually bound together, that our Lord, when asked whether it were\nlawful for any cause to put away one's wife (for on account of the\nhardness of the hearts of the Israelites Moses permitted a bill of\ndivorcement to be given), answered and said, \"Have ye not read that\nHe which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and\nsaid, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall\ncleave to his wife, and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they\nare no more twain, but one flesh. What, therefore, God hath joined\ntogether, let not man put asunder.\"[116] It is certain, then, that\nfrom the first men were created, as we see and know them to be now,\nof two sexes, male and female, and that they are called one, either\non account of the matrimonial union, or on account of the origin of\nthe woman, who was created from the side of the man. And it is by\nthis original example, which God Himself instituted, that the apostle\nadmonishes all husbands to love their own wives in particular.[117]\n\n\n  23. _Whether generation should have taken place even in Paradise\n      had man not sinned, or whether there should have been any\n      contention there between chastity and lust._\n\nBut he who says that there should have been neither copulation nor\ngeneration but for sin, virtually says that man's sin was necessary\nto complete the number of the saints. For if these two by not sinning\nshould have continued to live alone, because, as is supposed, they\ncould not have begotten children had they not sinned, then certainly\nsin was necessary in order that there might be not only two but many\nrighteous men. And if this cannot be maintained without absurdity,\nwe must rather believe that the number of the saints fit to complete\nthis most blessed city would have been as great though no one had\nsinned, as it is now that the grace of God gathers its citizens out\nof the multitude of sinners, so long as the children of this world\ngenerate and are generated.[118]\n\nAnd therefore that marriage, worthy of the happiness of Paradise,\nshould have had desirable fruit without the shame of lust, had\nthere been no sin. But how that could be, there is now no example\nto teach us. Nevertheless, it ought not to seem incredible that\none member might serve the will without lust then, since so many\nserve it now. Do we now move our feet and hands when we will to do\nthe things we would by means of these members? do we meet with no\nresistance in them, but perceive that they are ready servants of the\nwill, both in our own case and in that of others, and especially of\nartisans employed in mechanical operations, by which the weakness\nand clumsiness of nature become, through industrious exercise,\nwonderfully dexterous? and shall we not believe that, like as all\nthose members obediently serve the will, so also should the members\nhave discharged the function of generation, though lust, the award\nof disobedience, had been awanting? Did not Cicero, in discussing\nthe difference of governments in his _De Republica_, adopt a simile\nfrom human nature, and say that we command our bodily members as\nchildren, they are so obedient; but that the vicious parts of the\nsoul must be treated as slaves, and be coerced with a more stringent\nauthority? And no doubt, in the order of nature, the soul is more\nexcellent than the body; and yet the soul commands the body more\neasily than itself. Nevertheless this lust, of which we at present\nspeak, is the more shameful on this account, because the soul is\ntherein neither master of itself, so as not to lust at all, nor of\nthe body, so as to keep the members under the control of the will;\nfor if they were thus ruled, there should be no shame. But now the\nsoul is ashamed that the body, which by nature is inferior and\nsubject to it, should resist its authority. For in the resistance\nexperienced by the soul in the other emotions there is less shame,\nbecause the resistance is from itself, and thus, when it is conquered\nby itself, itself is the conqueror, although the conquest is\ninordinate and vicious, because accomplished by those parts of the\nsoul which ought to be subject to reason, yet, being accomplished\nby its own parts and energies, the conquest is, as I say, its own.\nFor when the soul conquers itself to a due subordination, so that\nits unreasonable motions are controlled by reason, while it again is\nsubject to God, this is a conquest virtuous and praiseworthy. Yet\nthere is less shame when the soul is resisted by its own vicious\nparts than when its will and order are resisted by the body, which is\ndistinct from and inferior to it, and dependent on it for life itself.\n\nBut so long as the will retains under its authority the other\nmembers, without which the members excited by lust to resist the\nwill cannot accomplish what they seek, chastity is preserved,\nand the delight of sin foregone. And certainly, had not culpable\ndisobedience been visited with penal disobedience, the marriage of\nParadise should have been ignorant of this struggle and rebellion,\nthis quarrel between will and lust, that the will may be satisfied\nand lust restrained, but those members, like all the rest, should\nhave obeyed the will. The field of generation[119] should have been\nsown by the organ created for this purpose, as the earth is sown by\nthe hand. And whereas now, as we essay to investigate this subject\nmore exactly, modesty hinders us, and compels us to ask pardon of\nchaste ears, there would have been no cause to do so, but we could\nhave discoursed freely, and without fear of seeming obscene, upon\nall those points which occur to one who meditates on the subject.\nThere would not have been even words which could be called obscene,\nbut all that might be said of these members would have been as pure\nas what is said of the other parts of the body. Whoever, then, comes\nto the perusal of these pages with unchaste mind, let him blame his\ndisposition, not his nature; let him brand the actings of his own\nimpurity, not the words which necessity forces us to use, and for\nwhich every pure and pious reader or hearer will very readily pardon\nme, while I expose the folly of that scepticism which argues solely\non the ground of its own experience, and has no faith in anything\nbeyond. He who is not scandalized at the apostle's censure of the\nhorrible wickedness of the women who \"changed the natural use into\nthat which is against nature,\"[120] will read all this without being\nshocked, especially as we are not, like Paul, citing and censuring\na damnable uncleanness, but are explaining, so far as we can, human\ngeneration, while with Paul we avoid all obscenity of language.\n\n\n  24. _That if men had remained innocent and obedient in Paradise,\n      the generative organs should have been in subjection to the\n      will as the other members are._\n\nThe man, then, would have sown the seed, and the woman received it,\nas need required, the generative organs being moved by the will, not\nexcited by lust. For we move at will not only those members which are\nfurnished with joints of solid bone, as the hands, feet, and fingers,\nbut we move also at will those which are composed of slack and soft\nnerves: we can put them in motion, or stretch them out, or bend and\ntwist them, or contract and stiffen them, as we do with the muscles\nof the mouth and face. The lungs, which are the very tenderest of\nthe viscera except the brain, and are therefore carefully sheltered\nin the cavity of the chest, yet for all purposes of inhaling and\nexhaling the breath, and of uttering and modulating the voice, are\nobedient to the will when we breathe, exhale, speak, shout, or sing,\njust as the bellows obey the smith or the organist. I will not press\nthe fact that some animals have a natural power to move a single spot\nof the skin with which their whole body is covered, if they have felt\non it anything they wish to drive off,--a power so great, that by\nthis shivering tremor of the skin they can not only shake off flies\nthat have settled on them, but even spears that have fixed in their\nflesh. Man, it is true, has not this power; but is this any reason\nfor supposing that God could not give it to such creatures as He\nwished to possess it? And therefore man himself also might very well\nhave enjoyed absolute power over his members had he not forfeited it\nby his disobedience; for it was not difficult for God to form him\nso that what is now moved in his body only by lust should have been\nmoved only at will.\n\nWe know, too, that some men are differently constituted from others,\nand have some rare and remarkable faculty of doing with their body\nwhat other men can by no effort do, and, indeed, scarcely believe\nwhen they hear of others doing. There are persons who can move their\nears, either one at a time, or both together. There are some who,\nwithout moving the head, can bring the hair down upon the forehead,\nand move the whole scalp backwards and forwards at pleasure. Some,\nby lightly pressing their stomach, bring up an incredible quantity\nand variety of things they have swallowed, and produce whatever they\nplease, quite whole, as if out of a bag. Some so accurately mimic\nthe voices of birds and beasts and other men, that, unless they\nare seen, the difference cannot be told. Some have such command of\ntheir bowels, that they can break wind continuously at pleasure,\nso as to produce the effect of singing. I myself have known a man\nwho was accustomed to sweat whenever he wished. It is well known\nthat some weep when they please, and shed a flood of tears. But\nfar more incredible is that which some of our brethren saw quite\nrecently. There was a presbyter called Restitutus, in the parish of\nthe Calamensian[121] Church, who, as often as he pleased (and he\nwas asked to do this by those who desired to witness so remarkable\na phenomenon), on some one imitating the wailings of mourners,\nbecame so insensible, and lay in a state so like death, that not\nonly had he no feeling when they pinched and pricked him, but even\nwhen fire was applied to him, and he was burned by it, he had no\nsense of pain except afterwards from the wound. And that his body\nremained motionless, not by reason of his self-command, but because\nhe was insensible, was proved by the fact that he breathed no more\nthan a dead man; and yet he said that, when any one spoke with more\nthan ordinary distinctness, he heard the voice, but as if it were a\nlong way off. Seeing, then, that even in this mortal and miserable\nlife the body serves some men by many remarkable movements and\nmoods beyond the ordinary course of nature, what reason is there\nfor doubting that, before man was involved by his sin in this weak\nand corruptible condition, his members might have served his will\nfor the propagation of offspring without lust? Man has been given\nover to himself because he abandoned God, while he sought to be\nself-satisfying; and disobeying God, he could not obey even himself.\nHence it is that he is involved in the obvious misery of being unable\nto live as he wishes. For if he lived as he wished, he would think\nhimself blessed; but he could not be so if he lived wickedly.\n\n\n   25. _Of true blessedness, which this present life cannot enjoy._\n\nHowever, if we look at this a little more closely, we see that no one\nlives as he wishes but the blessed, and that no one is blessed but the\nrighteous. But even the righteous himself does not live as he wishes,\nuntil he has arrived where he cannot die, be deceived, or injured, and\nuntil he is assured that this shall be his eternal condition. For this\nnature demands; and nature is not fully and perfectly blessed till it\nattains what it seeks. But what man is at present able to live as he\nwishes, when it is not in his power so much as to live? He wishes to\nlive, he is compelled to die. How, then, does he live as he wishes who\ndoes not live as long as he wishes? or if he wishes to die, how can\nhe live as he wishes, since he does not wish even to live? Or if he\nwishes to die, not because he dislikes life, but that after death he\nmay live better, still he is not yet living as he wishes, but only has\nthe prospect of so living when, through death, he reaches that which\nhe wishes. But admit that he lives as he wishes, because he has done\nviolence to himself, and forced himself not to wish what he cannot\nobtain, and to wish only what he can (as Terence has it, \"Since you\ncannot do what you will, will what you can\"[122]), is he therefore\nblessed because he is patiently wretched? For a blessed life is\npossessed only by the man who loves it. If it is loved and possessed,\nit must necessarily be more ardently loved than all besides; for\nwhatever else is loved must be loved for the sake of the blessed life.\nAnd if it is loved as it deserves to be,--and the man is not blessed\nwho does not love the blessed life as it deserves,--then he who so\nloves it cannot but wish it to be eternal. Therefore it shall then only\nbe blessed when it is eternal.\n\n\n    26. _That we are to believe that in Paradise our first parents\n                  begat offspring without blushing._\n\nIn Paradise, then, man lived as he desired so long as he desired\nwhat God had commanded. He lived in the enjoyment of God, and was\ngood by God's goodness; he lived without any want, and had it in his\npower so to live eternally. He had food that he might not hunger,\ndrink that he might not thirst, the tree of life that old age might\nnot waste him. There was in his body no corruption, nor seed of\ncorruption, which could produce in him any unpleasant sensation.\nHe feared no inward disease, no outward accident. Soundest health\nblessed his body, absolute tranquillity his soul. As in Paradise\nthere was no excessive heat or cold, so its inhabitants were exempt\nfrom the vicissitudes of fear and desire. No sadness of any kind was\nthere, nor any foolish joy; true gladness ceaselessly flowed from\nthe presence of God, who was loved \"out of a pure heart, and a good\nconscience, and faith unfeigned.\"[123] The honest love of husband\nand wife made a sure harmony between them. Body and spirit worked\nharmoniously together, and the commandment was kept without labour.\nNo languor made their leisure wearisome; no sleepiness interrupted\ntheir desire to labour.[124] In tanta facilitate rerum et felicitate\nhominum, absit ut suspicemur, non potuisse prolem seri sine libidinis\nmorbo: sed eo voluntatis nutu moverentur illa membra quo c\u00e6tera, et\nsine ardoris illecebroso stimulo cum tranquillitate animi et corporis\nnulla corruptione integritatis infunderetur gremio maritus uxoris.\nNeque enim quia experientia probari non potest, ideo credendum non\nest; quando illas corporis partes non ageret turbidus calor, sed\nspontanea potestas, sicut opus esset, adhiberet; ita tunc potuisse\nutero conjugis salva integritate feminei genitalis virile semen\nimmitti, sicut nunc potest eadem integritate salva ex utero virginis\nfluxus menstrui cruoris emitti. Eadem quippe via posset illud injici,\nqua hoc potest ejici. Ut enim ad pariendum non doloris gemitus, sed\nmaturitatis impulsus feminea viscera relaxaret: sic ad f\u0153tandum et\nconcipiendum non libidinis appetitus, sed voluntarius usus naturam\nutramque conjungeret. We speak of things which are now shameful, and\nalthough we try, as well as we are able, to conceive them as they\nwere before they became shameful, yet necessity compels us rather to\nlimit our discussion to the bounds set by modesty than to extend it\nas our moderate faculty of discourse might suggest. For since that\nwhich I have been speaking of was not experienced even by those who\nmight have experienced it,--I mean our first parents (for sin and\nits merited banishment from Paradise anticipated this passionless\ngeneration on their part),--when sexual intercourse is spoken of now,\nit suggests to men's thoughts not such a placid obedience to the will\nas is conceivable in our first parents, but such violent acting of\nlust as they themselves have experienced. And therefore modesty shuts\nmy mouth, although my mind conceives the matter clearly. But Almighty\nGod, the supreme and supremely good Creator of all natures, who aids\nand rewards good wills, while He abandons and condemns the bad, and\nrules both, was not destitute of a plan by which He might people\nHis city with the fixed number of citizens which His wisdom had\nforeordained even out of the condemned human race, discriminating\nthem not now by merits, since the whole mass was condemned as if in a\nvitiated root, but by grace, and showing, not only in the case of the\nredeemed, but also in those who were not delivered, how much grace He\nhas bestowed upon them. For every one acknowledges that he has been\nrescued from evil, not by deserved, but by gratuitous goodness, when\nhe is singled out from the company of those with whom he might justly\nhave borne a common punishment, and is allowed to go scathless.\nWhy, then, should God not have created those whom He foresaw would\nsin, since He was able to show in and by them both what their guilt\nmerited, and what His grace bestowed, and since, under His creating\nand disposing hand, even the perverse disorder of the wicked could\nnot pervert the right order of things?\n\n\n   27. _Of the angels and men who sinned, and that their wickedness\n            did not disturb the order of God's providence._\n\nThe sins of men and angels do nothing to impede the \"great works\nof the Lord which accomplish His will.\"[125] For He who by His\nprovidence and omnipotence distributes to every one his own portion,\nis able to make good use not only of the good, but also of the\nwicked. And thus making a good use of the wicked angel, who, in\npunishment of his first wicked volition, was doomed to an obduracy\nthat prevents him now from willing any good, why should not God have\npermitted him to tempt the first man, who had been created upright,\nthat is to say, with a good will? For he had been so constituted,\nthat if he looked to God for help, man's goodness should defeat\nthe angel's wickedness; but if by proud self-pleasing he abandoned\nGod, his Creator and Sustainer, he should be conquered. If his\nwill remained upright, through leaning on God's help, he should\nbe rewarded; if it became wicked, by forsaking God, he should be\npunished. But even this trusting in God's help could not itself\nbe accomplished without God's help, although man had it in his\nown power to relinquish the benefits of divine grace by pleasing\nhimself. For as it is not in our power to live in this world without\nsustaining ourselves by food, while it is in our power to refuse this\nnourishment and cease to live, as those do who kill themselves, so\nit was not in man's power, even in Paradise, to live as he ought\nwithout God's help; but it was in his power to live wickedly,\nthough thus he should cut short his happiness, and incur very just\npunishment. Since, then, God was not ignorant that man would fall,\nwhy should He not have suffered him to be tempted by an angel who\nhated and envied him? It was not, indeed, that He was unaware that he\nshould be conquered, but because He foresaw that by the man's seed,\naided by divine grace, this same devil himself should be conquered,\nto the greater glory of the saints. All was brought about in such a\nmanner, that neither did any future event escape God's foreknowledge,\nnor did His foreknowledge compel any one to sin, and so as to\ndemonstrate in the experience of the intelligent creation, human\nand angelic, how great a difference there is between the private\npresumption of the creature and the Creator's protection. For who\nwill dare to believe or say that it was not in God's power to prevent\nboth angels and men from sinning? But God preferred to leave this\nin their power, and thus to show both what evil could be wrought by\ntheir pride, and what good by His grace.\n\n\n       28. _Of the nature of the two cities, the earthly and the\n                              heavenly._\n\nAccordingly, two cities have been formed by two loves: the earthly\nby the love of self, even to the contempt of God; the heavenly by\nthe love of God, even to the contempt of self. The former, in a\nword, glories in itself, the latter in the Lord. For the one seeks\nglory from men; but the greatest glory of the other is God, the\nwitness of conscience. The one lifts up its head in its own glory;\nthe other says to its God, \"Thou art my glory, and the lifter up of\nmine head.\"[126] In the one, the princes and the nations it subdues\nare ruled by the love of ruling; in the other, the princes and the\nsubjects serve one another in love, the latter obeying, while the\nformer take thought for all. The one delights in its own strength,\nrepresented in the persons of its rulers; the other says to its God,\n\"I will love Thee, O Lord, my strength.\"[127] And therefore the wise\nmen of the one city, living according to man, have sought for profit\nto their own bodies or souls, or both, and those who have known God\n\"glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in\ntheir imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened; professing\nthemselves to be wise,\"--that is, glorying in their own wisdom, and\nbeing possessed by pride,--\"they became fools, and changed the glory\nof the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man,\nand to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.\" For they\nwere either leaders or followers of the people in adoring images,\n\"and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who\nis blessed for ever.\"[128] But in the other city there is no human\nwisdom, but only godliness, which offers due worship to the true God,\nand looks for its reward in the society of the saints, of holy angels\nas well as holy men, \"that God may be all in all.\"[129]\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[1] This book is referred to in another work of Augustine's (_contra\nAdvers. Legis et Prophet._ i. 18), which was written about the year 420.\n\n[2] 1 Cor. xv. 39.\n\n[3] Rom. iii. 20.\n\n[4] Gal. iii. 11.\n\n[5] John. i. 14.\n\n[6] The Apollinarians.\n\n[7] John. xx. 13.\n\n[8] Gal. v. 19-21.\n\n[9] Wisd. ix. 15.\n\n[10] 2 Cor. iv. 16.\n\n[11] 2 Cor. v. 1-4.\n\n[12] _\u00c6neid_, vi. 730-32.\n\n[13] _Ib._ 733, 734.\n\n[14] On the punishment of the devil, see the _De Agone Christi_, 3-5,\nand _De Nat. Boni_, 33.\n\n[15] Rom. iii. 7.\n\n[16] John xiv. 6.\n\n[17] 1 Cor. iii. 3.\n\n[18] 1 Cor. ii. 11-14.\n\n[19] 1 Cor. iii. 1.\n\n[20] Rom. iii. 20.\n\n[21] Gen. xlvi. 27.\n\n[22] See Augustine, _De H\u00e6res._ 46.\n\n[23] _Tusc. Qu\u00e6st._ iv. 6.\n\n[24] _\u00c6neid_, vi. 719-21.\n\n[25] Tit. i. 8, according to Greek and Vulgate.\n\n[26] John xxi. 15-17. On these synonyms see the commentaries _in loc._\n\n[27] Ps. xi. 5.\n\n[28] 1 John ii. 15\n\n[29] 2 Tim. iii. 2.\n\n[30] Phil. i. 23.\n\n[31] Ps. cxix. 20.\n\n[32] Wisd. vi. 20.\n\n[33] Ps. xxxii. 11.\n\n[34] Ps. iv. 7.\n\n[35] Ps. xvi. 11.\n\n[36] Phil. ii. 12.\n\n[37] Rom. xi. 20.\n\n[38] 2 Cor. xi. 3.\n\n[39] _\u00c6neid_, vi. 733.\n\n[40] Isa. lvii. 21.\n\n[41] Matt. vii. 12.\n\n[42] Ecclus. vii. 13.\n\n[43] Luke ii. 14.\n\n[44] _Cat._ i. 2.\n\n[45] Ter. _Andr._ ii. 1, 6.\n\n[46] _\u00c6neid_, vi. 733.\n\n[47] _\u00c6neid_, v. 278.\n\n[48] 2 Cor. vii. 8-11.\n\n[49] _Tusc. Disp._ iii. 32.\n\n[50] C. 4, 5.\n\n[51] Rom. viii. 23.\n\n[52] 1 Cor. xv. 54.\n\n[53] Matt. xxiv. 12.\n\n[54] Matt. x. 22.\n\n[55] 1 John i. 8.\n\n[56] 2 Cor. ix. 7.\n\n[57] Gal. vi. 1.\n\n[58] Ps. xxvi. 2.\n\n[59] Matt. xxvi. 75.\n\n[60] Jas. i. 2.\n\n[61] 1 Cor. iv. 9.\n\n[62] Phil. iii. 14.\n\n[63] Rom. xii. 15.\n\n[64] 2 Cor. vii. 5.\n\n[65] Phil. i. 23.\n\n[66] Rom. i. 11-13.\n\n[67] 2 Cor. xi. 1-3.\n\n[68] Rom. ix. 2.\n\n[69] Rom. x. 3.\n\n[70] 2 Cor. xii. 21.\n\n[71] Mark iii. 5.\n\n[72] John xi. 15.\n\n[73] John xi. 35.\n\n[74] Luke xxii. 15.\n\n[75] Matt. xxvi. 38.\n\n[76] Rom. i. 31.\n\n[77] Ps. lxix. 20.\n\n[78] Crantor, an Academic philosopher quoted by Cicero, _Tusc.\nQu\u00e6st._ iii. 6.\n\n[79] 1 John i. 8.\n\n[80] 1 John iv. 18.\n\n[81] Rom. viii. 15.\n\n[82] Ps. xix. 9.\n\n[83] Ps. ix. 18.\n\n[84] Matt. v. 28.\n\n[85] Gen. i. 28.\n\n[86] Gen. vi. 6, and 1 Sam. xv. 11.\n\n[87] Eccles. vii. 29.\n\n[88] John viii. 36.\n\n[89] 1 Tim. ii. 14.\n\n[90] Rom. v. 12.\n\n[91] Gen. iii. 12.\n\n[92] Ecclus. x. 13.\n\n[93] Matt. vii. 18.\n\n[94] _Defecit._\n\n[95] Ps. lxxiii. 18.\n\n[96] Gen. iii. 5.\n\n[97] Prov. xviii. 12.\n\n[98] That is to say, it was an obvious and indisputable transgression.\n\n[99] Ps. lxxxiii. 16.\n\n[100] Gen. iii. 12, 13.\n\n[101] Phil. ii. 8.\n\n[102] Ps. cxliv. 4.\n\n[103] Cicero, _Tusc. Qu\u00e6st._ iii. 6 and iv. 9. So Aristotle.\n\n[104] 1 Thess. iv. 4.\n\n[105] Gen. ii. 25.\n\n[106] An error which arose from the words, \"The eyes of them both\nwere opened,\" Gen. iii. 7.--See _De Genesi ad lit._ ii. 40.\n\n[107] Gen. iii. 6.\n\n[108] This doctrine and phraseology of Augustine being important in\nconnection with his whole theory of the fall, we give some parallel\npassages to show that the words are not used at random: _De Genesi ad\nlit._ xi. 41; _De Corrept. et Gratia_, xi. 31; and especially _Cont.\nJulian._ iv. 82.\n\n[109] Gen. iii. 7.\n\n[110] See Plato's _Republic_, book iv.\n\n[111] The one word being the Latin form, the other the Greek, of the\nsame adjective.\n\n[112] By Diogenes Laertius, vi. 69, and Cicero, _De Offic._ i. 41.\n\n[113] Gen. i. 28.\n\n[114] Ps. cxxxviii. 3.\n\n[115] Gen. i. 27, 28.\n\n[116] Matt. xix. 4, 5.\n\n[117] Eph. v. 25.\n\n[118] Luke xx. 34.\n\n[119] See Virgil, _Georg._ iii. 136.\n\n[120] Rom. i. 26.\n\n[121] The position of Calama is described by Augustine as between\nConstantine and Hippo, but nearer Hippo.--_Contra Lit. Petil._ ii.\n228. A full description of it is given in Poujoulat's _Histoire de\nS. Augustin_, i. 340, who says it was one of the most important\ntowns of Numidia, eighteen leagues south of Hippo, and represented\nby the modern Ghelma. It is to its bishop, Possidius, we owe the\ncontemporary _Life of Augustine_.\n\n[122] _Andr._ ii. 1, 5.\n\n[123] 1 Tim. i. 5.\n\n[124] Compare Basil's _Homily on Paradise_, and John Damascene, _De\nFide Orthod._ ii. 11.\n\n[125] Ps. cxi. 2.\n\n[126] Ps. iii. 3.\n\n[127] Ps. xviii. 1.\n\n[128] Rom. i. 21-25.\n\n[129] 1 Cor. xv. 28.\n\n\n\n\n                            BOOK FIFTEENTH.\n\n                               ARGUMENT.\n\n  HAVING TREATED IN THE FOUR PRECEDING BOOKS OF THE ORIGIN OF THE TWO\n      CITIES, THE EARTHLY AND THE HEAVENLY, AUGUSTINE EXPLAINS THEIR\n      GROWTH AND PROGRESS IN THE FOUR BOOKS WHICH FOLLOW; AND, IN\n      ORDER TO DO SO, HE EXPLAINS THE CHIEF PASSAGES OF THE SACRED\n      HISTORY WHICH BEAR UPON THIS SUBJECT. IN THIS FIFTEENTH BOOK HE\n      OPENS THIS PART OF HIS WORK BY EXPLAINING THE EVENTS RECORDED\n      IN GENESIS FROM THE TIME OF CAIN AND ABEL TO THE DELUGE.\n\n\n    1. _Of the two lines of the human race which from first to last\n                              divide it._\n\nOF the bliss of Paradise, of Paradise itself, and of the life of\nour first parents there, and of their sin and punishment, many\nhave thought much, spoken much, written much. We ourselves, too,\nhave spoken of these things in the foregoing books, and have\nwritten either what we read in the Holy Scriptures, or what we\ncould reasonably deduce from them. And were we to enter into a more\ndetailed investigation of these matters, an endless number of endless\nquestions would arise, which would involve us in a larger work than\nthe present occasion admits. We cannot be expected to find room for\nreplying to every question that may be started by unoccupied and\ncaptious men, who are ever more ready to ask questions than capable\nof understanding the answer. Yet I trust we have already done justice\nto these great and difficult questions regarding the beginning of\nthe world, or of the soul, or of the human race itself. This race we\nhave distributed into two parts, the one consisting of those who live\naccording to man, the other of those who live according to God. And\nthese we also mystically call the two cities, or the two communities\nof men, of which the one is predestined to reign eternally with God,\nand the other to suffer eternal punishment with the devil. This,\nhowever, is their end, and of it we are to speak afterwards. At\npresent, as we have said enough about their origin, whether among\nthe angels, whose numbers we know not, or in the two first human\nbeings, it seems suitable to attempt an account of their career, from\nthe time when our two first parents began to propagate the race until\nall human generation shall cease. For this whole time or world-age,\nin which the dying give place and those who are born succeed, is the\ncareer of these two cities concerning which we treat.\n\nOf these two first parents of the human race, then, Cain was the\nfirst-born, and he belonged to the city of men; after him was born\nAbel, who belonged to the city of God. For as in the individual the\ntruth of the apostle's statement is discerned, \"that is not first\nwhich is spiritual, but that which is natural, and afterward that\nwhich is spiritual,\"[130] whence it comes to pass that each man,\nbeing derived from a condemned stock, is first of all born of Adam\nevil and carnal, and becomes good and spiritual only afterwards, when\nhe is grafted into Christ by regeneration: so was it in the human\nrace as a whole. When these two cities began to run their course by\na series of deaths and births, the citizen of this world was the\nfirst-born, and after him the stranger in this world, the citizen\nof the city of God, predestinated by grace, elected by grace, by\ngrace a stranger below, and by grace a citizen above. By grace,--for\nso far as regards himself he is sprung from the same mass, all of\nwhich is condemned in its origin; but God, like a potter (for this\ncomparison is introduced by the apostle judiciously, and not without\nthought), of the same lump made one vessel to honour, another to\ndishonour.[131] But first the vessel to dishonour was made, and after\nit another to honour. For in each individual, as I have already said,\nthere is first of all that which is reprobate, that from which we\nmust begin, but in which we need not necessarily remain; afterwards\nis that which is well-approved, to which we may by advancing attain,\nand in which, when we have reached it, we may abide. Not, indeed,\nthat every wicked man shall be good, but that no one will be good\nwho was not first of all wicked; but the sooner any one becomes a\ngood man, the more speedily does he receive this title, and abolish\nthe old name in the new. Accordingly, it is recorded of Cain that he\nbuilt a city,[132] but Abel, being a sojourner, built none. For the\ncity of the saints is above, although here below it begets citizens,\nin whom it sojourns till the time of its reign arrives, when it shall\ngather together all in the day of the resurrection; and then shall\nthe promised kingdom be given to them, in which they shall reign with\ntheir Prince, the King of the ages, time without end.\n\n\n  2. _Of the children of the flesh and the children of the promise._\n\nThere was indeed on earth, so long as it was needed, a symbol and\nforeshadowing image of this city, which served the purpose of\nreminding men that such a city was to be, rather than of making it\npresent; and this image was itself called the holy city, as a symbol\nof the future city, though not itself the reality. Of this city\nwhich served as an image, and of that free city it typified, Paul\nwrites to the Galatians in these terms: \"Tell me, ye that desire\nto be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written,\nthat Abraham had two sons, the one by a bond maid, the other by a\nfree woman. But he who was of the bond woman was born after the\nflesh, but he of the free woman was by promise. Which things are an\nallegory:[133] for these are the two covenants; the one from the\nmount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this\nAgar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now\nis, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is\nabove is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written,\nRejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou\nthat travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than\nshe which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the\nchildren of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh\npersecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.\nNevertheless, what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bond woman and\nher son: for the son of the bond woman shall not be heir with the son\nof the free woman. And we, brethren, are not children of the bond\nwoman, but of the free, in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made\nus free.\"[134] This interpretation of the passage, handed down to\nus with apostolic authority, shows how we ought to understand the\nScriptures of the two covenants--the old and the new. One portion of\nthe earthly city became an image of the heavenly city, not having a\nsignificance of its own, but signifying another city, and therefore\nserving, or \"being in bondage.\" For it was founded not for its own\nsake, but to prefigure another city; and this shadow of a city was\nalso itself foreshadowed by another preceding figure. For Sarah's\nhandmaid Agar, and her son, were an image of this image. And as the\nshadows were to pass away when the full light came, Sarah, the free\nwoman, who prefigured the free city (which again was also prefigured\nin another way by that shadow of a city Jerusalem), therefore said,\n\"Cast out the bond woman and her son; for the son of the bond woman\nshall not be heir with my son Isaac,\" or, as the apostle says, \"with\nthe son of the free woman.\" In the earthly city, then, we find two\nthings--its own obvious presence, and its symbolic presentation of\nthe heavenly city. Now citizens are begotten to the earthly city by\nnature vitiated by sin, but to the heavenly city by grace freeing\nnature from sin; whence the former are called \"vessels of wrath,\"\nthe latter \"vessels of mercy.\"[135] And this was typified in the two\nsons of Abraham,--Ishmael, the son of Agar the handmaid, being born\naccording to the flesh, while Isaac was born of the free woman Sarah,\naccording to the promise. Both, indeed, were of Abraham's seed; but\nthe one was begotten by natural law, the other was given by gracious\npromise. In the one birth, human action is revealed; in the other, a\ndivine kindness comes to light.\n\n\n   3. _That Sarah's barrenness was made productive by God's grace._\n\nSarah, in fact, was barren; and, despairing of offspring, and being\nresolved that she would have at least through her handmaid that\nblessing she saw she could not in her own person procure, she gave her\nhandmaid to her husband, to whom she herself had been unable to bear\nchildren. From him she required this conjugal duty, exercising her own\nright in another's womb. And thus Ishmael was born according to the\ncommon law of human generation, by sexual intercourse. Therefore it\nis said that he was born \"according to the flesh,\"--not because such\nbirths are not the gifts of God, nor His handiwork, whose creative\nwisdom \"reaches,\" as it is written, \"from one end to another mightily,\nand sweetly doth she order all things,\"[136] but because, in a case in\nwhich the gift of God, which was not due to men and was the gratuitous\nlargess of grace, was to be conspicuous, it was requisite that a son\nbe given in a way which no effort of nature could compass. Nature\ndenies children to persons of the age which Abraham and Sarah had now\nreached; besides that, in Sarah's case, she was barren even in her\nprime. This nature, so constituted that offspring could not be looked\nfor, symbolized the nature of the human race vitiated by sin and by\njust consequence condemned, which deserves no future felicity. Fitly,\ntherefore, does Isaac, the child of promise, typify the children of\ngrace, the citizens of the free city, who dwell together in everlasting\npeace, in which self-love and self-will have no place, but a\nministering love that rejoices in the common joy of all, of many hearts\nmakes one, that is to say, secures a perfect concord.\n\n\n          4. _Of the conflict and peace of the earthly city._\n\nBut the earthly city, which shall not be everlasting (for it will no\nlonger be a city when it has been committed to the extreme penalty),\nhas its good in this world, and rejoices in it with such joy as such\nthings can afford. But as this is not a good which can discharge its\ndevotees of all distresses, this city is often divided against itself\nby litigations, wars, quarrels, and such victories as are either\nlife-destroying or short-lived. For each part of it that arms against\nanother part of it seeks to triumph over the nations through itself\nin bondage to vice. If, when it has conquered, it is inflated with\npride, its victory is life-destroying; but if it turns its thoughts\nupon the common casualties of our mortal condition, and is rather\nanxious concerning the disasters that may befall it than elated with\nthe successes already achieved, this victory, though of a higher\nkind, is still only short-lived; for it cannot abidingly rule over\nthose whom it has victoriously subjugated. But the things which this\ncity desires cannot justly be said to be evil, for it is itself,\nin its own kind, better than all other human good. For it desires\nearthly peace for the sake of enjoying earthly goods, and it makes\nwar in order to attain to this peace; since, if it has conquered, and\nthere remains no one to resist it, it enjoys a peace which it had not\nwhile there were opposing parties who contested for the enjoyment\nof those things which were too small to satisfy both. This peace\nis purchased by toilsome wars; it is obtained by what they style a\nglorious victory. Now, when victory remains with the party which\nhad the juster cause, who hesitates to congratulate the victor, and\nstyle it a desirable peace? These things, then, are good things, and\nwithout doubt the gifts of God. But if they neglect the better things\nof the heavenly city, which are secured by eternal victory and peace\nnever-ending, and so inordinately covet these present good things\nthat they believe them to be the only desirable things, or love them\nbetter than those things which are believed to be better,--if this be\nso, then it is necessary that misery follow and ever increase.\n\n\n  5. _Of the fratricidal act of the founder of the earthly city, and\n           the corresponding crime of the founder of Rome._\n\nThus the founder of the earthly city was a fratricide. Overcome with\nenvy, he slew his own brother, a citizen of the eternal city, and a\nsojourner on earth. So that we cannot be surprised that this first\nspecimen, or, as the Greeks say, archetype of crime, should, long\nafterwards, find a corresponding crime at the foundation of that\ncity which was destined to reign over so many nations, and be the\nhead of this earthly city of which we speak. For of that city also,\nas one of their poets has mentioned, \"the first walls were stained\nwith a brother's blood,\"[137] or, as Roman history records, Remus\nwas slain by his brother Romulus. And thus there is no difference\nbetween the foundation of this city and of the earthly city, unless\nit be that Romulus and Remus were both citizens of the earthly city.\nBoth desired to have the glory of founding the Roman republic, but\nboth could not have as much glory as if one only claimed it; for he\nwho wished to have the glory of ruling would certainly rule less if\nhis power were shared by a living consort. In order, therefore, that\nthe whole glory might be enjoyed by one, his consort was removed;\nand by this crime the empire was made larger indeed, but inferior,\nwhile otherwise it would have been less, but better. Now these\nbrothers, Cain and Abel, were not both animated by the same earthly\ndesires, nor did the murderer envy the other because he feared that,\nby both ruling, his own dominion would be curtailed,--for Abel was\nnot solicitous to rule in that city which his brother built,--he\nwas moved by that diabolical, envious hatred with which the evil\nregard the good, for no other reason than because they are good\nwhile themselves are evil. For the possession of goodness is by no\nmeans diminished by being shared with a partner either permanent or\ntemporarily assumed; on the contrary, the possession of goodness is\nincreased in proportion to the concord and charity of each of those\nwho share it. In short, he who is unwilling to share this possession\ncannot have it; and he who is most willing to admit others to a share\nof it will have the greatest abundance to himself. The quarrel, then,\nbetween Romulus and Remus shows how the earthly city is divided\nagainst itself; that which fell out between Cain and Abel illustrated\nthe hatred that subsists between the two cities, that of God and\nthat of men. The wicked war with the wicked; the good also war with\nthe wicked. But with the good, good men, or at least perfectly good\nmen, cannot war; though, while only going on towards perfection,\nthey war to this extent, that every good man resists others in those\npoints in which he resists himself. And in each individual \"the flesh\nlusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh.\"[138]\nThis spiritual lusting, therefore, can be at war with the carnal\nlust of another man; or carnal lust may be at war with the spiritual\ndesires of another, in some such way as good and wicked men are at\nwar; or, still more certainly, the carnal lusts of two men, good but\nnot yet perfect, contend together, just as the wicked contend with\nthe wicked, until the health of those who are under the treatment of\ngrace attains final victory.\n\n\n  6. _Of the weaknesses which even the citizens of the city of God\n      suffer during this earthly pilgrimage in punishment of sin, and\n      of which they are healed by God's care._\n\nThis sickliness--that is to say, that disobedience of which we spoke\nin the fourteenth book--is the punishment of the first disobedience.\nIt is therefore not nature, but vice; and therefore it is said to\nthe good who are growing in grace, and living in this pilgrimage\nby faith, \"Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law\nof Christ.\"[139] In like manner it is said elsewhere, \"Warn them\nthat are unruly, comfort the feeble-minded, support the weak, be\npatient toward all men. See that none render evil for evil unto any\nman.\"[140] And in another place, \"If a man be overtaken in a fault,\nye which are spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of meekness;\nconsidering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.\"[141] And elsewhere,\n\"Let not the sun go down upon your wrath.\"[142] And in the Gospel,\n\"If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his\nfault between thee and him alone.\"[143] So too of sins which may\ncreate scandal the apostle says, \"Them that sin rebuke before all,\nthat others also may fear.\"[144] For this purpose, and that we may\nkeep that peace without which no man can see the Lord,[145] many\nprecepts are given which carefully inculcate mutual forgiveness;\namong which we may number that terrible word in which the servant is\nordered to pay his formerly remitted debt of ten thousand talents,\nbecause he did not remit to his fellow-servant his debt of two\nhundred pence. To which parable the Lord Jesus added the words,\n\"So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from\nyour hearts forgive not every one his brother.\"[146] It is thus the\ncitizens of the city of God are healed while still they sojourn in\nthis earth and sigh for the peace of their heavenly country. The Holy\nSpirit, too, works within, that the medicine externally applied may\nhave some good result. Otherwise, even though God Himself make use of\nthe creatures that are subject to Him, and in some human form address\nour human senses, whether we receive those impressions in sleep or\nin some external appearance, still, if He does not by His own inward\ngrace sway and act upon the mind, no preaching of the truth is of\nany avail. But this God does, distinguishing between the vessels\nof wrath and the vessels of mercy, by His own very secret but very\njust providence. When He Himself aids the soul in His own hidden and\nwonderful ways, and the sin which dwells in our members, and is, as\nthe apostle teaches, rather the punishment of sin, does not reign in\nour mortal body to obey the lusts of it, and when we no longer yield\nour members as instruments of unrighteousness,[147] then the soul is\nconverted from its own evil and selfish desires, and, God possessing\nit, it possesses itself in peace even in this life, and afterwards,\nwith perfected health and endowed with immortality, will reign\nwithout sin in peace everlasting.\n\n\n  7. _Of the cause of Cain's crime and his obstinacy, which not even\n                    the word of God could subdue._\n\nBut though God made use of this very mode of address which we have\nbeen endeavouring to explain, and spoke to Cain in that form by\nwhich He was wont to accommodate Himself to our first parents and\nconverse with them as a companion, what good influence had it on\nCain? Did he not fulfil his wicked intention of killing his brother\neven after he was warned by God's voice? For when God had made a\ndistinction between their sacrifices, neglecting Cain's, regarding\nAbel's, which was doubtless intimated by some visible sign to that\neffect; and when God had done so because the works of the one were\nevil but those of his brother good, Cain was very wroth, and his\ncountenance fell. For thus it is written: \"And the Lord said unto\nCain, Why art thou wroth, and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou\nofferest rightly, but dost not rightly distinguish, hast thou not\nsinned? Fret not thyself, for unto thee shall be his turning, and\nthou shalt rule over him.\"[148] In this admonition administered by\nGod to Cain, that clause indeed, \"If thou offerest rightly, but dost\nnot rightly distinguish, hast thou not sinned?\" is obscure, inasmuch\nas it is not apparent for what reason or purpose it was spoken, and\nmany meanings have been put upon it, as each one who discusses it\nattempts to interpret it according to the rule of faith. The truth\nis, that a sacrifice is \"rightly offered\" when it is offered to the\ntrue God, to whom alone we must sacrifice. And it is \"not rightly\ndistinguished\" when we do not rightly distinguish the places or\nseasons or materials of the offering, or the person offering, or the\nperson to whom it is presented, or those to whom it is distributed\nfor food after the oblation. Distinguishing[149] is here used for\ndiscriminating,--whether when an offering is made in a place where\nit ought not or of a material which ought to be offered not there\nbut elsewhere; or when an offering is made at a wrong time, or of a\nmaterial suitable not then but at some other time; or when that is\noffered which in no place nor any time ought to be offered; or when\na man keeps to himself choicer specimens of the same kind than he\noffers to God; or when he or any other who may not lawfully partake\nprofanely eats of the oblation. In which of these particulars Cain\ndispleased God, it is difficult to determine. But the Apostle John,\nspeaking of these brothers, says, \"Not as Cain, who was of that\nwicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because\nhis own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.\"[150] He\nthus gives us to understand that God did not respect his offering\nbecause it was not rightly \"distinguished\" in this, that he gave to\nGod something of his own but kept himself to himself. For this all\ndo who follow not God's will but their own, who live not with an\nupright but a crooked heart, and yet offer to God such gifts as they\nsuppose will procure from Him that He aid them not by healing but\nby gratifying their evil passions. And this is the characteristic\nof the earthly city, that it worships God or gods who may aid it in\nreigning victoriously and peacefully on earth not through love of\ndoing good, but through lust of rule. The good use the world that\nthey may enjoy God: the wicked, on the contrary, that they may enjoy\nthe world would fain use God,--those of them, at least, who have\nattained to the belief that He is and takes an interest in human\naffairs. For they who have not yet attained even to this belief are\nstill at a much lower level. Cain, then, when he saw that God had\nrespect to his brother's sacrifice, but not to his own, should have\nhumbly chosen his good brother as his example, and not proudly\ncounted him his rival. But he was wroth, and his countenance fell.\nThis angry regret for another person's goodness, even his brother's,\nwas charged upon him by God as a great sin. And He accused him of it\nin the interrogation, \"Why art thou wroth, and why is thy countenance\nfallen?\" For God saw that he envied his brother, and of this He\naccused him. For to men, from whom the heart of their fellow is\nhid, it might be doubtful and quite uncertain whether that sadness\nbewailed his own wickedness by which, as he had learned, he had\ndispleased God, or his brother's goodness, which had pleased God, and\nwon His favourable regard to his sacrifice. But God, in giving the\nreason why He refused to accept Cain's offering and why Cain should\nrather have been displeased at himself than at his brother, shows him\nthat though he was unjust in \"not rightly distinguishing,\" that is,\nnot rightly living and being unworthy to have his offering received,\nhe was more unjust by far in hating his just brother without a cause.\n\nYet He does not dismiss him without counsel, holy, just, and good.\n\"Fret not thyself,\" He says, \"for unto thee shall be his turning,\nand thou shalt rule over him.\" Over his brother, does He mean? Most\ncertainly not. Over what, then, but sin? For He had said, \"Thou\nhast sinned,\" and then He added, \"Fret not thyself, for to thee\nshall be its turning, and thou shalt rule over it.\"[151] And the\n\"turning\" of sin to the man can be understood of his conviction that\nthe guilt of sin can be laid at no other man's door but his own.\nFor this is the health-giving medicine of penitence, and the fit\nplea for pardon; so that, when it is said, \"To thee its turning,\"\nwe must not supply \"shall be,\" but we must read, \"To thee let its\nturning be,\" understanding it as a command, not as a prediction.\nFor then shall a man rule over his sin when he does not prefer it\nto himself and defend it, but subjects it by repentance; otherwise\nhe that becomes protector of it shall surely become its prisoner.\nBut if we understand this sin to be that carnal concupiscence of\nwhich the apostle says, \"The flesh lusteth against the spirit,\"[152]\namong the fruits of which lust he names envy, by which assuredly\nCain was stung and excited to destroy his brother, then we may\nproperly supply the words \"shall be,\" and read, \"To thee shall be\nits turning, and thou shalt rule over it.\" For when the carnal part\nwhich the apostle calls sin, in that place where he says, \"It is\nnot I who do it, but sin that dwelleth in me,\"[153] that part which\nthe philosophers also call vicious, and which ought not to lead the\nmind, but which the mind ought to rule and restrain by reason from\nillicit motions,--when, then, this part has been moved to perpetrate\nany wickedness, if it be curbed and if it obey the word of the\napostle, \"Yield not your members instruments of unrighteousness unto\nsin,\"[154] it is turned towards the mind and subdued and conquered\nby it, so that reason rules over it as a subject. It was this which\nGod enjoined on him who was kindled with the fire of envy against his\nbrother, so that he sought to put out of the way him whom he should\nhave set as an example. \"Fret not thyself,\" or compose thyself, He\nsays: withhold thy hand from crime; let not sin reign in your mortal\nbody to fulfil it in the lusts thereof, nor yield your members\ninstruments of unrighteousness unto sin. \"For to thee shall be its\nturning,\" so long as you do not encourage it by giving it the rein,\nbut bridle it by quenching its fire. \"And thou shalt rule over it;\"\nfor when it is not allowed any external actings, it yields itself to\nthe rule of the governing mind and righteous will, and ceases from\neven internal motions. There is something similar said in the same\ndivine book of the woman, when God questioned and judged them after\ntheir sin, and pronounced sentence on them all,--the devil in the\nform of the serpent, the woman and her husband in their own persons.\nFor when He had said to her, \"I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and\nthy conception; in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children,\" then He\nadded, \"and thy turning shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule\nover thee.\"[155] What is said to Cain about his sin, or about the\nvicious concupiscence of his flesh, is here said of the woman who\nhad sinned; and we are to understand that the husband is to rule his\nwife as the soul rules the flesh. And therefore, says the apostle,\n\"He that loveth his wife, loveth himself; for no man ever yet hated\nhis own flesh.\"[156] This flesh, then, is to be healed, because it\nbelongs to ourselves: is not to be abandoned to destruction as if\nit were alien to our nature. But Cain received that counsel of God\nin the spirit of one who did not wish to amend. In fact, the vice\nof envy grew stronger in him; and, having entrapped his brother,\nhe slew him. Such was the founder of the earthly city. He was also\na figure of the Jews who slew Christ the Shepherd of the flock of\nmen, prefigured by Abel the shepherd of sheep: but as this is an\nallegorical and prophetical matter, I forbear to explain it now;\nbesides, I remember that I have made some remarks upon it in writing\nagainst Faustus the Manich\u00e6an.[157]\n\n\n    8. _What Cain's reason was for building a city so early in the\n                      history of the human race._\n\nAt present it is the history which I aim at defending, that Scripture\nmay not be reckoned incredible when it relates that one man built\na city at a time in which there seem to have been but four men\nupon earth, or rather indeed but three, after one brother slew the\nother,--to wit, the first man the father of all, and Cain himself,\nand his son Enoch, by whose name the city was itself called. But they\nwho are moved by this consideration forget to take into account that\nthe writer of the sacred history does not necessarily mention all the\nmen who might be alive at that time, but those only whom the scope of\nhis work required him to name. The design of that writer (who in this\nmatter was the instrument of the Holy Ghost) was to descend to Abraham\nthrough the successions of ascertained generations propagated from one\nman, and then to pass from Abraham's seed to the people of God, in\nwhom, separated as they were from other nations, was prefigured and\npredicted all that relates to the city whose reign is eternal, and to\nits king and founder Christ, which things were foreseen in the Spirit\nas destined to come; yet neither is this object so effected as that\nnothing is said of the other society of men which we call the earthly\ncity, but mention is made of it so far as seemed needful to enhance the\nglory of the heavenly city by contrast to its opposite. Accordingly,\nwhen the divine Scripture, in mentioning the number of years which\nthose men lived, concludes its account of each man of whom it speaks,\nwith the words, \"And he begat sons and daughters, and all his days were\nso and so, and he died,\" are we to understand that, because it does\nnot name those sons and daughters, therefore, during that long term\nof years over which one lifetime extended in those early days, there\nmight not have been born very many men, by whose united numbers not one\nbut several cities might have been built? But it suited the purpose of\nGod, by whose inspiration these histories were composed, to arrange\nand distinguish from the first these two societies in their several\ngenerations,--that on the one side the generations of men, that is to\nsay, of those who live according to man, and on the other side the\ngenerations of the sons of God, that is to say, of men living according\nto God, might be traced down together and yet apart from one another as\nfar as the deluge, at which point their dissociation and association\nare exhibited: their dissociation, inasmuch as the generations of both\nlines are recorded in separate tables, the one line descending from the\nfratricide Cain, the other from Seth, who had been born to Adam instead\nof him whom his brother slew; their association, inasmuch as the good\nso deteriorated that the whole race became of such a character that it\nwas swept away by the deluge, with the exception of one just man, whose\nname was Noah, and his wife and three sons and three daughters-in-law,\nwhich eight persons were alone deemed worthy to escape from that\ndesolating visitation which destroyed all men.\n\nTherefore, although it is written, \"And Cain knew his wife, and\nshe conceived and bare Enoch, and he builded a city and called the\nname of the city after the name of his son Enoch,\"[158] it does not\nfollow that we are to believe this to have been his first-born; for\nwe cannot suppose that this is proved by the expression \"he knew his\nwife,\" as if then for the first time he had had intercourse with\nher. For in the case of Adam, the father of all, this expression\nis used not only when Cain, who seems to have been his first-born,\nwas conceived, but also afterwards the same Scripture says, \"Adam\nknew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bare a son, and called his\nname Seth.\"[159] Whence it is obvious that Scripture employs this\nexpression neither always when a birth is recorded nor then only when\nthe birth of a first-born is mentioned. Neither is it necessary to\nsuppose that Enoch was Cain's first-born because he named his city\nafter him. For it is quite possible that though he had other sons,\nyet for some reason the father loved him more than the rest. Judah\nwas not the first-born, though he gives his name to Jud\u00e6a and the\nJews. But even though Enoch was the first-born of the city's founder,\nthat is no reason for supposing that the father named the city after\nhim as soon as he was born; for at that time he, being but a solitary\nman, could not have founded a civic community, which is nothing else\nthan a multitude of men bound together by some associating tie.\nBut when his family increased to such numbers that he had quite a\npopulation, then it became possible to him both to build a city,\nand give it, when founded, the name of his son. For so long was the\nlife of those antediluvians, that he who lived the shortest time of\nthose whose years are mentioned in Scripture attained to the age of\n753 years.[160] And though no one attained the age of a thousand\nyears, several exceeded the age of nine hundred. Who then can doubt\nthat during the lifetime of one man the human race might be so\nmultiplied that there would be a population to build and occupy not\none but several cities? And this might very readily be conjectured\nfrom the fact that from one man, Abraham, in not much more than four\nhundred years, the numbers of the Hebrew race so increased, that\nin the exodus of that people from Egypt there are recorded to have\nbeen six hundred thousand men capable of bearing arms,[161] and this\nover and above the Idum\u00e6ans, who, though not numbered with Israel's\ndescendants, were yet sprung from his brother, also a grandson of\nAbraham; and over and above the other nations which were of the same\nstock of Abraham, though not through Sarah,--that is, his descendants\nby Hagar and Keturah, the Ishmaelites, Midianites, etc.\n\n\n    9. _Of the long life and greater stature of the antediluvians._\n\nWherefore no one who considerately weighs facts will doubt that Cain\nmight have built a city, and that a large one, when it is observed\nhow prolonged were the lives of men, unless perhaps some sceptic take\nexception to this very length of years which our authors ascribe to\nthe antediluvians and deny that this is credible. And so, too, they\ndo not believe that the size of men's bodies was larger then than\nnow, though the most esteemed of their own poets, Virgil, asserts the\nsame, when he speaks of that huge stone which had been fixed as a\nlandmark, and which a strong man of those ancient times snatched up\nas he fought, and ran, and hurled, and cast it,--\n\n          \"Scarce twelve strong men of later mould\n           That weight could on their necks uphold;\"[162]\n\nthus declaring his opinion that the earth then produced mightier men.\nAnd if in the more recent times, how much more in the ages before the\nworld-renowned deluge? But the large size of the primitive human body\nis often proved to the incredulous by the exposure of sepulchres,\neither through the wear of time or the violence of torrents or some\naccident, and in which bones of incredible size have been found or\nhave rolled out. I myself, along with some others, saw on the shore\nat Utica a man's molar tooth of such a size, that if it were cut\ndown into teeth such as we have, a hundred, I fancy, could have\nbeen made out of it. But that, I believe, belonged to some giant.\nFor though the bodies of ordinary men were then larger than ours,\nthe giants surpassed all in stature. And neither in our own age nor\nany other have there been altogether wanting instances of gigantic\nstature, though they may be few. The younger Pliny, a most learned\nman, maintains that the older the world becomes, the smaller will\nbe the bodies of men.[163] And he mentions that Homer in his poems\noften lamented the same decline; and this he does not laugh at as\na poetical figment, but in his character of a recorder of natural\nwonders accepts it as historically true. But, as I said, the bones\nwhich are from time to time discovered prove the size of the bodies\nof the ancients,[164] and will do so to future ages, for they are\nslow to decay. But the length of an antediluvian's life cannot\nnow be proved by any such monumental evidence. But we are not on\nthis account to withhold our faith from the sacred history, whose\nstatements of past fact we are the more inexcusable in discrediting,\nas we see the accuracy of its prediction of what was future. And\neven that same Pliny[165] tells us that there is still a nation in\nwhich men live 200 years. If, then, in places unknown to us, men\nare believed to have a length of days which is quite beyond our own\nexperience, why should we not believe the same of times distant from\nour own? Or are we to believe that in other places there is what is\nnot here, while we do not believe that in other times there has been\nanything but what is now?\n\n\n  10. _Of the different computation of the ages of the antediluvians,\n      given by the Hebrew manuscripts and by our own._[166]\n\nWherefore, although there is a discrepancy for which I cannot account\nbetween our manuscripts and the Hebrew, in the very number of years\nassigned to the antediluvians, yet the discrepancy is not so great\nthat they do not agree about their longevity. For the very first man,\nAdam, before he begot his son Seth, is in our manuscripts found to\nhave lived 230 years, but in the Hebrew MSS. 130. But after he begot\nSeth, our copies read that he lived 700 years, while the Hebrew give\n800. And thus, when the two periods are taken together, the sum agrees.\nAnd so throughout the succeeding generations, the period before the\nfather begets a son is always made shorter by 100 years in the Hebrew,\nbut the period after his son is begotten is longer by 100 years in the\nHebrew than in our copies. And thus, taking the two periods together,\nthe result is the same in both. And in the sixth generation there is\nno discrepancy at all. In the seventh, however, of which Enoch is the\nrepresentative, who is recorded to have been translated without death\nbecause he pleased God, there is the same discrepancy as in the first\nfive generations, 100 years more being ascribed to him by our MSS.\nbefore he begat a son. But still the result agrees; for according to\nboth documents he lived before he was translated 365 years. In the\neighth generation the discrepancy is less than in the others, and of\na different kind. For Methuselah, whom Enoch begat, lived, before he\nbegat his successor, not 100 years less, but 100 years more, according\nto the Hebrew reading; and in our MSS. again these years are added\nto the period after he begat his son; so that in this case also the\nsum-total is the same. And it is only in the ninth generation, that is,\nin the age of Lamech, Methuselah's son and Noah's father, that there\nis a discrepancy in the sum-total; and even in this case it is slight.\nFor the Hebrew MSS. represent him as living twenty-four years more than\nours assign to him. For before he begat his son, who was called Noah,\nsix years fewer are given to him by the Hebrew MSS. than by ours; but\nafter he begat this son, they give him thirty years more than ours; so\nthat, deducting the former six, there remains, as we said, a surplus of\ntwenty-four.\n\n\n    11. _Of Methuselah's age, which seems to extend fourteen years\n                          beyond the deluge._\n\nFrom this discrepancy between the Hebrew books and our own arises\nthe well-known question as to the age of Methuselah;[167] for it\nis computed that he lived for fourteen years after the deluge,\nthough Scripture relates that of all who were then upon the earth\nonly the eight souls in the ark escaped destruction by the flood,\nand of these Methuselah was not one. For, according to our books,\nMethuselah, before he begat the son whom he called Lamech, lived 167\nyears; then Lamech himself, before his son Noah was born, lived 188\nyears, which together make 355 years. Add to these the age of Noah\nat the date of the deluge, 600 years, and this gives a total of 955\nfrom the birth of Methuselah to the year of the flood. Now all the\nyears of the life of Methuselah are computed to be 969; for when he\nhad lived 167 years, and had begotten his son Lamech, he then lived\nafter this 802 years, which makes a total, as we said, of 969 years.\nFrom this, if we deduct 955 years from the birth of Methuselah to\nthe flood, there remain fourteen years, which he is supposed to\nhave lived after the flood. And therefore some suppose that, though\nhe was not on earth (in which it is agreed that every living thing\nwhich could not naturally live in water perished), he was for a time\nwith his father, who had been translated, and that he lived there\ntill the flood had passed away. This hypothesis they adopt, that\nthey may not cast a slight on the trustworthiness of versions which\nthe Church has received into a position of high authority,[168]\nand because they believe that the Jewish MSS. rather than our own\nare in error. For they do not admit that this is a mistake of the\ntranslators, but maintain that there is a falsified statement in\nthe original, from which, through the Greek, the Scripture has been\ntranslated into our own tongue. They say that it is not credible that\nthe seventy translators, who simultaneously and unanimously produced\none rendering, could have erred, or, in a case in which no interest\nof theirs was involved, could have falsified their translation; but\nthat the Jews, envying us our translation of their Law and Prophets,\nhave made alterations in their texts so as to undermine the authority\nof ours. This opinion or suspicion let each man adopt according to\nhis own judgment. Certain it is that Methuselah did not survive\nthe flood, but died in the very year it occurred, if the numbers\ngiven in the Hebrew MSS. are true. My own opinion regarding the\nseventy translators I will, with God's help, state more carefully\nin its own place, when I have come down (following the order which\nthis work requires) to that period in which their translation was\nexecuted.[169] For the present question, it is enough that, according\nto our versions, the men of that age had lives so long as to make it\nquite possible that, during the lifetime of the first-born of the two\nsole parents then on earth, the human race multiplied sufficiently\nto form a community.\n\n\n     12. _Of the opinion of those who do not believe that in these\n           primitive times men lived so long as is stated._\n\nFor they are by no means to be listened to who suppose that in those\ntimes years were differently reckoned, and were so short that one\nof our years may be supposed to be equal to ten of theirs. So that\nthey say, when we read or hear that some man lived 900 years, we\nshould understand ninety,--ten of those years making but one of\nours, and ten of ours equalling 100 of theirs. Consequently, as they\nsuppose, Adam was twenty-three years of age when he begat Seth, and\nSeth himself was twenty years and six months old when his son Enos\nwas born, though the Scripture calls these months 205 years. For,\non the hypothesis of those whose opinion we are explaining, it was\ncustomary to divide one such year as we have into ten parts, and to\ncall each part a year. And each of these parts was composed of six\ndays squared; because God finished His works in six days, that He\nmight rest the seventh. Of this I disputed according to my ability\nin the eleventh book.[170] Now six squared, or six times six, gives\nthirty-six days; and this multiplied by ten amounts to 360 days, or\ntwelve lunar months. As for the five remaining days which are needed\nto complete the solar year, and for the fourth part of a day, which\nrequires that into every fourth or leap-year a day be added, the\nancients added such days as the Romans used to call \"intercalary,\"\nin order to complete the number of the years. So that Enos, Seth's\nson, was nineteen years old when his son Cainan was born, though\nScripture calls these years 190. And so through all the generations\nin which the ages of the antediluvians are given, we find in our\nversions that almost no one begat a son at the age of 100 or under,\nor even at the age of 120 or thereabouts; but the youngest fathers\nare recorded to have been 160 years old and upwards. And the reason\nof this, they say, is that no one can beget children when he is ten\nyears old, the age spoken of by those men as 100, but that sixteen\nis the age of puberty, and competent now to propagate offspring; and\nthis is the age called by them 160. And that it may not be thought\nincredible that in these days the year was differently computed from\nour own, they adduce what is recorded by several writers of history,\nthat the Egyptians had a year of four months, the Acarnanians of\nsix, and the Lavinians of thirteen months.[171] The younger Pliny,\nafter mentioning that some writers reported that one man had lived\n152 years, another ten more, others 200, others 300, that some had\neven reached 500 and 600, and a few 800 years of age, gave it as\nhis opinion that all this must be ascribed to mistaken computation.\nFor some, he says, make summer and winter each a year; others make\neach season a year, like the Arcadians, whose years, he says, were\nof three months. He added, too, that the Egyptians, of whose little\nyears of four months we have spoken already, sometimes terminated\ntheir year at the wane of each moon; so that with them there are\nproduced lifetimes of 1000 years.\n\nBy these plausible arguments certain persons, with no desire to\nweaken the credit of this sacred history, but rather to facilitate\nbelief in it by removing the difficulty of such incredible longevity,\nhave been themselves persuaded, and think they act wisely in\npersuading others, that in these days the year was so brief that\nten of their years equal but one of ours, while ten of ours equal\n100 of theirs. But there is the plainest evidence to show that this\nis quite false. Before producing this evidence, however, it seems\nright to mention a conjecture which is yet more plausible. From the\nHebrew manuscripts we could at once refute this confident statement;\nfor in them Adam is found to have lived not 230 but 130 years before\nhe begat his third son. If, then, this mean thirteen years by our\nordinary computation, then he must have begotten his first son when\nhe was only twelve or thereabouts. Who can at this age beget children\naccording to the ordinary and familiar course of nature? But not to\nmention him, since it is possible he may have been able to beget his\nlike as soon as he was created,--for it is not credible that he was\ncreated so little as our infants are,--not to mention him, his son\nwas not 205 years old when he begat Enos, as our versions have it,\nbut 105, and consequently, according to this idea, was not eleven\nyears old. But what shall I say of his son Cainan, who, though by our\nversion 170 years old, was by the Hebrew text seventy when he beget\nMahalaleel? If seventy years in those times meant only seven of our\nyears, what man of seven years old begets children?\n\n\n    13. _Whether, in computing years, we ought to follow the Hebrew\n                          or the Septuagint._\n\nBut if I say this, I shall presently be answered, It is one of the\nJews' lies. This, however, we have disposed of above, showing that it\ncannot be that men of so just a reputation as the seventy translators\nshould have falsified their version. However, if I ask them which\nof the two is more credible, that the Jewish nation, scattered\nfar and wide, could have unanimously conspired to forge this lie,\nand so, through envying others the authority of their Scriptures,\nhave deprived themselves of their verity; or that seventy men, who\nwere also themselves Jews, shut up in one place (for Ptolemy king\nof Egypt had got them together for this work), should have envied\nforeign nations that same truth, and by common consent inserted these\nerrors: who does not see which can be more naturally and readily\nbelieved? But far be it from any prudent man to believe either that\nthe Jews, however malicious and wrong-headed, could have tampered\nwith so many and so widely-dispersed manuscripts; or that those\nrenowned seventy individuals had any common purpose to grudge the\ntruth to the nations. One must therefore more plausibly maintain,\nthat when first their labours began to be transcribed from the copy\nin Ptolemy's library, some such misstatement might find its way into\nthe first copy made, and from it might be disseminated far and wide;\nand that this might arise from no fraud, but from a mere copyist's\nerror. This is a sufficiently plausible account of the difficulty\nregarding Methuselah's life, and of that other case in which there is\na difference in the total of twenty-four years. But in those cases\nin which there is a methodical resemblance in the falsification, so\nthat uniformly the one version allots to the period before a son and\nsuccessor is born 100 years more than the other, and to the period\nsubsequent 100 years less, and _vice vers\u00e2_, so that the totals may\nagree,--and this holds true of the first, second, third, fourth,\nfifth, and seventh generations,--in these cases error seems to have,\nif we may say so, a certain kind of constancy, and savours not of\naccident, but of design.\n\nAccordingly, that diversity of numbers which distinguishes the Hebrew\nfrom the Greek and Latin copies of Scripture, and which consists of\na uniform addition and deduction of 100 years in each lifetime for\nseveral consecutive generations, is to be attributed neither to the\nmalice of the Jews nor to men so diligent and prudent as the seventy\ntranslators, but to the error of the copyist who was first allowed to\ntranscribe the manuscript from the library of the above-mentioned king.\nFor even now, in cases where numbers contribute nothing to the easier\ncomprehension or more satisfactory knowledge of anything, they are both\ncarelessly transcribed, and still more carelessly emended. For who\nwill trouble himself to learn how many thousand men the several tribes\nof Israel contained? He sees no resulting benefit of such knowledge.\nOr how many men are there who are aware of the vast advantage that\nlies hid in this knowledge? But in this case, in which during so many\nconsecutive generations 100 years are added in one manuscript where\nthey are not reckoned in the other, and then, after the birth of the\nson and successor, the years which were wanting are added, it is\nobvious that the copyist who contrived this arrangement designed to\ninsinuate that the antediluvians lived an excessive number of years\nonly because each year was excessively brief, and that he tried to draw\nthe attention to this fact by his statement of their age of puberty at\nwhich they became able to beget children. For, lest the incredulous\nmight stumble at the difficulty of so long a lifetime, he insinuated\nthat 100 of their years equalled but ten of ours; and this insinuation\nhe conveyed by adding 100 years whenever he found the age below 160\nyears or thereabouts, deducting these years again from the period after\nthe son's birth, that the total might harmonize. By this means he\nintended to ascribe the generation of offspring to a fit age, without\ndiminishing the total sum of years ascribed to the lifetime of the\nindividuals. And the very fact that in the sixth generation he departed\nfrom this uniform practice, inclines us all the rather to believe that\nwhen the circumstance we have referred to required his alterations, he\nmade them; seeing that when this circumstance did not exist, he made\nno alteration. For in the same generation he found in the Hebrew MS.\nthat Jared lived before he begat Enoch 162 years, which, according to\nthe short year computation, is sixteen years and somewhat less than\ntwo months, an age capable of procreation; and therefore it was not\nnecessary to add 100 short years, and so make the age twenty-six years\nof the usual length; and of course it was not necessary to deduct,\nafter the son's birth, years which he had not added before it. And thus\nit comes to pass that in this instance there is no variation between\nthe two manuscripts.\n\nThis is corroborated still further by the fact that in the eighth\ngeneration, while the Hebrew books assign 182[172] years to Methuselah\nbefore Lamech's birth, ours assign to him twenty less, though usually\n100 years are added to this period; then, after Lamech's birth, the\ntwenty years are restored, so as to equalize the total in the two\nbooks. For if his design was that these 170 years be understood as\nseventeen, so as to suit the age of puberty, as there was no need for\nhim adding anything, so there was none for his subtracting anything;\nfor in this case he found an age fit for the generation of children,\nfor the sake of which he was in the habit of adding those 100 years\nin cases where he did not find the age already sufficient. This\ndifference of twenty years we might, indeed, have supposed had happened\naccidentally, had he not taken care to restore them afterwards as he\nhad deducted them from the period before, so that there might be no\ndeficiency in the total. Or are we perhaps to suppose that there was\nthe still more astute design of concealing the deliberate and uniform\naddition of 100 years to the first period and their deduction from the\nsubsequent period,--did he design to conceal this by doing something\nsimilar, that is to say, adding and deducting, not indeed a century,\nbut some years, even in a case in which there was no need for his doing\nso? But whatever may be thought of this, whether it be believed that\nhe did so or not, whether, in fine, it be so or not, I would have no\nmanner of doubt that when any diversity is found in the books, since\nboth cannot be true to fact, we do well to believe in preference\nthat language out of which the translation was made into another by\ntranslators. For there are three Greek MSS., one Latin, and one Syriac,\nwhich agree with one another, and in all of these Methuselah is said to\nhave died six years before the deluge.\n\n\n  14. _That the years in those ancient times were of the same length\n                             as our own._\n\nLet us now see how it can be plainly made out that in the enormously\nprotracted lives of those men the years were not so short that ten\nof their years were equal to only one of ours, but were of as great\nlength as our own, which are measured by the course of the sun. It is\nproved by this, that Scripture states that the flood occurred in the\nsix hundredth year of Noah's life. But why in the same place is it\nalso written, \"The waters of the flood were upon the earth in the six\nhundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the twenty-seventh\nday of the month,\"[173] if that very brief year (of which it took ten\nto make one of ours) consisted of thirty-six days? For so scant a year,\nif the ancient usage dignified it with the name of year, either has not\nmonths, or its month must be three days, so that it may have twelve\nof them. How then was it here said, \"In the six hundredth year, the\nsecond month, the twenty-seventh day of the month,\" unless the months\nthen were of the same length as the months now? For how else could it\nbe said that the flood began on the twenty-seventh day of the second\nmonth? Then afterwards, at the end of the flood, it is thus written:\n\"And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the twenty-seventh day\nof the month, on the mountains of Ararat. And the waters decreased\ncontinually until the eleventh month: on the first day of the month\nwere the tops of the mountains seen.\"[174] But if the months were\nsuch as we have, then so were the years. And certainly months of three\ndays each could not have a twenty-seventh day. Or if every measure of\ntime was diminished in proportion, and a thirtieth part of three days\nwas then called a day, then that great deluge, which is recorded to\nhave lasted forty days and forty nights, was really over in less than\nfour of our days. Who can away with such foolishness and absurdity?\nFar be this error from us,--an error which seeks to build up our faith\nin the divine Scriptures on false conjecture, only to demolish our\nfaith at another point. It is plain that the day then was what it now\nis, a space of four-and-twenty hours, determined by the lapse of day\nand night; the month then equal to the month now, which is defined by\nthe rise and completion of one moon; the year then equal to the year\nnow, which is completed by twelve lunar months, with the addition of\nfive days and a-fourth to adjust it with the course of the sun. It was\na year of this length which was reckoned the six hundredth of Noah's\nlife; and in the second month, the twenty-seventh day of the month,\nthe flood began,--a flood which, as is recorded, was caused by heavy\nrains continuing for forty days, which days had not only two hours and\na little more, but four-and-twenty hours, completing a night and a\nday. And consequently those antediluvians lived more than 900 years,\nwhich were years as long as those which afterwards Abraham lived 175\nof, and after him his son Isaac 180, and his son Jacob nearly 150,\nand some time after, Moses 120, and men now seventy or eighty, or not\nmuch longer, of which years it is said, \"their strength is labour and\nsorrow.\"[175]\n\nBut that discrepancy of numbers which is found to exist between our\nown and the Hebrew text does not touch the longevity of the ancients;\nand if there is any diversity so great that both versions cannot\nbe true, we must take our ideas of the real facts from that text\nout of which our own version has been translated. However, though\nany one who pleases has it in his power to correct this version,\nyet it is not unimportant to observe that no one has presumed to\nemend the Septuagint from the Hebrew text in the many places where\nthey seem to disagree. For this difference has not been reckoned a\nfalsification; and for my own part I am persuaded it ought not to\nbe reckoned so. But where the difference is not a mere copyist's\nerror, and where the sense is agreeable to truth and illustrative\nof truth, we must believe that the divine Spirit prompted them to\ngive a varying version, not in their function of translators, but in\nthe liberty of prophesying. And therefore we find that the apostles\njustly sanction the Septuagint, by quoting it as well as the Hebrew\nwhen they adduce proofs from the Scriptures. But as I have promised\nto treat this subject more carefully, if God help me, in a more\nfitting place, I will now go on with the matter in hand. For there\ncan be no doubt that, the lives of men being so long, the first-born\nof the first man could have built a city,--a city, however, which was\nearthly, and not that which is called the city of God, to describe\nwhich we have taken in hand this great work.\n\n\n  15. _Whether it is credible that the men of the primitive age\n      abstained from sexual intercourse until that date at which it\n      is recorded that they begat children._\n\nSome one, then, will say, Is it to be believed that a man who\nintended to beget children, and had no intention of continence,\nabstained from sexual intercourse a hundred years and more, or even,\naccording to the Hebrew version, only a little less, say eighty,\nseventy, or sixty years; or, if he did not abstain, was unable to\nbeget offspring? This question admits of two solutions. For either\npuberty was so much later as the whole life was longer, or, which\nseems to me more likely, it is not the first-born sons that are here\nmentioned, but those whose names were required to fill up the series\nuntil Noah was reached, from whom again we see that the succession\nis continued to Abraham, and after him down to that point of time\nuntil which it was needful to mark by pedigree the course of the\nmost glorious city, which sojourns as a stranger in this world, and\nseeks the heavenly country. That which is undeniable is that Cain\nwas the first who was born of man and woman. For had he not been the\nfirst who was added by birth to the two unborn persons, Adam could\nnot have said what he is recorded to have said, \"I have gotten a man\nby the Lord.\"[176] He was followed by Abel, whom the elder brother\nslew, and who was the first to show, by a kind of foreshadowing of\nthe sojourning city of God, what iniquitous persecutions that city\nwould suffer at the hands of wicked and, as it were, earth-born\nmen, who love their earthly origin, and delight in the earthly\nhappiness of the earthly city. But how old Adam was when he begat\nthese sons does not appear. After this the generations diverge, the\none branch deriving from Cain, the other from him whom Adam begot\nin the room of Abel slain by his brother, and whom he called Seth,\nsaying, as it is written, \"For God hath raised me up another seed\nfor Abel whom Cain slew.\"[177] These two series of generations\naccordingly, the one of Cain, the other of Seth, represent the two\ncities in their distinctive ranks, the one the heavenly city, which\nsojourns on earth, the other the earthly, which gapes after earthly\njoys, and grovels in them as if they were the only joys. But though\neight generations, including Adam, are registered before the flood,\nno man of Cain's line has his age recorded at which the son who\nsucceeded him was begotten. For the Spirit of God refused to mark the\ntimes before the flood in the generations of the earthly city, but\npreferred to do so in the heavenly line, as if it were more worthy\nof being remembered. Further, when Seth was born, the age of his\nfather is mentioned; but already he had begotten other sons, and who\nwill presume to say that Cain and Abel were the only ones previously\nbegotten? For it does not follow that they alone had been begotten\nof Adam, because they alone were named in order to continue the\nseries of generations which it was desirable to mention. For though\nthe names of all the rest are buried in silence, yet it is said that\nAdam begot sons and daughters; and who that cares to be free from the\ncharge of temerity will dare to say how many his offspring numbered?\nIt was possible enough that Adam was divinely prompted to say, after\nSeth was born, \"For God hath raised up to me another seed for Abel,\"\nbecause that son was to be capable of representing Abel's holiness,\nnot because he was born first after him in point of time. Then\nbecause it is written, \"And Seth lived 205 years,\" or, according to\nthe Hebrew reading, \"105 years, and begat Enos,\"[178] who but a rash\nman could affirm that this was his first-born? Will any man do so to\nexcite our wonder, and cause us to inquire how for so many years he\nremained free from sexual intercourse, though without any purpose\nof continuing so, or how, if he did not abstain, he yet had no\nchildren? Will any man do so when it is written of him, \"And he begat\nsons and daughters, and all the days of Seth were 912 years, and he\ndied?\"[179] And similarly regarding those whose years are afterwards\nmentioned, it is not disguised that they begat sons and daughters.\n\nConsequently it does not at all appear whether he who is named as the\nson was himself the first begotten. Nay, since it is incredible that\nthose fathers were either so long in attaining puberty, or could not\nget wives, or could not impregnate them, it is also incredible that\nthose sons were their first-born. But as the writer of the sacred\nhistory designed to descend by well-marked intervals through a series\nof generations to the birth and life of Noah, in whose time the flood\noccurred, he mentioned not those sons who were first begotten, but\nthose by whom the succession was handed down.\n\nLet me make this clearer by here inserting an example, in regard to\nwhich no one can have any doubt that what I am asserting is true.\nThe evangelist Matthew, where he designs to commit to our memories\nthe generation of the Lord's flesh by a series of parents, beginning\nfrom Abraham and intending to reach David, says, \"Abraham begat\nIsaac;\"[180] why did he not say Ishmael, whom he first begat? Then\n\"Isaac begat Jacob;\" why did he not say Esau, who was the first-born?\nSimply because these sons would not have helped him to reach David.\nThen follows, \"And Jacob begat Judah and his brethren:\" was Judah\nthe first begotten? \"Judah,\" he says, \"begat Pharez and Zara;\" yet\nneither were these twins the first-born of Judah, but before them he\nhad begotten three other sons. And so in the order of the generations\nhe retained those by whom he might reach David, so as to proceed\nonwards to the end he had in view. And from this we may understand\nthat the antediluvians who are mentioned were not the first-born, but\nthose through whom the order of the succeeding generations might\nbe carried on to the patriarch Noah. We need not, therefore, weary\nourselves with discussing the needless and obscure question as to\ntheir lateness of reaching puberty.\n\n\n   16. _Of marriage between blood-relations, in regard to which the\n       present law could not bind the men of the earliest ages._\n\nAs, therefore, the human race, subsequently to the first marriage\nof the man who was made of dust, and his wife who was made out\nof his side, required the union of males and females in order\nthat it might multiply, and as there were no human beings except\nthose who had been born of these two, men took their sisters for\nwives,--an act which was as certainly dictated by necessity in these\nancient days as afterwards it was condemned by the prohibitions\nof religion. For it is very reasonable and just that men, among\nwhom concord is honourable and useful, should be bound together by\nvarious relationships; and that one man should not himself sustain\nmany relationships, but that the various relationships should be\ndistributed among several, and should thus serve to bind together\nthe greatest number in the same social interests. \"Father\" and\n\"father-in-law\" are the names of two relationships. When, therefore,\na man has one person for his father, another for his father-in-law,\nfriendship extends itself to a larger number. But Adam in his single\nperson was obliged to hold both relations to his sons and daughters,\nfor brothers and sisters were united in marriage. So too Eve his wife\nwas both mother and mother-in-law to her children of both sexes;\nwhile, had there been two women, one the mother, the other the\nmother-in-law, the family affection would have had a wider field.\nThen the sister herself by becoming a wife sustained in her single\nperson two relationships, which, had they been distributed among\nindividuals, one being sister, and another being wife, the family tie\nwould have embraced a greater number of persons. But there was then\nno material for effecting this, since there were no human beings but\nthe brothers and sisters born of those two first parents. Therefore,\nwhen an abundant population made it possible, men ought to choose for\nwives women who were not already their sisters; for not only would\nthere then be no necessity for marrying sisters, but, were it done,\nit would be most abominable. For if the grandchildren of the first\npair, being now able to choose their cousins for wives, married their\nsisters, then it would no longer be only two but three relationships\nthat were held by one man, while each of these relationships ought to\nhave been held by a separate individual, so as to bind together by\nfamily affection a larger number. For one man would in that case be\nboth father, and father-in-law, and uncle[181] to his own children\n(brother and sister now man and wife); and his wife would be mother,\naunt, and mother-in-law to them; and they themselves would be not\nonly brother and sister, and man and wife, but cousins also, being\nthe children of brother and sister. Now, all these relationships,\nwhich combined three men into one, would have embraced nine persons\nhad each relationship been held by one individual, so that a man had\none person for his sister, another his wife, another his cousin,\nanother his father, another his uncle, another his father-in-law,\nanother his mother, another his aunt, another his mother-in-law; and\nthus the social bond would not have been tightened to bind a few, but\nloosened to embrace a larger number of relations.\n\nAnd we see that, since the human race has increased and multiplied,\nthis is so strictly observed even among the profane worshippers\nof many and false gods, that though their laws perversely allow a\nbrother to marry his sister,[182] yet custom, with a finer morality,\nprefers to forego this licence; and though it was quite allowable in\nthe earliest ages of the human race to marry one's sister, it is now\nabhorred as a thing which no circumstances could justify. For custom\nhas very great power either to attract or to shock human feeling. And\nin this matter, while it restrains concupiscence within due bounds,\nthe man who neglects and disobeys it is justly branded as abominable.\nFor if it is iniquitous to plough beyond our own boundaries through\nthe greed of gain, is it not much more iniquitous to transgress\nthe recognised boundaries of morals through sexual lust? And with\nregard to marriage in the next degree of consanguinity, marriage\nbetween cousins, we have observed that in our own time the customary\nmorality has prevented this from being frequent, though the law\nallows it. It was not prohibited by divine law, nor as yet had human\nlaw prohibited it; nevertheless, though legitimate, people shrank\nfrom it, because it lay so close to what was illegitimate, and in\nmarrying a cousin seemed almost to marry a sister,--for cousins are\nso closely related that they are called brothers and sisters,[183]\nand are almost really so. But the ancient fathers, fearing that near\nrelationship might gradually in the course of generations diverge,\nand become distant relationship, or cease to be relationship at all,\nreligiously endeavoured to limit it by the bond of marriage before\nit became distant, and thus, as it were, to call it back when it\nwas escaping them. And on this account, even when the world was\nfull of people, though they did not choose wives from among their\nsisters or half-sisters, yet they preferred them to be of the same\nstock as themselves. But who doubts that the modern prohibition of\nthe marriage even of cousins is the more seemly regulation,--not\nmerely on account of the reason we have been urging, the multiplying\nof relationships, so that one person might not absorb two, which\nmight be distributed to two persons, and so increase the number of\npeople bound together as a family, but also because there is in\nhuman nature I know not what natural and praiseworthy shamefacedness\nwhich restrains us from desiring that connection which, though for\npropagation, is yet lustful, and which even conjugal modesty blushes\nover, with any one to whom consanguinity bids us render respect?\n\nThe sexual intercourse of man and woman, then, is in the case of\nmortals a kind of seed-bed of the city; but while the earthly city\nneeds for its population only generation, the heavenly needs also\nregeneration to rid it of the taint of generation. Whether before the\ndeluge there was any bodily or visible sign of regeneration, such\nas was afterwards enjoined upon Abraham when he was circumcised, or\nwhat kind of sign it was, the sacred history does not inform us. But\nit does inform us that even these earliest of mankind sacrificed to\nGod, as appeared also in the case of the two first brothers; Noah,\ntoo, is said to have offered sacrifices to God when he had come\nforth from the ark after the deluge. And concerning this subject we\nhave already said in the foregoing books that the devils arrogate to\nthemselves divinity, and require sacrifice that they may be esteemed\ngods, and delight in these honours on no other account than this,\nbecause they know that true sacrifice is due to the true God.\n\n\n        17. _Of the two fathers and leaders who sprang from one\n                             progenitor._\n\nSince, then, Adam was the father of both lines,--the father, that is\nto say, both of the line which belonged to the earthly, and of that\nwhich belonged to the heavenly city,--when Abel was slain, and by his\ndeath exhibited a marvellous mystery, there were henceforth two lines\nproceeding from two fathers, Cain and Seth, and in those sons of\ntheirs, whom it behoved to register, the tokens of these two cities\nbegan to appear more distinctly. For Cain begat Enoch, in whose name\nhe built a city, an earthly one, which was not from home in this\nworld, but rested satisfied with its temporal peace and happiness.\nCain, too, means \"possession;\" wherefore at his birth either his\nfather or mother said, \"I have gotten a man through God.\" Then Enoch\nmeans \"dedication;\" for the earthly city is dedicated in this world\nin which it is built, for in this world it finds the end towards\nwhich it aims and aspires. Further, Seth signifies \"resurrection,\"\nand Enos his son signifies \"man,\" not as Adam, which also signifies\nman but is used in Hebrew indifferently for man and woman, as it is\nwritten, \"Male and female created He them, and blessed them, and\ncalled their name Adam,\"[184] leaving no room to doubt that though\nthe woman was distinctively called Eve, yet the name Adam, meaning\nman, was common to both. But Enos means man in so restricted a\nsense, that Hebrew linguists tell us it cannot be applied to woman:\nit is the equivalent of the \"child of the resurrection,\" when they\nneither marry nor are given in marriage.[185] For there shall be no\ngeneration in that place to which regeneration shall have brought\nus. Wherefore I think it not immaterial to observe that in those\ngenerations which are propagated from him who is called Seth,\nalthough daughters as well as sons are said to have been begotten,\nno woman is expressly registered by name; but in those which sprang\nfrom Cain at the very termination to which the line runs, the last\nperson named as begotten is a woman. For we read, \"Methusael begat\nLamech. And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was\nAdah, and the name of the other Zillah. And Adah bare Jabal: he was\nthe father of the shepherds that dwell in tents. And his brother's\nname was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp\nand organ. And Zillah, she also bare Tubal-Cain, an instructor of\nevery artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubal-Cain was\nNaamah.\"[186] Here terminate all the generations of Cain, being\neight in number, including Adam,--to wit, seven from Adam to Lamech,\nwho married two wives, and whose children, among whom a woman also\nis named, form the eighth generation. Whereby it is elegantly\nsignified that the earthly city shall to its termination have carnal\ngenerations proceeding from the intercourse of males and females.\nAnd therefore the wives themselves of the man who is the last named\nfather of Cain's line are registered in their own names,--a practice\nnowhere followed before the deluge save in Eve's case. Now as Cain,\nsignifying possession, the founder of the earthly city, and his son\nEnoch, meaning dedication, in whose name it was founded, indicate\nthat this city is earthly both in its beginning and in its end,--a\ncity in which nothing more is hoped for than can be seen in this\nworld,--so Seth, meaning resurrection, and being the father of\ngenerations registered apart from the others, we must consider what\nthis sacred history says of his son.\n\n\n      18. _The significance of Abel, Seth, and Enos to Christ and\n                         His body the Church._\n\n\"And to Seth,\" it is said, \"there was born a son, and he called his\nname Enos: he hoped to call on the name of the Lord God.\"[187] Here\nwe have a loud testimony to the truth. Man, then, the son of the\nresurrection, lives in hope: he lives in hope as long as the city of\nGod, which is begotten by faith in the resurrection, sojourns in\nthis world. For in these two men, Abel, signifying \"grief,\" and his\nbrother Seth, signifying \"resurrection,\" the death of Christ and His\nlife from the dead are prefigured. And by faith in these is begotten\nin this world the city of God, that is to say, the man who has hoped\nto call on the name of the Lord. \"For by hope,\" says the apostle, \"we\nare saved: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth,\nwhy doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do\nwe with patience wait for it.\"[188] Who can avoid referring this to a\nprofound mystery? For did not Abel hope to call upon the name of the\nLord God when his sacrifice is mentioned in Scripture as having been\naccepted by God? Did not Seth himself hope to call on the name of the\nLord God, of whom it was said, \"For God hath appointed me another\nseed instead of Abel?\" Why then is this which is found to be common\nto all the godly specially attributed to Enos, unless because it was\nfit that in him, who is mentioned as the first-born of the father\nof those generations which were separated to the better part of the\nheavenly city, there should be a type of the man, or society of men,\nwho live not according to man in contentment with earthly felicity,\nbut according to God in hope of everlasting felicity? And it was not\nsaid, \"He hoped in the Lord God,\" nor \"He called on the name of the\nLord God,\" but \"He hoped to call on the name of the Lord God.\" And\nwhat does this \"hoped to call\" mean, unless it is a prophecy that a\npeople should arise who, according to the election of grace, would\ncall on the name of the Lord God? It is this which has been said by\nanother prophet, and which the apostle interprets of the people who\nbelong to the grace of God: \"And it shall be that whosoever shall\ncall upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.\"[189] For these two\nexpressions, \"And he called his name Enos, which means man,\" and \"He\nhoped to call on the name of the Lord God,\" are sufficient proof\nthat man ought not to rest his hopes in himself; as it is elsewhere\nwritten, \"Cursed is the man that trusteth in man.\"[190] Consequently\nno one ought to trust in himself that he shall become a citizen of\nthat other city which is not dedicated in the name of Cain's son in\nthis present time, that is to say, in the fleeting course of this\nmortal world, but in the immortality of perpetual blessedness.\n\n\n            19. _The significance of Enoch's translation._\n\nFor that line also of which Seth is the father has the name\n\"Dedication\" in the seventh generation from Adam, counting Adam. For\nthe seventh from him is Enoch, that is, Dedication. But this is that\nman who was translated because he pleased God, and who held in the\norder of the generations a remarkable place, being the seventh from\nAdam, a number signalized by the consecration of the Sabbath. But,\ncounting from the diverging point of the two lines, or from Seth,\nhe was the sixth. Now it was on the sixth day God made man, and\nconsummated His works. But the translation of Enoch prefigured our\ndeferred dedication; for though it is indeed already accomplished in\nChrist our Head, who so rose again that He shall die no more, and who\nwas Himself also translated, yet there remains another dedication\nof the whole house, of which Christ Himself is the foundation, and\nthis dedication is deferred till the end, when all shall rise again\nto die no more. And whether it is the house of God, or the temple of\nGod, or the city of God, that is said to be dedicated, it is all the\nsame, and equally in accordance with the usage of the Latin language.\nFor Virgil himself calls the city of widest empire \"the house of\nAssaracus,\"[191] meaning the Romans, who were descended through\nthe Trojans from Assaracus. He also calls them the house of \u00c6neas,\nbecause Rome was built by those Trojans who had come to Italy under\n\u00c6neas.[192] For that poet imitated the sacred writings, in which the\nHebrew nation, though so numerous, is called the house of Jacob.\n\n\n  20. _How it is that Cain's line terminates in the eighth\n      generation, while Noah, though descended from the same father,\n      Adam, is found to be the tenth from him._\n\nSome one will say, If the writer of this history intended, in\nenumerating the generations from Adam through his son Seth, to\ndescend through them to Noah, in whose time the deluge occurred, and\nfrom him again to trace the connected generations down to Abraham,\nwith whom Matthew begins the pedigree of Christ the eternal King of\nthe city of God, what did he intend by enumerating the generations\nfrom Cain, and to what terminus did he mean to trace them? We reply,\nTo the deluge, by which the whole stock of the earthly city was\ndestroyed, but repaired by the sons of Noah. For the earthly city\nand community of men who live after the flesh will never fail until\nthe end of this world, of which our Lord says, \"The children of this\nworld generate, and are generated.\"[193] But the city of God, which\nsojourns in this world, is conducted by regeneration to the world to\ncome, of which the children neither generate nor are generated. In\nthis world generation is common to both cities; though even now the\ncity of God has many thousand citizens who abstain from the act of\ngeneration; yet the other city also has some citizens who imitate\nthese, though erroneously. For to that city belong also those who\nhave erred from the faith, and introduced divers heresies; for\nthey live according to man, not according to God. And the Indian\ngymnosophists, who are said to philosophize in the solitudes of\nIndia in a state of nudity, are its citizens; and they abstain\nfrom marriage. For continence is not a good thing, except when it\nis practised in the faith of the highest good, that is, God. Yet\nno one is found to have practised it before the deluge; for indeed\neven Enoch himself, the seventh from Adam, who is said to have been\ntranslated without dying, begat sons and daughters before he was\ntranslated, and among these was Methuselah, by whom the succession of\nthe recorded generations is maintained.\n\nWhy, then, is so small a number of Cain's generations registered, if\nit was proper to trace them to the deluge, and if there was no such\ndelay of the date of puberty as to preclude the hope of offspring\nfor a hundred or more years? For if the author of this book had\nnot in view some one to whom he might rigidly trace the series of\ngenerations, as he designed in those which sprang from Seth's seed\nto descend to Noah, and thence to start again by a rigid order,\nwhat need was there of omitting the first-born sons for the sake of\ndescending to Lamech, in whose sons that line terminates,--that\nis to say, in the eighth generation from Adam, or the seventh from\nCain,--as if from this point he had wished to pass on to another\nseries, by which he might reach either the Israelitish people,\namong whom the earthly Jerusalem presented a prophetic figure of\nthe heavenly city, or to Jesus Christ, \"according to the flesh, who\nis over all, God blessed for ever,\"[194] the Maker and Ruler of the\nheavenly city? What, I say, was the need of this, seeing that the\nwhole of Cain's posterity were destroyed in the deluge? From this it\nis manifest that they are the first-born sons who are registered in\nthis genealogy. Why, then, are there so few of them? Their numbers in\nthe period before the deluge must have been greater, if the date of\npuberty bore no proportion to their longevity, and they had children\nbefore they were a hundred years old. For supposing they were on an\naverage thirty years old when they began to beget children, then, as\nthere are eight generations, including Adam and Lamech's children,\n8 times 30 gives 240 years; did they then produce no more children\nin all the rest of the time before the deluge? With what intention,\nthen, did he who wrote this record make no mention of subsequent\ngenerations? For from Adam to the deluge there are reckoned,\naccording to our copies of Scripture, 2262 years,[195] and according\nto the Hebrew text, 1656 years. Supposing, then, the smaller number\nto be the true one, and subtracting from 1656 years 240, is it\ncredible that during the remaining 1400 and odd years until the\ndeluge the posterity of Cain begat no children?\n\nBut let any one who is moved by this call to mind that when I\ndiscussed the question, how it is credible that those primitive\nmen could abstain for so many years from begetting children, two\nmodes of solution were found,--either a puberty late in proportion\nto their longevity, or that the sons registered in the genealogies\nwere not the first-born, but those through whom the author of the\nbook intended to reach the point aimed at, as he intended to reach\nNoah by the generations of Seth. So that, if in the generations of\nCain there occurs no one whom the writer could make it his object\nto reach by omitting the first-borns and inserting those who would\nserve such a purpose, then we must have recourse to the supposition\nof late puberty, and say that only at some age beyond a hundred years\nthey became capable of begetting children, so that the order of the\ngenerations ran through the first-borns, and filled up even the\nwhole period before the deluge, long though it was. It is, however,\npossible that, for some more secret reason which escapes me, this\ncity, which we say is earthly, is exhibited in all its generations\ndown to Lamech and his sons, and that then the writer withholds\nfrom recording the rest which may have existed before the deluge.\nAnd without supposing so late a puberty in these men, there might\nbe another reason for tracing the generations by sons who were not\nfirst-borns, viz. that the same city which Cain built, and named\nafter his son Enoch, may have had a widely extended dominion and many\nkings, not reigning simultaneously, but successively, the reigning\nking begetting always his successor. Cain himself would be the first\nof these kings; his son Enoch, in whose name the city in which he\nreigned was built, would be the second; the third Irad, whom Enoch\nbegat; the fourth Mehujael, whom Irad begat; the fifth Methusael,\nwhom Mehujael begat; the sixth Lamech, whom Methusael begat, and who\nis the seventh from Adam through Cain. But it was not necessary that\nthe first-born should succeed their fathers in the kingdom, but those\nwould succeed who were recommended by the possession of some virtue\nuseful to the earthly city, or who were chosen by lot, or the son who\nwas best liked by his father would succeed by a kind of hereditary\nright to the throne. And the deluge may have happened during the\nlifetime and reign of Lamech, and may have destroyed him along with\nall other men, save those who were in the ark. For we cannot be\nsurprised that, during so long a period from Adam to the deluge, and\nwith the ages of individuals varying as they did, there should not be\nan equal number of generations in both lines, but seven in Cain's,\nand ten in Seth's; for as I have already said, Lamech is the seventh\nfrom Adam, Noah the tenth; and in Lamech's case not one son only is\nregistered, as in the former instances, but more, because it was\nuncertain which of them would have succeeded when he died, if there\nhad intervened any time to reign between his death and the deluge.\n\nBut in whatever manner the generations of Cain's line are traced\ndownwards, whether it be by first-born sons or by the heirs to\nthe throne, it seems to me that I must by no means omit to notice\nthat, when Lamech had been set down as the seventh from Adam, there\nwere named, in addition, as many of his children as made up this\nnumber to eleven, which is the number signifying sin; for three\nsons and one daughter are added. The wives of Lamech have another\nsignification, different from that which I am now pressing. For at\npresent I am speaking of the children, and not of those by whom the\nchildren were begotten. Since, then, the law is symbolized by the\nnumber ten,--whence that memorable Decalogue,--there is no doubt\nthat the number eleven, which goes beyond[196] ten, symbolizes the\ntransgression of the law, and consequently sin. For this reason,\neleven veils of goat's skin were ordered to be hung in the tabernacle\nof the testimony, which served in the wanderings of God's people as\nan ambulatory temple. And in that haircloth there was a reminder of\nsins, because the goats were to be set on the left hand of the Judge;\nand therefore, when we confess our sins, we prostrate ourselves in\nhaircloth, as if we were saying what is written in the psalm, \"My\nsin is ever before me.\"[197] The progeny of Adam, then, by Cain\nthe murderer, is completed in the number eleven, which symbolizes\nsin; and this number itself is made up by a woman, as it was by the\nsame sex that beginning was made of sin by which we all die. And\nit was committed that the pleasure of the flesh, which resists the\nspirit, might follow; and so Naamah, the daughter of Lamech, means\n\"pleasure.\" But from Adam to Noah, in the line of Seth, there are\nten generations. And to Noah three sons are added, of whom, while\none fell into sin, two were blessed by their father; so that, if you\ndeduct the reprobate and add the gracious sons to the number, you get\ntwelve,--a number signalized in the case of the patriarchs and of\nthe apostles, and made up of the parts of the number seven multiplied\ninto one another,--for three times four, or four times three, give\ntwelve. These things being so, I see that I must consider and mention\nhow these two lines, which by their separate genealogies depict the\ntwo cities, one of earth-born, the other of regenerated persons,\nbecame afterwards so mixed and confused, that the whole human race,\nwith the exception of eight persons, deserved to perish in the deluge.\n\n\n  21. _Why it is that, as soon as Cain's son Enoch has been named,\n      the genealogy is forthwith continued as far as the deluge,\n      while after the mention of Enos, Seth's son, the narrative\n      returns again to the creation of man._\n\nWe must first see why, in the enumeration of Cain's posterity, after\nEnoch, in whose name the city was built, has been first of all\nmentioned, the rest are at once enumerated down to that terminus of\nwhich I have spoken, and at which that race and the whole line was\ndestroyed in the deluge; while, after Enos the son of Seth has been\nmentioned, the rest are not at once named down to the deluge, but a\nclause is inserted to the following effect: \"This is the book of the\ngenerations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness\nof God made He him; male and female created He them; and blessed them,\nand called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.\"[198]\nThis seems to me to be inserted for this purpose, that here again the\nreckoning of the times may start from Adam himself,--a purpose which\nthe writer had not in view in speaking of the earthly city, as if God\nmentioned it, but did not take account of its duration. But why does\nhe return to this recapitulation after mentioning the son of Seth,\nthe man who hoped to call on the name of the Lord God, unless because\nit was fit thus to present these two cities, the one beginning with a\nmurderer and ending in a murderer (for Lamech, too, acknowledges to\nhis two wives that he had committed murder), the other built up by him\nwho hoped to call upon the name of the Lord God? For the highest and\ncomplete terrestrial duty of the city of God, which is a stranger in\nthis world, is that which was exemplified in the individual who was\nbegotten by him who typified the resurrection of the murdered Abel.\nThat one man is the unity of the whole heavenly city, not yet indeed\ncomplete, but to be completed, as this prophetic figure foreshows. The\nson of Cain, therefore, that is, the son of possession (and of what\nbut an earthly possession?), may have a name in the earthly city which\nwas built in his name. It is of such the Psalmist says, \"They call\ntheir lands after their own names.\"[199] Wherefore they incur what is\nwritten in another psalm: \"Thou, O Lord, in Thy city wilt despise their\nimage.\"[200] But as for the son of Seth, the son of the resurrection,\nlet him hope to call on the name of the Lord God. For he prefigures\nthat society of men which says, \"But I am like a green olive-tree in\nthe house of God: I have trusted in the mercy of God.\"[201] But let him\nnot seek the empty honours of a famous name upon earth, for \"Blessed\nis the man that maketh the name of the Lord his trust, and respecteth\nnot vanities nor lying follies.\"[202] After having presented the two\ncities, the one founded in the material good of this world, the other\nin hope in God, but both starting from a common gate opened in Adam\ninto this mortal state, and both running on and running out to their\nproper and merited ends, Scripture begins to reckon the times, and in\nthis reckoning includes other generations, making a recapitulation\nfrom Adam, out of whose condemned seed, as out of one mass handed over\nto merited damnation, God made some vessels of wrath to dishonour and\nothers vessels of mercy to honour; in punishment rendering to the\nformer what is due, in grace giving to the latter what is not due:\nin order that by the very comparison of itself with the vessels of\nwrath, the heavenly city, which sojourns on earth, may learn not to\nput confidence in the liberty of its own will, but may hope to call on\nthe name of the Lord God. For will, being a nature which was made good\nby the good God, but mutable by the immutable, because it was made out\nof nothing, can both decline from good to do evil, which takes place\nwhen it freely chooses, and can also escape the evil and do good, which\ntakes place only by divine assistance.\n\n\n  22. _Of the fall of the sons of God who were captivated by the\n      daughters of men, whereby all, with the exception of eight\n      persons, deservedly perished in the deluge._\n\nWhen the human race, in the exercise of this freedom of will,\nincreased and advanced, there arose a mixture and confusion of the\ntwo cities by their participation in a common iniquity. And this\ncalamity, as well as the first, was occasioned by woman, though\nnot in the same way; for these women were not themselves betrayed,\nneither did they persuade the men to sin, but having belonged to the\nearthly city and society of the earthly, they had been of corrupt\nmanners from the first, and were loved for their bodily beauty by the\nsons of God, or the citizens of the other city which sojourns in this\nworld. Beauty is indeed a good gift of God; but that the good may not\nthink it a great good, God dispenses it even to the wicked. And thus,\nwhen the good that is great and proper to the good was abandoned by\nthe sons of God, they fell to a paltry good which is not peculiar to\nthe good, but common to the good and the evil; and when they were\ncaptivated by the daughters of men, they adopted the manners of the\nearthly to win them as their brides, and forsook the godly ways\nthey had followed in their own holy society. And thus beauty, which\nis indeed God's handiwork, but only a temporal, carnal, and lower\nkind of good, is not fitly loved in preference to God, the eternal,\nspiritual, and unchangeable good. When the miser prefers his gold to\njustice, it is through no fault of the gold, but of the man; and so\nwith every created thing. For though it be good, it may be loved with\nan evil as well as with a good love: it is loved rightly when it is\nloved ordinately; evilly, when inordinately. It is this which some\none has briefly said in these verses in praise of the Creator:[203]\n\"These are Thine, they are good, because Thou art good who didst\ncreate them. There is in them nothing of ours, unless the sin we\ncommit when we forget the order of things, and instead of Thee love\nthat which Thou hast made.\"\n\nBut if the Creator is truly loved, that is, if He Himself is loved\nand not another thing in His stead, He cannot be evilly loved; for\nlove itself is to be ordinately loved, because we do well to love\nthat which, when we love it, makes us live well and virtuously.\nSo that it seems to me that it is a brief but true definition of\nvirtue to say, it is the order of love; and on this account, in the\nCanticles, the bride of Christ, the city of God, sings, \"Order love\nwithin me.\"[204] It was the order of this love, then, this charity\nor attachment, which the sons of God disturbed when they forsook\nGod, and were enamoured of the daughters of men.[205] And by these\ntwo names (sons of God and daughters of men) the two cities are\nsufficiently distinguished. For though the former were by nature\nchildren of men, they had come into possession of another name by\ngrace. For in the same Scripture in which the sons of God are said to\nhave loved the daughters of men, they are also called angels of God;\nwhence many suppose that they were not men but angels.\n\n\n  23. _Whether we are to believe that angels, who are of a spiritual\n      substance, fell in love with the beauty of women, and sought them\n      in marriage, and that from this connection giants were born._\n\nIn the third book of this work (c. 5) we made a passing reference\nto this question, but did not decide whether angels, inasmuch as\nthey are spirits, could have bodily intercourse with women. For it\nis written, \"Who maketh His angels spirits,\"[206] that is, He makes\nthose who are by nature spirits His angels by appointing them to\nthe duty of bearing His messages. For the Greek word \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, which\nin Latin appears as \"angelus,\" means a messenger. But whether the\nPsalmist speaks of their bodies when he adds, \"and His ministers a\nflaming fire,\" or means that God's ministers ought to blaze with love\nas with a spiritual fire, is doubtful. However, the same trustworthy\nScripture testifies that angels have appeared to men in such bodies\nas could not only be seen, but also touched. There is, too, a very\ngeneral rumour, which many have verified by their own experience,\nor which trustworthy persons who have heard the experience of\nothers corroborate, that sylvans and fauns, who are commonly called\n\"incubi,\" had often made wicked assaults upon women, and satisfied\ntheir lust upon them; and that certain devils, called Duses by the\nGauls, are constantly attempting and effecting this impurity is so\ngenerally affirmed, that it were impudent to deny it.[207] From\nthese assertions, indeed, I dare not determine whether there be some\nspirits embodied in an aerial substance (for this element, even when\nagitated by a fan, is sensibly felt by the body), and who are capable\nof lust and of mingling sensibly with women; but certainly I could by\nno means believe that God's holy angels could at that time have so\nfallen, nor can I think that it is of them the Apostle Peter said,\n\"For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down\nto hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved\nunto judgment.\"[208] I think he rather speaks of those who first\napostatized from God, along with their chief the devil, who enviously\ndeceived the first man under the form of a serpent. But the same holy\nScripture affords the most ample testimony that even godly men have\nbeen called angels; for of John it is written: \"Behold, I send my\nmessenger (angel) before Thy face, who shall prepare Thy way.\"[209]\nAnd the prophet Malachi, by a peculiar grace specially communicated\nto him, was called an angel.[210]\n\nBut some are moved by the fact that we have read that the fruit of\nthe connection between those who are called angels of God and the\nwomen they loved were not men like our own breed, but giants; just\nas if there were not born even in our own time (as I have mentioned\nabove) men of much greater size than the ordinary stature. Was\nthere not at Rome a few years ago, when the destruction of the city\nnow accomplished by the Goths was drawing near, a woman, with her\nfather and mother, who by her gigantic size overtopped all others?\nSurprising crowds from all quarters came to see her, and that which\nstruck them most was the circumstance that neither of her parents\nwere quite up to the tallest ordinary stature. Giants therefore might\nwell be born, even before the sons of God, who are also called angels\nof God, formed a connection with the daughters of men, or of those\nliving according to men, that is to say, before the sons of Seth\nformed a connection with the daughters of Cain. For thus speaks even\nthe canonical Scripture itself in the book in which we read of this;\nits words are: \"And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on\nthe face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the\nsons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair [good];\nand they took them wives of all which they chose. And the Lord God\nsaid, My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is\nflesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. There were\ngiants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons\nof God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to\nthem, the same became the giants, men of renown.\"[211] These words of\nthe divine book sufficiently indicate that already there were giants\nin the earth in those days, in which the sons of God took wives of\nthe children of men, when they loved them because they were good,\nthat is, fair. For it is the custom of this Scripture to call those\nwho are beautiful in appearance \"good.\" But after this connection had\nbeen formed, then too were giants born. For the words are: \"There\nwere giants in the earth in those days, _and also after that_, when\nthe sons of God came in unto the daughters of men.\" Therefore there\nwere giants both before, \"in those days,\" and \"also after that.\"\nAnd the words, \"they bare children to them,\" show plainly enough\nthat before the sons of God fell in this fashion they begat children\nto God, not to themselves,--that is to say, not moved by the lust\nof sexual intercourse, but discharging the duty of propagation,\nintending to produce not a family to gratify their own pride, but\ncitizens to people the city of God; and to these they as God's angels\nwould bear the message, that they should place their hope in God,\nlike him who was born of Seth the son of resurrection, and who hoped\nto call on the name of the Lord God, in which hope they and their\noffspring would be co-heirs of eternal blessings, and brethren in the\nfamily of which God is the Father.\n\nBut that those angels were not angels in the sense of not being\nmen, as some suppose, Scripture itself decides, which unambiguously\ndeclares that they were men. For when it had first been stated that\n\"the angels of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair, and\nthey took them wives of all which they chose,\" it was immediately\nadded, \"And the Lord God said, My Spirit shall not always strive\nwith these men, for that they also are flesh.\" For by the Spirit of\nGod they had been made angels of God, and sons of God; but declining\ntowards lower things, they are called men, a name of nature, not of\ngrace; and they are called flesh, as deserters of the Spirit, and\nby their desertion deserted [by Him]. The Septuagint indeed calls\nthem both angels of God and sons of God, though all the copies do\nnot show this, some having only the name \"sons of God.\" And Aquila,\nwhom the Jews prefer to the other interpreters,[212] has translated\nneither angels of God nor sons of God, but sons of gods. But both\nare correct. For they were both sons of God, and thus brothers of\ntheir own fathers, who were children of the same God; and they were\nsons of gods, because begotten by gods, together with whom they\nthemselves also were gods, according to that expression of the psalm:\n\"I have said, Ye are gods, and all of you are children of the Most\nHigh.\"[213] For the Septuagint translators are justly believed to\nhave received the Spirit of prophecy; so that, if they made any\nalterations under His authority, and did not adhere to a strict\ntranslation, we could not doubt that this was divinely dictated.\nHowever, the Hebrew word may be said to be ambiguous, and to be\nsusceptible of either translation, \"sons of God,\" or \"sons of gods.\"\n\nLet us omit, then, the fables of those scriptures which are called\napocryphal, because their obscure origin was unknown to the fathers\nfrom whom the authority of the true Scriptures has been transmitted\nto us by a most certain and well-ascertained succession. For though\nthere is some truth in these apocryphal writings, yet they contain\nso many false statements, that they have no canonical authority.\nWe cannot deny that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, left some divine\nwritings, for this is asserted by the Apostle Jude in his canonical\nepistle. But it is not without reason that these writings have no\nplace in that canon of Scripture which was preserved in the temple\nof the Hebrew people by the diligence of successive priests; for\ntheir antiquity brought them under suspicion, and it was impossible\nto ascertain whether these were his genuine writings, and they were\nnot brought forward as genuine by the persons who were found to have\ncarefully preserved the canonical books by a successive transmission.\nSo that the writings which are produced under his name, and which\ncontain these fables about the giants, saying that their fathers were\nnot men, are properly judged by prudent men to be not genuine; just\nas many writings are produced by heretics under the names both of\nother prophets, and, more recently, under the names of the apostles,\nall of which, after careful examination, have been set apart from\ncanonical authority under the title of Apocrypha. There is therefore\nno doubt that, according to the Hebrew and Christian canonical\nScriptures, there were many giants before the deluge, and that these\nwere citizens of the earthly society of men, and that the sons of\nGod, who were according to the flesh the sons of Seth, sunk into this\ncommunity when they forsook righteousness. Nor need we wonder that\ngiants should be born even from these. For all of their children were\nnot giants; but there were more then than in the remaining periods\nsince the deluge. And it pleased the Creator to produce them, that\nit might thus be demonstrated that neither beauty, nor yet size and\nstrength, are of much moment to the wise man, whose blessedness lies\nin spiritual and immortal blessings, in far better and more enduring\ngifts, in the good things that are the peculiar property of the good,\nand are not shared by good and bad alike. It is this which another\nprophet confirms when he says, \"These were the giants, famous from\nthe beginning, that were of so great stature, and so expert in war.\nThose did not the Lord choose, neither gave He the way of knowledge\nunto them; but they were destroyed because they had no wisdom, and\nperished through their own foolishness.\"[214]\n\n\n  24. _How we are to understand this which the Lord said to those who\n      were to perish in the flood: \"Their days shall be_ 120 _years.\"_\n\nBut that which God said, \"Their days shall be an hundred and twenty\nyears,\" is not to be understood as a prediction that henceforth men\nshould not live longer than 120 years,--for even after the deluge we\nfind that they lived more than 500 years,--but we are to understand\nthat God said this when Noah had nearly completed his fifth century,\nthat is, had lived 480 years, which Scripture, as it frequently uses\nthe name of the whole for the largest part, calls 500 years. Now the\ndeluge came in the 600th year of Noah's life, the second month; and\nthus 120 years were predicted as being the remaining span of those\nwho were doomed, which years being spent, they should be destroyed\nby the deluge. And it is not unreasonably believed that the deluge\ncame as it did, because already there were not found upon earth any\nwho were not worthy of sharing a death so manifestly judicial,--not\nthat a good man, who must die some time, would be a jot the worse of\nsuch a death after it was past. Nevertheless there died in the deluge\nnone of those mentioned in the sacred Scripture as descended from\nSeth. But here is the divine account of the cause of the deluge: \"The\nLord God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and\nthat every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil\ncontinually. And it repented[215] the Lord that He had made man on\nthe earth, and it grieved Him at His heart. And the Lord said, I will\ndestroy man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth; both\nman and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air: for\nI am angry that I have made them.\"[216]\n\n\n    25. _Of the anger of God, which does not inflame His mind, nor\n                disturb His unchangeable tranquillity._\n\nThe anger of God is not a disturbing emotion of His mind, but a\njudgment by which punishment is inflicted upon sin. His thought\nand reconsideration also are the unchangeable reason which\nchanges things; for He does not, like man, repent of anything He\nhas done, because in all matters His decision is as inflexible as\nHis prescience is certain. But if Scripture were not to use such\nexpressions as the above, it would not familiarly insinuate itself\ninto the minds of all classes of men, whom it seeks access to for\ntheir good, that it may alarm the proud, arouse the careless,\nexercise the inquisitive, and satisfy the intelligent; and this it\ncould not do, did it not first stoop, and in a manner descend, to\nthem where they lie. But its denouncing death on all the animals of\nearth and air is a declaration of the vastness of the disaster that\nwas approaching: not that it threatens destruction to the irrational\nanimals as if they too had incurred it by sin.\n\n\n      26. _That the ark which Noah was ordered to make figures in\n                 every respect Christ and the church._\n\nMoreover, inasmuch as God commanded Noah, a just man, and, as the\ntruthful Scripture says, a man perfect in his generation,--not indeed\nwith the perfection of the citizens of the city of God in that\nimmortal condition in which they equal the angels, but in so far as\nthey can be perfect in their sojourn in this world,--inasmuch as God\ncommanded him, I say, to make an ark, in which he might be rescued\nfrom the destruction of the flood, along with his family, _i.e._ his\nwife, sons, and daughters-in-law, and along with the animals who, in\nobedience to God's command, came to him into the ark: is certainly\na figure of the city of God sojourning in this world; that is to\nsay, of the church, which is rescued by the wood on which hung the\nMediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus.[217] For even its\nvery dimensions, in length, breadth, and height, represent the human\nbody in which He came, as it had been foretold. For the length of\nthe human body, from the crown of the head to the sole of the foot,\nis six times its breadth from side to side, and ten times its depth\nor thickness, measuring from back to front: that is to say, if you\nmeasure a man as he lies on his back or on his face, he is six times\nas long from head to foot as he is broad from side to side, and ten\ntimes as long as he is high from the ground. And therefore the ark\nwas made 300 cubits in length, 50 in breadth, and 30 in height. And\nits having a door made in the side of it certainly signified the\nwound which was made when the side of the Crucified was pierced with\nthe spear: for by this those who come to Him enter; for thence flowed\nthe sacraments by which those who believe are initiated. And the fact\nthat it was ordered to be made of squared timbers, signifies the\nimmoveable steadiness of the life of the saints; for however you turn\na cube, it still stands. And the other peculiarities of the ark's\nconstruction are signs of features of the church.\n\nBut we have not now time to pursue this subject; and, indeed, we\nhave already dwelt upon it in the work we wrote against Faustus the\nManichean, who denies that there is anything prophesied of Christ\nin the Hebrew books. It may be that one man's exposition excels\nanother's, and that ours is not the best; but all that is said\nmust be referred to this city of God we speak of, which sojourns\nin this wicked world as in a deluge, at least if the expositor\nwould not widely miss the meaning of the author. For example, the\ninterpretation I have given in the work against Faustus, of the\nwords, \"with lower, second, and third storeys shalt thou make it,\"\nis, that because the church is gathered out of all nations, it is\nsaid to have two storeys, to represent the two kinds of men,--the\ncircumcision, to wit, and the uncircumcision, or, as the apostle\notherwise calls them, Jews and Gentiles; and to have three storeys,\nbecause all the nations were replenished from the three sons of Noah.\nNow any one may object to this interpretation, and may give another\nwhich harmonizes with the rule of faith. For as the ark was to have\nrooms not only on the lower, but also on the upper storeys, which\nwere called \"third storeys,\" that there might be a habitable space\non the third floor from the basement, some one may interpret these\nto mean the three graces commended by the apostle,--faith, hope, and\ncharity. Or even more suitably they may be supposed to represent\nthose three harvests in the gospel, thirty-fold, sixtyfold, an\nhundredfold,--chaste marriage dwelling in the ground floor, chaste\nwidowhood in the upper, and chaste virginity in the top storey. Or\nany better interpretation may be given, so long as the reference to\nthis city is maintained. And the same statement I would make of all\nthe remaining particulars in this passage which require exposition,\nviz. that although different explanations are given, yet they must\nall agree with the one harmonious catholic faith.\n\n\n  27. _Of the ark and the deluge, and that we cannot agree with\n      those who receive the bare history, but reject the allegorical\n      interpretation, nor with those who maintain the figurative and\n      not the historical meaning._\n\nYet no one ought to suppose either that these things were written for\nno purpose, or that we should study only the historical truth, apart\nfrom any allegorical meanings; or, on the contrary, that they are\nonly allegories, and that there were no such facts at all, or that,\nwhether it be so or no, there is here no prophecy of the church.\nFor what right-minded man will contend that books so religiously\npreserved during thousands of years, and transmitted by so orderly\na succession, were written without an object, or that only the bare\nhistorical facts are to be considered when we read them? For, not\nto mention other instances, if the number of the animals entailed\nthe construction of an ark of great size, where was the necessity of\nsending into it two unclean and seven clean animals of each species,\nwhen both could have been preserved in equal numbers? Or could not\nGod, who ordered them to be preserved in order to replenish the race,\nrestore them in the same way He had created them?\n\nBut they who contend that these things never happened, but are only\nfigures setting forth other things, in the first place suppose that\nthere could not be a flood so great that the water should rise\nfifteen cubits above the highest mountains, because it is said\nthat clouds cannot rise above the top of Mount Olympus, because it\nreaches the sky where there is none of that thicker atmosphere in\nwhich winds, clouds, and rains have their origin. They do not reflect\nthat the densest element of all, earth, can exist there; or perhaps\nthey deny that the top of the mountain is earth. Why, then, do these\nmeasurers and weighers of the elements contend that earth can be\nraised to those aerial altitudes, and that water cannot, while they\nadmit that water is lighter, and liker to ascend than earth? What\nreason do they adduce why earth, the heavier and lower element, has\nfor so many ages scaled to the tranquil \u00e6ther, while water, the\nlighter, and more likely to ascend, is not suffered to do the same\neven for a brief space of time?\n\nThey say, too, that the area of that ark could not contain so many\nkinds of animals of both sexes, two of the unclean and seven of the\nclean. But they seem to me to reckon only one area of 300 cubits long\nand 50 broad, and not to remember that there was another similar\nin the storey above, and yet another as large in the storey above\nthat again; and that there was consequently an area of 900 cubits by\n150. And if we accept what Origen[218] has with some appropriateness\nsuggested, that Moses the man of God, being, as it is written,\n\"learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians,\"[219] who delighted\nin geometry, may have meant geometrical cubits, of which they say\nthat one is equal to six of our cubits, then who does not see what a\ncapacity these dimensions give to the ark? For as to their objection\nthat an ark of such size could not be built, it is a very silly\ncalumny; for they are aware that huge cities have been built, and\nthey should remember that the ark was an hundred years in building.\nOr, perhaps, though stone can adhere to stone when cemented with\nnothing but lime, so that a wall of several miles may be constructed,\nyet plank cannot be riveted to plank by mortices, bolts, nails,\nand pitch-glue, so as to construct an ark which was not made with\ncurved ribs but straight timbers, which was not to be launched by its\nbuilders but to be lifted by the natural pressure of the water when\nit reached it, and which was to be preserved from shipwreck as it\nfloated about rather by divine oversight than by human skill.\n\nAs to another customary inquiry of the scrupulous about the very\nminute creatures, not only such as mice and lizards, but also\nlocusts, beetles, flies, fleas, and so forth, whether there were not\nin the ark a larger number of them than was determined by God in\nHis command, those persons who are moved by this difficulty are to\nbe reminded that the words \"every creeping thing of the earth\" only\nindicate that it was not needful to preserve in the ark the animals\nthat can live in the water, whether the fishes that live submerged\nin it, or the sea-birds that swim on its surface. Then, when it is\nsaid \"male and female,\" no doubt reference is made to the repairing\nof the races, and consequently there was no need for those creatures\nbeing in the ark which are born without the union of the sexes from\ninanimate things, or from their corruption; or if they were in the\nark, they might be there as they commonly are in houses, not in any\ndeterminate numbers; or if it was necessary that there should be a\ndefinite number of all those animals that cannot naturally live in\nthe water, that so the most sacred mystery which was being enacted\nmight be bodied forth and perfectly figured in actual realities,\nstill this was not the care of Noah or his sons, but of God. For\nNoah did not catch the animals and put them into the ark, but gave\nthem entrance as they came seeking it. For this is the force of the\nwords, \"They shall come unto thee,\"[1]--not, that is to say, by man's\neffort, but by God's will. But certainly we are not required to\nbelieve that those which have no sex also came; for it is expressly\nand definitely said, \"They shall be male and female.\"[220] For there\nare some animals which are born out of corruption, but yet afterwards\nthey themselves copulate and produce offspring, as flies; but others,\nwhich have no sex, like bees. Then, as to those animals which have\nsex, but without ability to propagate their kind, like mules and\nshe-mules, it is probable that they were not in the ark, but that\nit was counted sufficient to preserve their parents, to wit, the\nhorse and the ass; and this applies to all hybrids. Yet, if it was\nnecessary for the completeness of the mystery, they were there; for\neven this species has \"male and female.\"\n\nAnother question is commonly raised regarding the food of the\ncarnivorous animals,--whether, without transgressing the command\nwhich fixed the number to be preserved, there were necessarily others\nincluded in the ark for their sustenance; or, as is more probable,\nthere might be some food which was not flesh, and which yet suited\nall. For we know how many animals whose food is flesh eat also\nvegetable products and fruits, especially figs and chestnuts. What\nwonder is it, therefore, if that wise and just man was instructed\nby God what would suit each, so that without flesh he prepared and\nstored provision fit for every species? And what is there which\nhunger would not make animals eat? Or what could not be made sweet\nand wholesome by God, who, with a divine facility, might have enabled\nthem to do without food at all, had it not been requisite to the\ncompleteness of so great a mystery that they should be fed? But none\nbut a contentious man can suppose that there was no prefiguring\nof the church in so manifold and circumstantial a detail. For the\nnations have already so filled the church, and are comprehended in\nthe framework of its unity, the clean and unclean together, until\nthe appointed end, that this one very manifest fulfilment leaves no\ndoubt how we should interpret even those others which are somewhat\nmore obscure, and which cannot so readily be discerned. And since\nthis is so, if not even the most audacious will presume to assert\nthat these things were written without a purpose, or that though the\nevents really happened they mean nothing, or that they did not really\nhappen, but are only allegory, or that at all events they are far\nfrom having any figurative reference to the church; if it has been\nmade out that, on the other hand, we must rather believe that there\nwas a wise purpose in their being committed to memory and to writing,\nand that they did happen, and have a significance, and that this\nsignificance has a prophetic reference to the church, then this book,\nhaving served this purpose, may now be closed, that we may go on to\ntrace in the history subsequent to the deluge the courses of the two\ncities,--the earthly, that lives according to men, and the heavenly,\nthat lives according to God.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[130] 1 Cor. xv. 46.\n\n[131] Rom. ix. 21.\n\n[132] Gen. iv. 17.\n\n[133] Comp. _De Trin._ xv. c. 15.\n\n[134] Gal. iv. 21-31.\n\n[135] Rom. ix. 22, 23.\n\n[136] Wisdom viii. 1.\n\n[137] Lucan, _Phar._ i. 95.\n\n[138] Gal. v. 17.\n\n[139] Gal. vi. 2.\n\n[140] 1 Thess. v. 14, 15.\n\n[141] Gal. vi. 1.\n\n[142] Eph. iv. 26.\n\n[143] Matt. xviii. 15.\n\n[144] 1 Tim. v. 20.\n\n[145] Heb. xii. 14.\n\n[146] Matt. xviii. 35.\n\n[147] Rom. vi. 12, 13.\n\n[148] Gen. iv. 6, 7.\n\n[149] Literally, \"division.\"\n\n[150] 1 John iii. 12.\n\n[151] We alter the pronoun to suit Augustine's interpretation.\n\n[152] Gal. v. 17.\n\n[153] Rom. vii. 17.\n\n[154] Rom. vi. 13.\n\n[155] Gen. iii. 16.\n\n[156] Eph. v. 28, 29.\n\n[157] _C. Faustum. Man._ xii. c. 9.\n\n[158] Gen. iv. 17.\n\n[159] Gen. iv. 25.\n\n[160] Lamech, according to the LXX.\n\n[161] Ex. xii. 37.\n\n[162] Virgil, _\u00c6neid_, xii. 899, 900. Compare the _Iliad_, v. 302,\nand Juvenal, xv. 65 et seqq.\n\n          \"Terra malos homines nunc educat atque pusillos.\"\n\n[163] Plin. _Hist. Nat._ vii. 16.\n\n[164] See the account given by Herodotus (i. 67) of the discovery of\nthe bones of Orestes, which, as the story goes, gave a stature of\nseven cubits.\n\n[165] Pliny, _Hist. Nat._ vii. 49, merely reports what he had read in\nHellanicus about the Epirotes of Etolia.\n\n[166] \"Our own MSS.,\" of which Augustine here speaks, were the Latin\nversions of the Septuagint used by the Church before Jerome's was\nreceived; the \"Hebrew MSS.\" were the versions made from the Hebrew\ntext. Compare _De Doct. Christ._ ii. 15 et seqq.\n\n[167] Jerome (_De Qu\u00e6st. Heb. in Gen._) says it was a question famous\nin all the churches.--VIVES.\n\n[168] \"Quos in auctoritatem celebriorum Ecclesia suscepit.\"\n\n[169] See below, book xviii. c. 42-44.\n\n[170] C. 8.\n\n[171] On this subject see Wilkinson's note to the second book\n(appendix) of Rawlinson's _Herodotus_, where all available references\nare given.\n\n[172] One hundred and eighty-seven is the number given in the Hebrew,\nand one hundred and sixty-seven in the Septuagint; but notwithstanding\nthe confusion, the argument of Augustine is easily followed.\n\n[173] Gen. vii. 10, 11 (in our version the seventeenth day).\n\n[174] Gen. viii. 4, 5.\n\n[175] Ps. xc. 10.\n\n[176] Gen. iv. 1.\n\n[177] Gen. iv. 25.\n\n[178] Gen. v. 6.\n\n[179] Gen. v. 8.\n\n[180] Matt. i.\n\n[181] His own children being the children of his sister, and\ntherefore his nephews.\n\n[182] This was allowed by the Egyptians and Athenians, never by the\nRomans.\n\n[183] Both in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, though not uniformly, nor in\nLatin commonly.\n\n[184] Gen. v. 2.\n\n[185] Luke xx. 35, 36.\n\n[186] Gen. iv. 18-22.\n\n[187] Gen. iv. 26.\n\n[188] Rom. viii. 24, 25.\n\n[189] Rom. x. 13.\n\n[190] Jer. xvii. 5.\n\n[191] _\u00c6neid_, i. 288.\n\n[192] _\u00c6neid_, iii. 97.\n\n[193] Luke xx. 34.\n\n[194] Rom. ix. 5.\n\n[195] Eusebius, Jerome, Bede, and others, who follow the Septuagint,\nreckon only 2242 years, which Vives explains by supposing Augustine\nto have made a copyist's error.\n\n[196] _Transgreditur._\n\n[197] Ps. li. 3.\n\n[198] Gen. v. 1.\n\n[199] Ps. xlix. 11.\n\n[200] Ps. lxxiii. 20.\n\n[201] Ps. lii. 8.\n\n[202] Ps. xl. 4.\n\n[203] Or, according to another reading, \"Which I briefly said in\nthese verses in praise of a taper.\"\n\n[204] Cant. ii. 4.\n\n[205] See _De Doct. Christ._ i. 28.\n\n[206] Ps. civ. 4.\n\n[207] On these kinds of devils, see the note of Vives _in loc._,\nor Lecky's _Hist. of Rationalism_, i. 26, who quotes from Maury's\n_Histoire de la Magie_, that the Dusii were Celtic spirits, and are\nthe origin of our \"Deuce.\"\n\n[208] 2 Pet. ii. 4.\n\n[209] Mark i. 2.\n\n[210] Mal. ii. 7.\n\n[211] Gen. vi. 1-4. Lactantius (_Inst._ ii. 15), Sulpicius Severus\n(_Hist._ i. 2), and others suppose from this passage that angels had\ncommerce with the daughters of men. See further references in the\nCommentary of Pererius _in loc_.\n\n[212] Aquila lived in the time of Hadrian, to whom he is said to\nhave been related. He was excommunicated from the Church for the\npractice of astrology; and is best known by his translation of the\nHebrew Scriptures into Greek, which he executed with great care and\naccuracy, though he has been charged with falsifying passages to\nsupport the Jews in their opposition to Christianity.\n\n[213] Ps. lxxxii. 6.\n\n[214] Baruch iii. 26-28.\n\n[215] Lit.: \"The Lord thought and reconsidered.\"\n\n[216] Gen. vi. 5-7.\n\n[217] 1 Tim. ii. 5.\n\n[218] In his second homily on Genesis.\n\n[219] Acts vii. 22.\n\n[220] Gen. vi. 19, 20.\n\n\n\n\n                            BOOK SIXTEENTH.\n\n                               ARGUMENT.\n\n  IN THE FORMER PART OF THIS BOOK, FROM THE FIRST TO THE TWELFTH\n      CHAPTER, THE PROGRESS OF THE TWO CITIES, THE EARTHLY AND\n      THE HEAVENLY, FROM NOAH TO ABRAHAM, IS EXHIBITED FROM HOLY\n      SCRIPTURE: IN THE LATTER PART, THE PROGRESS OF THE HEAVENLY\n      ALONE, FROM ABRAHAM TO THE KINGS OF ISRAEL, IS THE SUBJECT.\n\n\n   1. _Whether, after the deluge, from Noah to Abraham, any families\n               can be found who lived according to God._\n\nIt is difficult to discover from Scripture, whether, after the\ndeluge, traces of the holy city are continuous, or are so interrupted\nby intervening seasons of godlessness, that not a single worshipper\nof the one true God was found among men; because from Noah, who,\nwith his wife, three sons, and as many daughters-in-law, achieved\ndeliverance in the ark from the destruction of the deluge, down to\nAbraham, we do not find in the canonical books that the piety of\nany one is celebrated by express divine testimony, unless it be in\nthe case of Noah, who commends with a prophetic benediction his two\nsons Shem and Japheth, while he beheld and foresaw what was long\nafterwards to happen. It was also by this prophetic spirit that,\nwhen his middle son--that is, the son who was younger than the first\nand older than the last born--had sinned against him, he cursed him\nnot in his own person, but in his son's (his own grandson's), in the\nwords, \"Cursed be the lad Canaan; a servant shall he be unto his\nbrethren.\"[221] Now Canaan was born of Ham, who, so far from covering\nhis sleeping father's nakedness, had divulged it. For the same reason\nalso he subjoins the blessing on his two other sons, the oldest and\nyoungest, saying, \"Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall\nbe his servant. God shall gladden Japheth, and he shall dwell in the\nhouses of Shem.\"[222] And so, too, the planting of the vine by Noah,\nand his intoxication by its fruit, and his nakedness while he slept,\nand the other things done at that time, and recorded, are all of them\npregnant with prophetic meanings, and veiled in mysteries.[223]\n\n\n      2. _What was prophetically prefigured in the sons of Noah._\n\nThe things which then were hidden are now sufficiently revealed\nby the actual events which have followed. For who can carefully\nand intelligently consider these things without recognising them\naccomplished in Christ? Shem, of whom Christ was born in the flesh,\nmeans \"named.\" And what is of greater name than Christ, the fragrance\nof whose name is now everywhere perceived, so that even prophecy\nsings of it beforehand, comparing it in the Song of Songs[224] to\nointment poured forth? Is it not also in the houses of Christ, that\nis, in the churches, that the \"enlargement\" of the nations dwells?\nFor Japheth means \"enlargement.\" And Ham (_i.e._ hot), who was the\nmiddle son of Noah, and, as it were, separated himself from both,\nand remained between them, neither belonging to the first-fruits of\nIsrael nor to the fulness of the Gentiles, what does he signify but\nthe tribe of heretics, hot with the spirit, not of patience, but of\nimpatience, with which the breasts of heretics are wont to blaze,\nand with which they disturb the peace of the saints? But even the\nheretics yield an advantage to those that make proficiency, according\nto the apostle's saying, \"There must also be heresies, that they\nwhich are approved may be made manifest among you.\"[225] Whence,\ntoo, it is elsewhere said, \"The son that receives instruction will\nbe wise, and he uses the foolish as his servant.\"[226] For while the\nhot restlessness of heretics stirs questions about many articles of\nthe catholic faith, the necessity of defending them forces us both to\ninvestigate them more accurately, to understand them more clearly,\nand to proclaim them more earnestly; and the question mooted by an\nadversary becomes the occasion of instruction. However, not only\nthose who are openly separated from the church, but also all who\nglory in the Christian name, and at the same time lead abandoned\nlives, may without absurdity seem to be figured by Noah's middle\nson: for the passion of Christ, which was signified by that man's\nnakedness, is at once proclaimed by their profession, and dishonoured\nby their wicked conduct. Of such, therefore, it has been said,\n\"By their fruits ye shall know them.\"[227] And therefore was Ham\ncursed in his son, he being, as it were, his fruit. So, too, this\nson of his, Canaan, is fitly interpreted \"their movement,\" which is\nnothing else than their work. But Shem and Japheth, that is to say,\nthe circumcision and uncircumcision, or, as the apostle otherwise\ncalls them, the Jews and Greeks, but called and justified, having\nsomehow discovered the nakedness of their father (which signifies\nthe Saviour's passion), took a garment and laid it upon their backs,\nand entered backwards and covered their father's nakedness, without\ntheir seeing what their reverence hid. For we both honour the passion\nof Christ as accomplished for us, and we hate the crime of the Jews\nwho crucified Him. The garment signifies the sacrament, their backs\nthe memory of things past: for the church celebrates the passion of\nChrist as already accomplished, and no longer to be looked forward\nto, now that Japheth already dwells in the habitations of Shem, and\ntheir wicked brother between them.\n\nBut the wicked brother is, in the person of his son (_i.e._ his\nwork), the boy, or slave, of his good brothers, when good men make\na skilful use of bad men, either for the exercise of their patience\nor for their advancement in wisdom. For the apostle testifies that\nthere are some who preach Christ from no pure motives; \"but,\" says\nhe, \"whether in pretence or in truth, Christ is preached; and I\ntherein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.\"[228] For it is Christ\nHimself who planted the vine of which the prophet says, \"The vine of\nthe Lord of hosts is the house of Israel;\"[229] and He drinks of its\nwine, whether we thus understand that cup of which He says, \"Can ye\ndrink of the cup that I shall drink of?\"[230] and, \"Father, if it\nbe possible, let this cup pass from me,\"[231] by which He obviously\nmeans His passion. Or, as wine is the fruit of the vine, we may\nprefer to understand that from this vine, that is to say, from the\nrace of Israel, He has assumed flesh and blood that He might suffer;\n\"and he was drunken,\" that is, He suffered; \"and was naked,\" that is,\nHis weakness appeared in His suffering, as the apostle says, \"though\nHe was crucified through weakness.\"[232] Wherefore the same apostle\nsays, \"The weakness of God is stronger than men; and the foolishness\nof God is wiser than men.\"[233] And when to the expression \"he was\nnaked\" Scripture adds \"in his house,\" it elegantly intimates that\nJesus was to suffer the cross and death at the hands of His own\nhousehold, His own kith and kin, the Jews. This passion of Christ is\nonly externally and verbally professed by the reprobate, for what\nthey profess they do not understand. But the elect hold in the inner\nman this so great mystery, and honour inwardly in the heart this\nweakness and foolishness of God. And of this there is a figure in Ham\ngoing out to proclaim his father's nakedness; while Shem and Japheth,\nto cover or honour it, went in, that is to say, did it inwardly.\n\nThese secrets of divine Scripture we investigate as well as we can.\nAll will not accept our interpretation with equal confidence, but\nall hold it certain that these things were neither done nor recorded\nwithout some foreshadowing of future events, and that they are to be\nreferred only to Christ and His church, which is the city of God,\nproclaimed from the very beginning of human history by figures which\nwe now see everywhere accomplished. From the blessing of the two sons\nof Noah, and the cursing of the middle son, down to Abraham, or for\nmore than a thousand years, there is, as I have said, no mention of\nany righteous persons who worshipped God. I do not therefore conclude\nthat there were none; but it had been tedious to mention every one,\nand would have displayed historical accuracy rather than prophetic\nforesight. The object of the writer of these sacred books, or rather\nof the Spirit of God in him, is not only to record the past, but\nto depict the future, so far as it regards the city of God; for\nwhatever is said of those who are not its citizens, is given either\nfor her instruction, or as a foil to enhance her glory. Yet we are\nnot to suppose that all that is recorded has some signification; but\nthose things which have no signification of their own are interwoven\nfor the sake of the things which are significant. It is only the\nploughshare that cleaves the soil; but to effect this, other parts of\nthe plough are requisite. It is only the strings in harps and other\nmusical instruments which produce melodious sounds; but that they may\ndo so, there are other parts of the instrument which are not indeed\nstruck by those who sing, but are connected with the strings which\nare struck, and produce musical notes. So in this prophetic history\nsome things are narrated which have no significance, but are, as it\nwere, the framework to which the significant things are attached.\n\n\n          3. _Of the generations of the three sons of Noah._\n\nWe must therefore introduce into this work an explanation of the\ngenerations of the three sons of Noah, in so far as that may illustrate\nthe progress in time of the two cities. Scripture first mentions that\nof the youngest son, who is called Japheth: he had eight sons,[234]\nand by two of these sons seven grandchildren, three by one son, four\nby the other; in all, fifteen descendants. Ham, Noah's middle son, had\nfour sons, and by one of them five grandsons, and by one of these two\ngreat-grandsons; in all, eleven. After enumerating these, Scripture\nreturns to the first of the sons, and says, \"Cush begat Nimrod; he\nbegan to be a giant on the earth. He was a giant hunter against the\nLord God: wherefore they say, As Nimrod the giant hunter against the\nLord. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babylon, Erech, Accad, and\nCalneh, in the land of Shinar. Out of that land went forth Assur, and\nbuilt Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah, and Resen between\nNineveh and Calah: this was a great city.\" Now this Cush, father of\nthe giant Nimrod, is the first-named among the sons of Ham, to whom\nfive sons and two grandsons are ascribed. But he either begat this\ngiant after his grandsons were born, or, which is more credible,\nScripture speaks of him separately on account of his eminence; for\nmention is also made of his kingdom, which began with that magnificent\ncity Babylon, and the other places, whether cities or districts,\nmentioned along with it. But what is recorded of the land of Shinar\nwhich belonged to Nimrod's kingdom, to wit, that Assur went forth from\nit and built Nineveh and the other cities mentioned with it, happened\nlong after; but he takes occasion to speak of it here on account of\nthe grandeur of the Assyrian kingdom, which was wonderfully extended\nby Ninus son of Belus, and founder of the great city Nineveh, which\nwas named after him, Nineveh, from Ninus. But Assur, father of the\nAssyrian, was not one of the sons of Ham, Noah's middle son, but is\nfound among the sons of Shem, his eldest son. Whence it appears that\namong Shem's offspring there arose men who afterwards took possession\nof that giant's kingdom, and advancing from it, founded other cities,\nthe first of which was called Nineveh, from Ninus. From him Scripture\nreturns to Ham's other son, Mizraim; and his sons are enumerated, not\nas seven individuals, but as seven nations. And from the sixth, as\nif from the sixth son, the race called the Philistines are said to\nhave sprung; so that there are in all eight. Then it returns again to\nCanaan, in whose person Ham was cursed; and his eleven sons are named.\nThen the territories they occupied, and some of the cities, are named.\nAnd thus, if we count sons and grandsons, there are thirty-one of Ham's\ndescendants registered.\n\nIt remains to mention the sons of Shem, Noah's eldest son; for to\nhim this genealogical narrative gradually ascends from the youngest.\nBut in the commencement of the record of Shem's sons there is an\nobscurity which calls for explanation, since it is closely connected\nwith the object of our investigation. For we read, \"Unto Shem also,\nthe father of all the children of Heber, the brother of Japheth the\nelder, were children born.\"[235] This is the order of the words:\nAnd to Shem was born Heber, even to himself, that is, to Shem\nhimself was born Heber, and Shem is the father of all his children.\nWe are intended to understand that Shem is the patriarch of all\nhis posterity who were to be mentioned, whether sons, grandsons,\ngreat-grandsons, or descendants at any remove. For Shem did not beget\nHeber, who was indeed in the fifth generation from him. For Shem\nbegat, among other sons, Arphaxad; Arphaxad begat Cainan, Cainan\nbegat Salah, Salah begat Heber. And it was with good reason that he\nwas named first among Shem's offspring, taking precedence even of his\nsons, though only a grandchild of the fifth generation; for from him,\nas tradition says, the Hebrews derived their name, though the other\netymology which derives the name from Abraham (as if _Abrahews_) may\npossibly be correct. But there can be little doubt that the former\nis the right etymology, and that they were called after Heber,\n_Heberews_, and then, dropping a letter, Hebrews; and so was their\nlanguage called Hebrew, which was spoken by none but the people\nof Israel among whom was the city of God, mysteriously prefigured\nin all the people, and truly present in the saints. Six of Shem's\nsons then are first named, then four grandsons born to one of these\nsons; then it mentions another son of Shem, who begat a grandson;\nand his son, again, or Shem's great-grandson, was Heber. And Heber\nbegat two sons, and called the one Peleg, which means \"dividing;\"\nand Scripture subjoins the reason of this name, saying, \"for in\nhis days was the earth divided.\" What this means will afterwards\nappear. Heber's other son begat twelve sons; consequently all Shem's\ndescendants are twenty-seven. The total number of the progeny of the\nthree sons of Noah is seventy-three, fifteen by Japheth, thirty-one\nby Ham, twenty-seven by Shem. Then Scripture adds, \"These are the\nsons of Shem, after their families, after their tongues, in their\nlands, after their nations.\" And so of the whole number: \"These\nare the families of the sons of Noah after their generations, in\ntheir nations; and by these were the isles of the nations dispersed\nthrough the earth after the flood.\" From which we gather that the\nseventy-three (or rather, as I shall presently show, seventy-two)\nwere not individuals, but nations. For in a former passage, when the\nsons of Japheth were enumerated, it is said in conclusion, \"By these\nwere the isles of the nations divided in their lands, every one after\nhis language, in their tribes, and in their nations.\"\n\nBut nations are expressly mentioned among the sons of Ham, as I\nshowed above. \"Mizraim begat those who are called Ludim;\" and so also\nof the other seven nations. And after enumerating all of them, it\nconcludes, \"These are the sons of Ham, in their families, according\nto their languages, in their territories, and in their nations.\" The\nreason, then, why the children of several of them are not mentioned,\nis that they belonged by birth to other nations, and did not\nthemselves become nations. Why else is it, that though eight sons are\nreckoned to Japheth, the sons of only two of these are mentioned; and\nthough four are reckoned to Ham, only three are spoken of as having\nsons; and though six are reckoned to Shem, the descendants of only\ntwo of these are traced? Did the rest remain childless? We cannot\nsuppose so; but they did not produce nations so great as to warrant\ntheir being mentioned, but were absorbed in the nations to which they\nbelonged by birth.\n\n\n  4. _Of the diversity of languages, and of the founding of Babylon._\n\nBut though these nations are said to have been dispersed according to\ntheir languages, yet the narrator recurs to that time when all had\nbut one language, and explains how it came to pass that a diversity\nof languages was introduced. \"The whole earth,\" he says, \"was of one\nlip, and all had one speech. And it came to pass, as they journeyed\nfrom the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and\ndwelt there. And they said one to another, Come, and let us make\nbricks, and burn them thoroughly. And they had bricks for stone, and\nslime for mortar. And they said, Come, and let us build for ourselves\na city, and a tower whose top shall reach the sky; and let us make\nus a name, before we be scattered abroad on the face of all the\nearth. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which\nthe children, of men builded. And the Lord God said, Behold, the\npeople is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin\nto do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have\nimagined to do. Come, and let us go down, and confound there their\nlanguage, that they may not understand one another's speech. And God\nscattered them thence on the face of all the earth: and they left\noff to build the city and the tower. Therefore the name of it is\ncalled Confusion; because the Lord did there confound the language of\nall the earth: and the Lord God scattered them thence on the face of\nall the earth.\"[236] This city, which was called Confusion, is the\nsame as Babylon, whose wonderful construction Gentile history also\nnotices. For Babylon means Confusion. Whence we conclude that the\ngiant Nimrod was its founder, as had been hinted a little before,\nwhere Scripture, in speaking of him, says that the beginning of\nhis kingdom was Babylon, that is, Babylon had a supremacy over the\nother cities as the metropolis and royal residence; although it did\nnot rise to the grand dimensions designed by its proud and impious\nfounder. The plan was to make it so high that it should reach the\nsky, whether this was meant of one tower which they intended to\nbuild higher than the others, or of all the towers, which might be\nsignified by the singular number, as we speak of \"the soldier,\"\nmeaning the army, and of the frog or the locust, when we refer to the\nwhole multitude of frogs and locusts in the plagues with which Moses\nsmote the Egyptians.[237] But what did these vain and presumptuous\nmen intend? How did they expect to raise this lofty mass against God,\nwhen they had built it above all the mountains and the clouds of\nthe earth's atmosphere? What injury could any spiritual or material\nelevation do to God? The safe and true way to heaven is made by\nhumility, which lifts up the heart to the Lord, not against Him;\nas this giant is said to have been a \"hunter _against_ the Lord.\"\nThis has been misunderstood by some through the ambiguity of the\nGreek word, and they have translated it, not \"against the Lord,\" but\n\"before the Lord;\" for \u1f14\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd means both \"before\" and \"against.\"\nIn the Psalm this word is rendered, \"Let us weep _before_ the Lord\nour Maker.\"[238] The same word occurs in the book of Job, where it is\nwritten, \"Thou hast broken into fury _against_ the Lord.\"[239] And\nso this giant is to be recognised as a \"hunter _against_ the Lord.\"\nAnd what is meant by the term \"hunter\" but deceiver, oppressor, and\ndestroyer of the animals of the earth? He and his people, therefore,\nerected this tower against the Lord, and so gave expression to their\nimpious pride; and justly was their wicked intention punished by\nGod, even though it was unsuccessful. But what was the nature of the\npunishment? As the tongue is the instrument of domination, in it\npride was punished; so that man, who would not understand God when\nHe issued His commands, should be misunderstood when he himself gave\norders. Thus was that conspiracy disbanded, for each man retired from\nthose he could not understand, and associated with those whose speech\nwas intelligible; and the nations were divided according to their\nlanguages, and scattered over the earth as seemed good to God, who\naccomplished this in ways hidden from and incomprehensible to us.\n\n\n  5. _Of God's coming down to confound the languages of the builders\n                             of the city._\n\nWe read, \"The Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the\nsons of men built:\" it was not the sons of God, but that society\nwhich lived in a merely human way, and which we call the earthly\ncity. God, who is always wholly everywhere, does not move locally;\nbut He is said to descend when He does anything in the earth out of\nthe usual course, which, as it were, makes His presence felt. And\nin the same way, He does not by \"seeing\" learn some new thing, for\nHe cannot ever be ignorant of anything; but He is said to see and\nrecognise, in time, that which He causes others to see and recognise.\nAnd therefore that city was not previously being seen as God made\nit be seen when He showed how offensive it was to Him. We might,\nindeed, interpret God's descending to the city of the descent of\nHis angels in whom He dwells; so that the following words, \"And the\nLord God said, Behold, they are all one race and of one language,\"\nand also what follows, \"Come, and let us go down and confound\ntheir speech,\" are a recapitulation, explaining how the previously\nintimated \"descent of the Lord\" was accomplished. For if He had\nalready gone down, why does He say, \"Come, and let us go down and\nconfound?\"--words which seem to be addressed to the angels, and to\nintimate that He who was in the angels descended in their descent.\nAnd the words most appropriately are, not, \"Go ye down and confound,\"\nbut, \"Let us confound their speech;\" showing that He so works by His\nservants, that they are themselves also fellow-labourers with God, as\nthe apostle says, \"For we are fellow-labourers with God.\"[240]\n\n\n    6. _What we are to understand by God's speaking to the angels._\n\nWe might have supposed that the words uttered at the creation of man,\n\"Let us,\" and not Let me, \"make man,\" were addressed to the angels,\nhad He not added \"in our image;\" but as we cannot believe that man\nwas made in the image of angels, or that the image of God is the\nsame as that of angels, it is proper to refer this expression to the\nplurality of the Trinity. And yet this Trinity, being one God, even\nafter saying \"Let _us_ make,\" goes on to say, \"And God made man in\nHis image,\"[241] and not \"Gods made,\" or \"in their image.\" And were\nthere any difficulty in applying to the angels the words, \"Come,\nand let us go down and confound their speech,\" we might refer the\nplural to the Trinity, as if the Father were addressing the Son and\nthe Holy Spirit; but it rather belongs to the angels to approach God\nby holy movements, that is, by pious thoughts, and thereby to avail\nthemselves of the unchangeable truth which rules in the court of\nheaven as their eternal law. For they are not themselves the truth;\nbut partaking in the creative truth, they are moved towards it as\nthe fountain of life, that what they have not in themselves they may\nobtain in it. And this movement of theirs is steady, for they never\ngo back from what they have reached. And to these angels God does not\nspeak, as we speak to one another, or to God, or to angels, or as the\nangels speak to us, or as God speaks to us through them: He speaks\nto them in an ineffable manner of His own, and that which He says is\nconveyed to us in a manner suited to our capacity. For the speaking\nof God antecedent and superior to all His works, is the immutable\nreason of His work: it has no noisy and passing sound, but an energy\neternally abiding and producing results in time. Thus He speaks to\nthe holy angels; but to us, who are far off, He speaks otherwise.\nWhen, however, we hear with the inner ear some part of the speech\nof God, we approximate to the angels. But in this work I need not\nlabour to give an account of the ways in which God speaks. For either\nthe unchangeable Truth speaks directly to the mind of the rational\ncreature in some indescribable way, or speaks through the changeable\ncreature, either presenting spiritual images to our spirit, or bodily\nvoices to our bodily sense.\n\nThe words, \"Nothing will be restrained from them which they have\nimagined to do,\"[242] are assuredly not meant as an affirmation, but\nas an interrogation, such as is used by persons threatening, as,\n_e.g._, when Dido exclaims,\n\n          \"They will not take arms and pursue?\"[243]\n\nWe are to understand the words as if it had been said, Shall nothing\nbe restrained from them which they have imagined to do?[244] From\nthese three men, therefore, the three sons of Noah we mean, 73, or\nrather, as the catalogue will show, 72 nations and as many languages\nwere dispersed over the earth, and as they increased filled even the\nislands. But the nations multiplied much more than the languages. For\neven in Africa we know several barbarous nations which have but one\nlanguage; and who can doubt that, as the human race increased, men\ncontrived to pass to the islands in ships?\n\n\n   7. _Whether even the remotest islands received their_ FAUNA _from\n  the animals which were preserved, through the deluge, in the ark_.\n\nThere is a question raised about all those kinds of beasts which are\nnot domesticated, nor are produced like frogs from the earth, but are\npropagated by male and female parents, such as wolves and animals of\nthat kind; and it is asked how they could be found in the islands\nafter the deluge, in which all the animals not in the ark perished,\nunless the breed was restored from those which were preserved in\npairs in the ark. It might, indeed, be said that they crossed to\nthe islands by swimming, but this could only be true of those very\nnear the mainland; whereas there are some so distant, that we fancy\nno animal could swim to them. But if men caught them and took them\nacross with themselves, and thus propagated these breeds in their new\nabodes, this would not imply an incredible fondness for the chase. At\nthe same time, it cannot be denied that by the intervention of angels\nthey might be transferred by God's order or permission. If, however,\nthey were produced out of the earth as at their first creation, when\nGod said, \"Let the earth bring forth the living creature,\"[245]\nthis makes it more evident that all kinds of animals were preserved\nin the ark, not so much for the sake of renewing the stock, as of\nprefiguring the various nations which were to be saved in the church;\nthis, I say, is more evident, if the earth brought forth many animals\nin islands to which they could not cross over.\n\n\n    8. _Whether certain monstrous races of men are derived from the\n                    stock of Adam or Noah's sons._\n\nIt is also asked whether we are to believe that certain monstrous\nraces of men, spoken of in secular history,[246] have sprung from\nNoah's sons, or rather, I should say, from that one man from whom\nthey themselves were descended. For it is reported that some have\none eye in the middle of the forehead; some, feet turned backwards\nfrom the heel; some, a double sex, the right breast like a man, the\nleft like a woman, and that they alternately beget and bring forth:\nothers are said to have no mouth, and to breathe only through the\nnostrils; others are but a cubit high, and are therefore called by\nthe Greeks \"Pigmies:\"[247] they say that in some places the women\nconceive in their fifth year, and do not live beyond their eighth.\nSo, too, they tell of a race who have two feet but only one leg, and\nare of marvellous swiftness, though they do not bend the knee: they\nare called Skiopodes, because in the hot weather they lie down on\ntheir backs and shade themselves with their feet. Others are said to\nhave no head, and their eyes in their shoulders; and other human or\nquasi-human races are depicted in mosaic in the harbour esplanade of\nCarthage, on the faith of histories of rarities. What shall I say\nof the Cynocephali, whose dog-like head and barking proclaim them\nbeasts rather than men? But we are not bound to believe all we hear\nof these monstrosities. But whoever is anywhere born a man, that\nis, a rational mortal animal, no matter what unusual appearance he\npresents in colour, movement, sound, nor how peculiar he is in some\npower, part, or quality of his nature, no Christian can doubt that he\nsprings from that one protoplast. We can distinguish the common human\nnature from that which is peculiar, and therefore wonderful.\n\nThe same account which is given of monstrous births in individual\ncases can be given of monstrous races. For God, the Creator of\nall, knows where and when each thing ought to be, or to have been\ncreated, because He sees the similarities and diversities which can\ncontribute to the beauty of the whole. But he who cannot see the\nwhole is offended by the deformity of the part, because he is blind\nto that which balances it, and to which it belongs. We know that\nmen are born with more than four fingers on their hands or toes on\ntheir feet: this is a smaller matter; but far from us be the folly\nof supposing that the Creator mistook the number of a man's fingers,\nthough we cannot account for the difference. And so in cases where\nthe divergence from the rule is greater. He whose works no man justly\nfinds fault with, knows what He has done. At Hippo-Diarrhytus there\nis a man whose hands are crescent-shaped, and have only two fingers\neach, and his feet similarly formed. If there were a race like him,\nit would be added to the history of the curious and wonderful. Shall\nwe therefore deny that this man is descended from that one man who\nwas first created? As for the Androgyni, or Hermaphrodites, as\nthey are called, though they are rare, yet from time to time there\nappear persons of sex so doubtful, that it remains uncertain from\nwhich sex they take their name; though it is customary to give them\na masculine name, as the more worthy. For no one ever called them\nHermaphroditesses. Some years ago, quite within my own memory, a man\nwas born in the East, double in his upper, but single in his lower\nhalf--having two heads, two chests, four hands, but one body and two\nfeet like an ordinary man; and he lived so long that many had an\nopportunity of seeing him. But who could enumerate all the human\nbirths that have differed widely from their ascertained parents? As,\ntherefore, no one will deny that these are all descended from that\none man, so all the races which are reported to have diverged in\nbodily appearance from the usual course which nature generally or\nalmost universally preserves, if they are embraced in that definition\nof man as rational and mortal animals, unquestionably trace their\npedigree to that one first father of all. We are supposing these\nstories about various races who differ from one another and from\nus to be true; but possibly they are not: for if we were not aware\nthat apes, and monkeys, and sphinxes are not men, but beasts, those\nhistorians would possibly describe them as races of men, and flaunt\nwith impunity their false and vainglorious discoveries. But supposing\nthey are men of whom these marvels are recorded, what if God has seen\nfit to create some races in this way, that we might not suppose that\nthe monstrous births which appear among ourselves are the failures\nof that wisdom whereby He fashions the human nature, as we speak of\nthe failure of a less perfect workman? Accordingly, it ought not to\nseem absurd to us, that as in individual races there are monstrous\nbirths, so in the whole race there are monstrous races. Wherefore, to\nconclude this question cautiously and guardedly, either these things\nwhich have been told of some races have no existence at all; or if\nthey do exist, they are not human races; or if they are human, they\nare descended from Adam.\n\n\n           9. _Whether we are to believe in the Antipodes._\n\nBut as to the fable that there are Antipodes, that is to say, men on\nthe opposite side of the earth, where the sun rises when it sets to\nus, men who walk with their feet opposite ours, that is on no ground\ncredible. And, indeed, it is not affirmed that this has been learned\nby historical knowledge, but by scientific conjecture, on the ground\nthat the earth is suspended within the concavity of the sky, and that\nit has as much room on the one side of it as on the other: hence they\nsay that the part which is beneath must also be inhabited. But they do\nnot remark that, although it be supposed or scientifically demonstrated\nthat the world is of a round and spherical form, yet it does not\nfollow that the other side of the earth is bare of water; nor even,\nthough it be bare, does it immediately follow that it is peopled. For\nScripture, which proves the truth of its historical statements by the\naccomplishment of its prophecies, gives no false information; and it is\ntoo absurd to say, that some men might have taken ship and traversed\nthe whole wide ocean, and crossed from this side of the world to the\nother, and that thus even the inhabitants of that distant region are\ndescended from that one first man. Wherefore let us seek if we can find\nthe city of God that sojourns on earth among those human races who are\ncatalogued as having been divided into seventy-two nations and as many\nlanguages. For it continued down to the deluge and the ark, and is\nproved to have existed still among the sons of Noah by their blessings,\nand chiefly in the eldest son Shem; for Japheth received this blessing,\nthat he should dwell in the tents of Shem.\n\n\n     10. _Of the genealogy of Shem, in whose line the city of God\n                is preserved till the time of Abraham._\n\nIt is necessary, therefore, to preserve the series of generations\ndescending from Shem, for the sake of exhibiting the city of God\nafter the flood; as before the flood it was exhibited in the series\nof generations descending from Seth. And therefore does divine\nScripture, after exhibiting the earthly city as Babylon or \"Confusion,\"\nrevert to the patriarch Shem, and recapitulate the generations from\nhim to Abraham, specifying besides, the year in which each father\nbegat the son that belonged to this line, and how long he lived. And\nunquestionably it is this which fulfils the promise I made, that it\nshould appear why it is said of the sons of Heber, \"The name of the\none was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided.\"[248] For what\ncan we understand by the division of the earth, if not the diversity\nof languages? And, therefore, omitting the other sons of Shem, who\nare not concerned in this matter, Scripture gives the genealogy of\nthose by whom the line runs on to Abraham, as before the flood those\nare given who carried on the line to Noah from Seth. Accordingly this\nseries of generations begins thus: \"These are the generations of Shem:\nShem was an hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after\nthe flood. And Shem lived after he begat Arphaxad five hundred years,\nand begat sons and daughters.\" In like manner it registers the rest,\nnaming the year of his life in which each begat the son who belonged\nto that line which extends to Abraham. It specifies, too, how many\nyears he lived thereafter, begetting sons and daughters, that we may\nnot childishly suppose that the men named were the only men, but may\nunderstand how the population increased, and how regions and kingdoms\nso vast could be populated by the descendants of Shem; especially the\nkingdom of Assyria, from which Ninus subdued the surrounding nations,\nreigning with brilliant prosperity, and bequeathing to his descendants\na vast but thoroughly consolidated empire, which held together for many\ncenturies.\n\nBut to avoid needless prolixity, we shall mention not the number of\nyears each member of this series lived, but only the year of his life\nin which he begat his heir, that we may thus reckon the number of\nyears from the flood to Abraham, and may at the same time leave room\nto touch briefly and cursorily upon some other matters necessary to\nour argument. In the second year, then, after the flood, Shem when\nhe was a hundred years old begat Arphaxad; Arphaxad when he was 135\nyears old begat Cainan; Cainan when he was 130 years begat Salah.\nSalah himself, too, was the same age when he begat Eber. Eber lived\n134 years, and begat Peleg, in whose days the earth was divided.\nPeleg himself lived 130 years, and begat Reu; and Reu lived 132\nyears, and begat Serug; Serug 130, and begat Nahor; and Nahor 79, and\nbegat Terah; and Terah 70, and begat Abram, whose name God afterwards\nchanged into _Abraham_. There are thus from the flood to Abraham 1072\nyears, according to the Vulgate or Septuagint versions. In the Hebrew\ncopies far fewer years are given; and for this either no reason or a\nnot very credible one is given.\n\nWhen, therefore, we look for the city of God in these seventy-two\nnations, we cannot affirm that while they had but one lip, that is,\none language, the human race had departed from the worship of the\ntrue God, and that genuine godliness had survived only in those\ngenerations which descend from Shem through Arphaxad and reach to\nAbraham; but from the time when they proudly built a tower to\nheaven, a symbol of godless exaltation, the city or society of the\nwicked becomes apparent. Whether it was only disguised before, or\nnon-existent; whether both cities remained after the flood,--the\ngodly in the two sons of Noah who were blessed, and in their\nposterity, and the ungodly in the cursed son and his descendants,\nfrom whom sprang that mighty hunter against the Lord,--is not easily\ndetermined. For possibly--and certainly this is more credible--there\nwere despisers of God among the descendants of the two sons, even\nbefore Babylon was founded, and worshippers of God among the\ndescendants of Ham. Certainly neither race was ever obliterated from\nearth. For in both the Psalms in which it is said, \"They are all\ngone aside, they are altogether become filthy; there is none that\ndoeth good, no, not one,\" we read further, \"Have all the workers of\niniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and\ncall not upon the Lord.\"[249] There was then a people of God even at\nthat time. And therefore the words, \"There is none that doeth good,\nno, not one,\" were said of the sons of men, not of the sons of God.\nFor it had been previously said, \"God looked down from heaven upon\nthe sons of men, to see if any understood and sought after God;\" and\nthen follow the words which demonstrate that all the sons of men,\nthat is, all who belong to the city which lives according to man, not\naccording to God, are reprobate.\n\n\n  11. _That the original language in use among men was that which was\n      afterwards called Hebrew, from Heber, in whose family it was\n      preserved when the confusion of tongues occurred._\n\nWherefore, as the fact of all using one language did not secure the\nabsence of sin-infected men from the race,--for even before the\ndeluge there was one language, and yet all but the single family of\njust Noah were found worthy of destruction by the flood,--so when\nthe nations, by a prouder godlessness, earned the punishment of the\ndispersion and the confusion of tongues, and the city of the godless\nwas called Confusion or Babylon, there was still the house of Heber\nin which the primitive language of the race survived. And therefore,\nas I have already mentioned, when an enumeration is made of the\nsons of Shem, who each founded a nation, Heber is first mentioned,\nalthough he was of the fifth generation from Shem. And because, when\nthe other races were divided by their own peculiar languages, his\nfamily preserved that language which is not unreasonably believed to\nhave been the common language of the race, it was on this account\nthenceforth named Hebrew. For it then became necessary to distinguish\nthis language from the rest by a proper name; though, while there was\nonly one, it had no other name than the language of man, or human\nspeech, it alone being spoken by the whole human race. Some one will\nsay: If the earth was divided by languages in the days of Peleg,\nHeber's son, that language, which was formerly common to all, should\nrather have been called after Peleg. But we are to understand that\nHeber himself gave to his son this name Peleg, which means Division;\nbecause he was born when the earth was divided, that is, at the very\ntime of the division, and that this is the meaning of the words, \"In\nhis days the earth was divided.\"[250] For unless Heber had been still\nalive when the languages were multiplied, the language which was\npreserved in his house would not have been called after him. We are\ninduced to believe that this was the primitive and common language,\nbecause the multiplication and change of languages was introduced\nas a punishment, and it is fit to ascribe to the people of God an\nimmunity from this punishment. Nor is it without significance that\nthis is the language which Abraham retained, and that he could not\ntransmit it to all his descendants, but only to those of Jacob's\nline, who distinctively and eminently constituted God's people, and\nreceived His covenants, and were Christ's progenitors according to\nthe flesh. In the same way, Heber himself did not transmit that\nlanguage to all his posterity, but only to the line from which\nAbraham sprang. And thus, although it is not expressly stated,\nthat when the wicked were building Babylon there was a godly seed\nremaining, this indistinctness is intended to stimulate research\nrather than to elude it. For when we see that originally there was\none common language, and that Heber is mentioned before all Shem's\nsons, though he belonged to the fifth generation from him, and that\nthe language which the patriarchs and prophets used, not only in\ntheir conversation, but in the authoritative language of Scripture,\nis called Hebrew, when we are asked where that primitive and common\nlanguage was preserved after the confusion of tongues, certainly, as\nthere can be no doubt that those among whom it was preserved were\nexempt from the punishment it embodied, what other suggestion can we\nmake, than that it survived in the family of him whose name it took,\nand that this is no small proof of the righteousness of this family,\nthat the punishment with which the other families were visited did\nnot fall upon it?\n\nBut yet another question is mooted: How did Heber and his son Peleg\neach found a nation, if they had but one language? For no doubt the\nHebrew nation propagated from Heber through Abraham, and becoming\nthrough him a great people, is one nation. How, then, are all the sons\nof the three branches of Noah's family enumerated as founding a nation\neach, if Heber and Peleg did not so? It is very probable that the\ngiant Nimrod founded also his nation, and that Scripture has named him\nseparately on account of the extraordinary dimensions of his empire\nand of his body, so that the number of seventy-two nations remains.\nBut Peleg was mentioned, not because he founded a nation (for his\nrace and language are Hebrew), but on account of the critical time at\nwhich he was born, all the earth being then divided. Nor ought we to\nbe surprised that the giant Nimrod lived to the time in which Babylon\nwas founded and the confusion of tongues occurred, and the consequent\ndivision of the earth. For though Heber was in the sixth generation\nfrom Noah, and Nimrod in the fourth, it does not follow that they could\nnot be alive at the same time. For when the generations are few, they\nlive longer and are born later; but when they are many, they live a\nshorter time, and come into the world earlier. We are to understand\nthat, when the earth was divided, the descendants of Noah who are\nregistered as founders of nations were not only already born, but\nwere of an age to have immense families, worthy to be called tribes\nor nations. And therefore we must by no means suppose that they were\nborn in the order in which they were set down; otherwise, how could the\ntwelve sons of Joktan, another son of Heber's, and brother of Peleg,\nhave already founded nations, if Joktan was born, as he is registered,\nafter his brother Peleg, since the earth was divided at Peleg's birth?\nWe are therefore to understand that, though Peleg is named first, he\nwas born long after Joktan, whose twelve sons had already families\nso large as to admit of their being divided by different languages.\nThere is nothing extraordinary in the last born being first named: of\nthe sons of Noah, the descendants of Japheth are first named; then\nthe sons of Ham, who was the second son; and last the sons of Shem,\nwho was the first and oldest. Of these nations the names have partly\nsurvived, so that at this day we can see from whom they have sprung, as\nthe Assyrians from Assur, the Hebrews from Heber, but partly have been\naltered in the lapse of time, so that the most learned men, by profound\nresearch in ancient records, have scarcely been able to discover the\norigin, I do not say of all, but of some of these nations. There is,\nfor example, nothing in the name Egyptians to show that they are\ndescended from Misraim, Ham's son, nor in the name Ethiopians to show\na connection with Cush, though such is said to be the origin of these\nnations. And if we take a general survey of the names, we shall find\nthat more have been changed than have remained the same.\n\n\n     12. _Of the era in Abraham's life from which a new period in\n                     the holy succession begins._\n\nLet us now survey the progress of the city of God from the era of the\npatriarch Abraham, from whose time it begins to be more conspicuous,\nand the divine promises which are now fulfilled in Christ are more\nfully revealed. We learn, then, from the intimations of holy Scripture,\nthat Abraham was born in the country of the Chaldeans, a land belonging\nto the Assyrian empire. Now, even at that time impious superstitions\nwere rife with the Chaldeans, as with other nations. The family of\nTerah, to which Abraham belonged, was the only one in which the worship\nof the true God survived, and the only one, we may suppose, in which\nthe Hebrew language was preserved; although Joshua the son of Nun tells\nus that even this family served other gods in Mesopotamia.[251] The\nother descendants of Heber gradually became absorbed in other races and\nother languages. And thus, as the single family of Noah was preserved\nthrough the deluge of water to renew the human race, so, in the deluge\nof superstition that flooded the whole world, there remained but the\none family of Terah in which the seed of God's city was preserved. And\nas, when Scripture has enumerated the generations prior to Noah, with\ntheir ages, and explained the cause of the flood before God began to\nspeak to Noah about the building of the ark, it is said, \"These are the\ngenerations of Noah;\" so also now, after enumerating the generations\nfrom Shem, Noah's son, down to Abraham, it then signalizes an era by\nsaying, \"These are the generations of Terah: Terah begat Abram, Nahor,\nand Haran; and Haran begat Lot. And Haran died before his father Terah\nin the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees. And Abram and Nahor\ntook them wives: the name of Abram's wife was Sarai; and the name of\nNahor's wife Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah, and\nthe father of Iscah.\"[252] This Iscah is supposed to be the same as\nSarah, Abraham's wife.\n\n\n  13. _Why, in the account of Terah's emigration, on his forsaking\n      the Chaldeans and passing over into Mesopotamia, no mention is\n      made of his son Nahor._\n\nNext it is related how Terah with his family left the region of the\nChaldeans and came into Mesopotamia, and dwelt in Haran. But nothing\nis said about one of his sons called Nahor, as if he had not taken\nhim along with him. For the narrative runs thus: \"And Terah took\nAbram his son, and Lot the son of Haran, his son's son, and Sarah\nhis daughter-in-law, his son Abram's wife, and led them forth out\nof the region of the Chaldeans to go into the land of Canaan; and\nhe came into Haran, and dwelt there.\"[253] Nahor and Milcah his\nwife are nowhere named here. But afterwards, when Abraham sent his\nservant to take a wife for his son Isaac, we find it thus written:\n\"And the servant took ten camels of the camels of his lord, and\nof all the goods of his lord, with him; and arose, and went into\nMesopotamia, into the city of Nahor.\"[254] This and other testimonies\nof this sacred history show that Nahor, Abraham's brother, had\nalso left the region of the Chaldeans, and fixed his abode in\nMesopotamia, where Abraham dwelt with his father. Why, then, did the\nScripture not mention him, when Terah with his family went forth\nout of the Chaldean nation and dwelt in Haran, since it mentions\nthat he took with him not only Abraham his son, but also Sarah his\ndaughter-in-law, and Lot his grandson? The only reason we can think\nof is, that perhaps he had lapsed from the piety of his father and\nbrother, and adhered to the superstition of the Chaldeans, and had\nafterwards emigrated thence, either through penitence, or because he\nwas persecuted as a suspected person. For in the book called Judith,\nwhen Holofernes, the enemy of the Israelites, inquired what kind of\nnation that might be, and whether war should be made against them,\nAchior, the leader of the Ammonites, answered him thus: \"Let our lord\nnow hear a word from the mouth of thy servant, and I will declare\nunto thee the truth concerning the people which dwelleth near thee\nin this hill country, and there shall no lie come out of the mouth\nof thy servant. For this people is descended from the Chaldeans, and\nthey dwelt heretofore in Mesopotamia, because they would not follow\nthe gods of their fathers, which were glorious in the land of the\nChaldeans, but went out of the way of their ancestors, and adored the\nGod of heaven, whom they knew; and they cast them out from the face\nof their gods, and they fled into Mesopotamia, and dwelt there many\ndays. And their God said to them, that they should depart from their\nhabitation, and go into the land of Canaan; and they dwelt,\"[255]\netc., as Achior the Ammonite narrates. Whence it is manifest that the\nhouse of Terah had suffered persecution from the Chaldeans for the\ntrue piety with which they worshipped the one and true God.\n\n\n   14. _Of the years of Terah, who completed his lifetime in Haran._\n\nOn Terah's death in Mesopotamia, where he is said to have lived 205\nyears, the promises of God made to Abraham now begin to be pointed\nout; for thus it is written: \"And the days of Terah in Haran were\ntwo hundred and five years, and he died in Haran.\"[256] This is not\nto be taken as if he had spent all his days there, but that he there\ncompleted the days of his life, which were two hundred and five\nyears: otherwise it would not be known how many years Terah lived,\nsince it is not said in what year of his life he came into Haran; and\nit is absurd to suppose that, in this series of generations, where it\nis carefully recorded how many years each one lived, his age was the\nonly one not put on record. For although some whom the same Scripture\nmentions have not their age recorded, they are not in this series, in\nwhich the reckoning of time is continuously indicated by the death\nof the parents and the succession of the children. For this series,\nwhich is given in order from Adam to Noah, and from him down to\nAbraham, contains no one without the number of the years of his life.\n\n\n     15. _Of the time of the migration of Abraham, when, according\n          to the commandment of God, he went out from Haran._\n\nWhen, after the record of the death of Terah, the father of Abraham,\nwe next read, \"And the Lord said to Abram, Get thee out of thy\ncountry, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house,\"[257]\netc., it is not to be supposed, because this follows in the order of\nthe narrative, that it also followed in the chronological order of\nevents. For if it were so, there would be an insoluble difficulty.\nFor after these words of God which were spoken to Abraham, the\nScripture says: \"And Abram departed, as the Lord had spoken unto him;\nand Lot went with him. Now Abraham was seventy-five years old when he\ndeparted out of Haran.\"[258] How can this be true if he departed from\nHaran after his father's death? For when Terah was seventy years old,\nas is intimated above, he begat Abraham; and if to this number we add\nthe seventy-five years which Abraham reckoned when he went out of\nHaran, we get 145 years. Therefore that was the number of the years\nof Terah, when Abraham departed out of that city of Mesopotamia;\nfor he had reached the seventy-fifth year of his life, and thus\nhis father, who begat him in the seventieth year of his life, had\nreached, as was said, his 145th. Therefore he did not depart thence\nafter his father's death, that is, after the 205 years his father\nlived; but the year of his departure from that place, seeing it was\nhis seventy-fifth, is inferred beyond a doubt to have been the 145th\nof his father, who begat him in his seventieth year. And thus it is\nto be understood that the Scripture, according to its custom, has\ngone back to the time which had already been passed by the narrative;\njust as above, when it had mentioned the grandsons of Noah, it said\nthat they were in their nations and tongues; and yet afterwards, as\nif this also had followed in order of time, it says, \"And the whole\nearth was of one lip, and one speech for all.\"[259] How, then, could\nthey be said to be in their own nations and according to their own\ntongues, if there was one for all; except because the narrative goes\nback to gather up what it had passed over? Here, too, in the same\nway, after saying, \"And the days of Terah in Haran were 205 years,\nand Terah died in Haran,\" the Scripture, going back to what had been\npassed over in order to complete what had been begun about Terah,\nsays, \"And the Lord said to Abram, Get thee out of thy country,\"[260]\netc. After which words of God it is added, \"And Abram departed,\nas the Lord spake unto him; and Lot went with him. But Abram was\nseventy-five years old when he departed out of Haran.\" Therefore it\nwas done when his father was in the 145th year of his age; for it\nwas then the seventy-fifth of his own. But this question is also\nsolved in another way, that the seventy-five years of Abraham when\nhe departed out of Haran are reckoned from the year in which he was\ndelivered from the fire of the Chaldeans, not from that of his birth,\nas if he was rather to be held as having been born then.\n\nNow the blessed Stephen, in narrating these things in the Acts of the\nApostles, says: \"The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham,\nwhen he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran, and said unto\nhim, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy\nfather's house, and come into the land which I will show thee.\"[261]\nAccording to these words of Stephen, God spoke to Abraham, not after\nthe death of his father, who certainly died in Haran, where his son\nalso dwelt with him, but before he dwelt in that city, although he\nwas already in Mesopotamia. Therefore he had already departed from\nthe Chaldeans. So that when Stephen adds, \"Then Abraham went out of\nthe land of the Chaldeans, and dwelt in Charran,\"[262] this does not\npoint out what took place after God spoke to him (for it was not after\nthese words of God that he went out of the land of the Chaldeans,\nsince he says that God spoke to him in Mesopotamia), but the word\n\"_then_\" which he uses refers to that whole period from his going out\nof the land of the Chaldeans and dwelling in Haran. Likewise in what\nfollows, \"And thenceforth, when his father was dead, he settled him in\nthis land, wherein ye now dwell, and your fathers,\" he does not say,\nafter his father was dead he went out from Haran; but thenceforth he\nsettled him here, after his father was dead. It is to be understood,\ntherefore, that God had spoken to Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia,\nbefore he dwelt in Haran; but that he came to Haran with his father,\nkeeping in mind the precept of God, and that he went out thence in his\nown seventy-fifth year, which was his father's 145th. But he says that\nhis settlement in the land of Canaan, not his going forth from Haran,\ntook place after his father's death; because his father was already\ndead when he purchased the land, and personally entered on possession\nof it. But when, on his having already settled in Mesopotamia, that\nis, already gone out of the land of the Chaldeans, God says, \"Get\nthee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's\nhouse,\"[263] this means, not that he should cast out his body from\nthence, for he had already done that, but that he should tear away\nhis soul. For he had not gone out from thence in mind, if he was held\nby the hope and desire of returning,--a hope and desire which was to\nbe cut off by God's command and help, and by his own obedience. It\nwould indeed be no incredible supposition that afterwards, when Nahor\nfollowed his father, Abraham then fulfilled the precept of the Lord,\nthat he should depart out of Haran with Sarah his wife and Lot his\nbrother's son.\n\n\n    16. _Of the order and nature of the promises of God which were\n                           made to Abraham._\n\nGod's promises made to Abraham are now to be considered; for in\nthese the oracles of our God,[264] that is, of the true God, began\nto appear more openly concerning the godly people, whom prophetic\nauthority foretold. The first of these reads thus: \"And the Lord\nsaid unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred,\nand from thy father's house, and go into a land that I will show\nthee: and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee,\nand magnify thy name; and thou shalt be blessed: and I will bless\nthem that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee: and in thee\nshall all tribes of the earth be blessed.\"[265] Now it is to be\nobserved that two things are promised to Abraham, the one, that his\nseed should possess the land of Canaan, which is intimated when it\nis said, \"Go into a land that I will show thee, and I will make of\nthee a great nation;\" but the other far more excellent, not about\nthe carnal but the spiritual seed, through which he is the father,\nnot of the one Israelite nation, but of all nations who follow the\nfootprints of his faith, which was first promised in these words,\n\"And in thee shall all tribes of the earth be blessed.\" Eusebius\nthought this promise was made in Abraham's seventy-fifth year, as if\nsoon after it was made Abraham had departed out of Haran; because\nthe Scripture cannot be contradicted, in which we read, \"Abram was\nseventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.\" But if\nthis promise was made in that year, then of course Abraham was\nstaying in Haran with his father; for he could not depart thence\nunless he had first dwelt there. Does this, then, contradict what\nStephen says, \"The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham, when\nhe was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran?\"[266] But it is\nto be understood that the whole took place in the same year,--both\nthe promise of God before Abraham dwelt in Haran, and his dwelling\nin Haran, and his departure thence,--not only because Eusebius in\nthe Chronicles reckons from the year of this promise, and shows that\nafter 430 years the exodus from Egypt took place, when the law was\ngiven, but because the Apostle Paul also mentions it.\n\n\n  17. _Of the three most famous kingdoms of the nations, of which\n      one, that is, the Assyrian, was already very eminent when\n      Abraham was born._\n\nDuring the same period there were three famous kingdoms of the\nnations, in which the city of the earth-born, that is, the society of\nmen living according to man under the domination of the fallen angels,\nchiefly flourished, namely, the three kingdoms of Sicyon, Egypt, and\nAssyria. Of these, Assyria was much the most powerful and sublime;\nfor that king Ninus, son of Belus, had subdued the people of all Asia\nexcept India. By Asia I now mean not that part which is one province of\nthis greater Asia, but what is called Universal Asia, which some set\ndown as the half, but most as the third part of the whole world,--the\nthree being Asia, Europe, and Africa, thereby making an unequal\ndivision. For the part called Asia stretches from the south through the\neast even to the north; Europe from the north even to the west; and\nAfrica from the west even to the south. Thus we see that two, Europe\nand Africa, contain one half of the world, and Asia alone the other\nhalf. And these two parts are made by the circumstance, that there\nenters between them from the ocean all the Mediterranean water, which\nmakes this great sea of ours. So that, if you divide the world into\ntwo parts, the east and the west, Asia will be in the one, and Europe\nand Africa in the other. So that of the three kingdoms then famous,\none, namely Sicyon, was not under the Assyrians, because it was in\nEurope; but as for Egypt, how could it fail to be subject to the empire\nwhich ruled all Asia with the single exception of India? In Assyria,\ntherefore, the dominion of the impious city had the pre-eminence. Its\nhead was Babylon,--an earth-born city, most fitly named, for it means\nconfusion. There Ninus reigned after the death of his father Belus, who\nfirst had reigned there sixty-five years. His son Ninus, who, on his\nfather's death, succeeded to the kingdom, reigned fifty-two years, and\nhad been king forty-three years when Abraham was born, which was about\nthe 1200th year before Rome was founded, as it were another Babylon in\nthe west.\n\n\n      18. _Of the repeated address of God to Abraham, in which He\n         promised the land of Canaan to him and to his seed._\n\nAbraham, then, having departed out of Haran in the seventy-fifth year\nof his own age, and in the hundred and forty-fifth of his father's,\nwent with Lot, his brother's son, and Sarah his wife, into the land of\nCanaan, and came even to Sichem, where again he received the divine\noracle, of which it is thus written: \"And the Lord appeared unto Abram,\nand said unto him, Unto thy seed will I give this land.\"[267] Nothing\nis promised here about that seed in which he is made the father of\nall nations, but only about that by which he is the father of the one\nIsraelite nation; for by this seed that land was possessed.\n\n\n     19. _Of the divine preservation of Sarah's chastity in Egypt,\n       when Abraham had called her not his wife but his sister._\n\nHaving built an altar there, and called upon God, Abraham proceeded\nthence and dwelt in the desert, and was compelled by pressure of\nfamine to go on into Egypt. There he called his wife his sister, and\ntold no lie. For she was this also, because she was near of blood;\njust as Lot, on account of the same nearness, being his brother's\nson, is called his brother. Now he did not deny that she was his\nwife, but held his peace about it, committing to God the defence of\nhis wife's chastity, and providing as a man against human wiles;\nbecause if he had not provided against the danger as much as he\ncould, he would have been tempting God rather than trusting in Him.\nWe have said enough about this matter against the calumnies of\nFaustus the Manich\u00e6an. At last what Abraham had expected the Lord to\ndo took place. For Pharaoh, king of Egypt, who had taken her to him\nas his wife, restored her to her husband on being severely plagued.\nAnd far be it from us to believe that she was defiled by lying with\nanother; because it is much more credible that, by these great\nafflictions, Pharaoh was not permitted to do this.\n\n\n     20. _Of the parting of Lot and Abraham, which they agreed to\n                      without breach of charity._\n\nOn Abraham's return out of Egypt to the place he had left, Lot, his\nbrother's son, departed from him into the land of Sodom, without\nbreach of charity. For they had grown rich, and began to have many\nherdmen of cattle, and when these strove together, they avoided in\nthis way the pugnacious discord of their families. Indeed, as human\naffairs go, this cause might even have given rise to some strife\nbetween themselves. Consequently these are the words of Abraham to\nLot, when taking precaution against this evil, \"Let there be no\nstrife between me and thee, and between my herdmen and thy herdmen;\nfor we be brethren. Behold, is not the whole land before thee?\nSeparate thyself from me: if thou wilt go to the left hand, I will\ngo to the right; or if thou wilt go to the right hand, I will go to\nthe left.\"[268] From this, perhaps, has arisen a pacific custom among\nmen, that when there is any partition of earthly things, the greater\nshould make the division, the less the choice.\n\n\n       21. _Of the third promise of God, by which He assured the\n        land of Canaan to Abraham and his seed in perpetuity._\n\nNow, when Abraham and Lot had separated, and dwelt apart, owing to\nthe necessity of supporting their families, and not to vile discord,\nand Abraham was in the land of Canaan, but Lot in Sodom, the Lord\nsaid to Abraham in a third oracle, \"Lift up thine eyes, and look\nfrom the place where thou now art, to the north, and to Africa, and\nto the east, and to the sea; for all the land which thou seest, to\nthee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever. And I will make thy\nseed as the dust of the earth: if any one can number the dust of\nthe earth, thy seed shall also be numbered. Arise, and walk through\nthe land, in the length of it, and in the breadth of it; for unto\nthee will I give it.\"[269] It does not clearly appear whether in\nthis promise that also is contained by which he is made the father\nof all nations. For the clause, \"And I will make thy seed as the\ndust of the earth,\" may seem to refer to this, being spoken by that\nfigure the Greeks call hyperbole, which indeed is figurative, not\nliteral. But no person of understanding can doubt in what manner\nthe Scripture uses this and other figures. For that figure (that\nis, way of speaking) is used when what is said is far larger than\nwhat is meant by it; for who does not see how incomparably larger\nthe number of the dust must be than that of all men can be from Adam\nhimself down to the end of the world? How much greater, then, must\nit be than the seed of Abraham,--not only that pertaining to the\nnation of Israel, but also that which is and shall be according to\nthe imitation of faith in all nations of the whole wide world! For\nthat seed is indeed very small in comparison with the multitude of\nthe wicked, although even those few of themselves make an innumerable\nmultitude, which by a hyperbole is compared to the dust of the earth.\nTruly that multitude which was promised to Abraham is not innumerable\nto God, although to man; but to God not even the dust of the earth\nis so. Further, the promise here made may be understood not only of\nthe nation of Israel, but of the whole seed of Abraham, which may be\nfitly compared to the dust for multitude, because regarding it also\nthere is the promise[270] of many children, not according to the\nflesh, but according to the spirit. But we have therefore said that\nthis does not clearly appear, because the multitude even of that one\nnation, which was born according to the flesh of Abraham through his\ngrandson Jacob, has increased so much as to fill almost all parts\nof the world. Consequently, even it might by hyperbole be compared\nto the dust for multitude, because even it alone is innumerable by\nman. Certainly no one questions that only that land is meant which is\ncalled Canaan. But that saying, \"To thee will I give it, and to thy\nseed for ever,\" may move some, if by \"for ever\" they understand \"to\neternity.\" But if in this passage they take \"for ever\" thus, as we\nfirmly hold it means, that the beginning of the world to come is to\nbe ordered from the end of the present, there is still no difficulty,\nbecause, although the Israelites are expelled from Jerusalem, they\nstill remain in other cities in the land of Canaan, and shall remain\neven to the end; and when that whole land is inhabited by Christians,\nthey also are the very seed of Abraham.\n\n\n  22. _Of Abraham's overcoming the enemies of Sodom, when he\n      delivered Lot from captivity and was blessed by Melchizedek the\n      priest._\n\nHaving received this oracle of promise, Abraham migrated, and remained\nin another place of the same land, that is, beside the oak of Mamre,\nwhich was Hebron. Then on the invasion of Sodom, when five kings\ncarried on war against four, and Lot was taken captive with the\nconquered Sodomites, Abraham delivered him from the enemy, leading with\nhim to battle three hundred and eighteen of his home-born servants,\nand won the victory for the kings of Sodom, but would take nothing of\nthe spoils when offered by the king for whom he had won them. He was\nthen openly blessed by Melchizedek, who was priest of God Most High,\nabout whom many and great things are written in the epistle which\nis inscribed to the Hebrews, which most say is by the Apostle Paul,\nthough some deny this. For then first appeared the sacrifice which is\nnow offered to God by Christians in the whole wide world, and that is\nfulfilled which long after the event was said by the prophet to Christ,\nwho was yet to come in the flesh, \"Thou art a priest for ever after the\norder of Melchizedek,\"[271]--that is to say, not after the order of\nAaron, for that order was to be taken away when the things shone forth\nwhich were intimated beforehand by these shadows.\n\n\n  23. _Of the word of the Lord to Abraham, by which it was promised\n      to him that his posterity should be multiplied according to\n      the multitude of the stars; on believing which he was declared\n      justified while yet in uncircumcision._\n\nThe word of the Lord came to Abraham in a vision also. For when\nGod promised him protection and exceeding great reward, he, being\nsolicitous about posterity, said that a certain Eliezer of Damascus,\nborn in his house, would be his heir. Immediately he was promised an\nheir, not that house-born servant, but one who was to come forth of\nAbraham himself; and again a seed innumerable, not as the dust of\nthe earth, but as the stars of heaven,--which rather seems to me a\npromise of a posterity exalted in celestial felicity. For, so far as\nmultitude is concerned, what are the stars of heaven to the dust of\nthe earth, unless one should say the comparison is like inasmuch as\nthe stars also cannot be numbered? For it is not to be believed that\nall of them can be seen. For the more keenly one observes them, the\nmore does he see. So that it is to be supposed some remain concealed\nfrom the keenest observers, to say nothing of those stars which are\nsaid to rise and set in another part of the world most remote from\nus. Finally, the authority of this book condemns those like Aratus\nor Eudoxus, or any others who boast that they have found out and\nwritten down the complete number of the stars. Here, indeed, is set\ndown that sentence which the apostle quotes in order to commend\nthe grace of God, \"Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him\nfor righteousness;\"[272] lest the circumcision should glory, and\nbe unwilling to receive the uncircumcised nations to the faith of\nChrist. For at the time when he believed, and his faith was counted\nto him for righteousness, Abraham had not yet been circumcised.\n\n\n  24. _Of the meaning of the sacrifice Abraham was commanded to offer\n      when he supplicated to be taught about those things he had\n      believed._\n\nIn the same vision, God in speaking to him also says, \"I am God that\nbrought thee out of the region of the Chaldees, to give thee this land\nto inherit it.\"[273] And when Abram asked whereby he might know that he\nshould inherit it, God said to him, \"Take me an heifer of three years\nold, and a she-goat of three years old, and a ram of three years old,\nand a turtle-dove, and a pigeon. And he took unto him all these, and\ndivided them in the midst, and laid each piece one against another; but\nthe birds divided he not. And the fowls came down,\" as it is written,\n\"on the carcases, and Abram sat down by them. But about the going down\nof the sun, great fear fell upon Abram; and, lo, an horror of great\ndarkness fell upon him. And He said unto Abram, Know of a surety that\nthy seed shall be a stranger in a land not theirs, and they shall\nreduce them to servitude; and shall afflict them four hundred years:\nbut the nation whom they shall serve will I judge; and afterward shall\nthey come out hither with great substance. And thou shalt go to thy\nfathers in peace; kept in a good old age. But in the fourth generation\nthey shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is\nnot yet full. And when the sun was setting, there was a flame, and a\nsmoking furnace, and lamps of fire, that passed through between those\npieces. In that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto\nthy seed will I give this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great\nriver Euphrates: the Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites,\nand the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, and the\nAmorites, and the Canaanites, and the Hivites, and the Girgashites, and\nthe Jebusites.\"[274]\n\nAll these things were said and done in a vision from God; but it\nwould take long, and would exceed the scope of this work, to treat of\nthem exactly in detail. It is enough that we should know that, after\nit was said Abram believed in God, and it was counted to him for\nrighteousness, he did not fail in faith in saying, \"Lord God, whereby\nshall I know that I shall inherit it?\" for the inheritance of that land\nwas promised to him. Now he does not say, How shall I know, as if he\ndid not yet believe; but he says, \"Whereby shall I know,\" meaning that\nsome sign might be given by which he might know the manner of those\nthings which he had believed, just as it is not for lack of faith the\nVirgin Mary says, \"How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?\"[275]\nfor she inquired as to the way in which that should take place which\nshe was certain would come to pass. And when she asked this, she was\ntold, \"The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the\nHighest shall overshadow thee.\"[276] Here also, in fine, a symbol was\ngiven, consisting of three animals, a heifer, a she-goat, and a ram,\nand two birds, a turtle-dove and pigeon, that he might know that the\nthings which he had not doubted should come to pass were to happen in\naccordance with this symbol. Whether, therefore, the heifer was a sign\nthat the people should be put under the law, the she-goat that the same\npeople was to become sinful, the ram that they should reign (and these\nanimals are said to be of three years old for this reason, that there\nare three remarkable divisions of time, from Adam to Noah, and from\nhim to Abraham, and from him to David, who, on the rejection of Saul,\nwas first established by the will of the Lord in the kingdom of the\nIsraelite nation: in this third division, which extends from Abraham\nto David, that people grew up as if passing through the third age of\nlife), or whether they had some other more suitable meaning, still I\nhave no doubt whatever that spiritual things were prefigured by them as\nwell as by the turtle-dove and pigeon. And it is said, \"But the birds\ndivided he not,\" because carnal men are divided among themselves, but\nthe spiritual not at all, whether they seclude themselves from the busy\nconversation of men, like the turtle-dove, or dwell among them, like\nthe pigeon; for both birds are simple and harmless, signifying that\neven in the Israelite people, to which that land was to be given, there\nwould be individuals who were children of the promise, and heirs of\nthe kingdom that is[277] to remain in eternal felicity. But the fowls\ncoming down on the divided carcases represent nothing good, but the\nspirits of this air, seeking some food for themselves in the division\nof carnal men. But that Abraham sat down with them, signifies that even\namid these divisions of the carnal, true believers shall persevere to\nthe end. And that about the going down of the sun great fear fell upon\nAbraham and a horror of great darkness, signifies that about the end of\nthis world believers shall be in great perturbation and tribulation,\nof which the Lord said in the gospel, \"For then shall be great\ntribulation, such as was not from the beginning.\"[278]\n\nBut what is said to Abraham, \"Know of a surety that thy seed shall\nbe a stranger in a land not theirs, and they shall reduce them to\nservitude, and shall afflict them 400 years,\" is most clearly a\nprophecy about the people of Israel which was to be in servitude in\nEgypt. Not that this people was to be in that servitude under the\noppressive Egyptians for 400 years, but it is foretold that this\nshould take place in the course of those 400 years. For as it is\nwritten of Terah the father of Abraham, \"And the days of Terah in\nHaran were 205 years,\"[279] not because they were all spent there,\nbut because they were completed there, so it is said here also,\n\"And they shall reduce them to servitude, and shall afflict them\n400 years,\" for this reason, because that number was completed, not\nbecause it was all spent in that affliction. The years are said to be\n400 in round numbers, although they were a little more,--whether you\nreckon from this time, when these things were promised to Abraham,\nor from the birth of Isaac, as the seed of Abraham, of which these\nthings are predicted. For, as we have already said above, from the\nseventy-fifth year of Abraham, when the first promise was made to\nhim, down to the exodus of Israel from Egypt, there are reckoned\n430 years, which the apostle thus mentions: \"And this I say, that\nthe covenant confirmed by God, the law, which was made 430 years\nafter, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none\neffect.\"[280] So then these 430 years might be called 400, because\nthey are not much more, especially since part even of that number\nhad already gone by when these things were shown and said to Abraham\nin vision, or when Isaac was born in his father's 100th year,\ntwenty-five years after the first promise, when of these 430 years\nthere now remained 405, which God was pleased to call 400. No one\nwill doubt that the other things which follow in the prophetic words\nof God pertain to the people of Israel.\n\nWhen it is added, \"And when the sun was now setting there was a\nflame, and lo, a smoking furnace, and lamps of fire, which passed\nthrough between those pieces,\" this signifies that at the end of the\nworld the carnal shall be judged by fire. For just as the affliction\nof the city of God, such as never was before, which is expected to\ntake place under Antichrist, was signified by Abraham's horror of\ngreat darkness about the going down of the sun, that is, when the\nend of the world draws nigh,--so at the going down of the sun, that\nis, at the very end of the world, there is signified by that fire\nthe day of judgment, which separates the carnal who are to be saved\nby fire from those who are to be condemned in the fire. And then\nthe covenant made with Abraham particularly sets forth the land of\nCanaan, and names eleven tribes in it from the river of Egypt even\nto the great river Euphrates. It is not then from the great river of\nEgypt, that is, the Nile, but from a small one which separates Egypt\nfrom Palestine, where the city of Rhinocorura is.\n\n\n      25. _Of Sarah's handmaid, Hagar, whom she herself wished to\n                       be Abraham's concubine._\n\nAnd here follow the times of Abraham's sons, the one by Hagar the bond\nmaid, the other by Sarah the free woman, about whom we have already\nspoken in the previous book. As regards this transaction, Abraham is\nin no way to be branded as guilty concerning this concubine, for he\nused her for the begetting of progeny, not for the gratification of\nlust; and not to insult, but rather to obey his wife, who supposed\nit would be a solace of her barrenness if she could make use of the\nfruitful womb of her handmaid to supply the defect of her own nature,\nand by that law of which the apostle says, \"Likewise also the husband\nhath not power of his own body, but the wife,\"[281] could, as a wife,\nmake use of him for childbearing by another, when she could not do so\nin her own person. Here there is no wanton lust, no filthy lewdness.\nThe handmaid is delivered to the husband by the wife for the sake of\nprogeny, and is received by the husband for the sake of progeny, each\nseeking, not guilty excess, but natural fruit. And when the pregnant\nbond woman despised her barren mistress, and Sarah, with womanly\njealousy, rather laid the blame of this on her husband, even then\nAbraham showed that he was not a slavish lover, but a free begetter of\nchildren, and that in using Hagar he had guarded the chastity of Sarah\nhis wife, and had gratified her will and not his own,--had received\nher without seeking, had gone in to her without being attached, had\nimpregnated without loving her,--for he says, \"Behold thy maid is in\nthy hands: do to her as it pleaseth thee;\"[282] a man able to use women\nas a man should,--his wife temperately, his handmaid compliantly,\nneither intemperately!\n\n\n  26. _Of God's attestation to Abraham, by which He assures him, when\n      now old, of a son by the barren Sarah, and appoints him the\n      father of the nations, and seals his faith in the promise by\n      the sacrament of circumcision._\n\nAfter these things Ishmael was born of Hagar; and Abraham might think\nthat in him was fulfilled what God had promised him, saying, when he\nwished to adopt his home-born servant, \"This shall not be thine heir;\nbut he that shall come forth of thee, he shall be thine heir.\"[283]\nTherefore, lest he should think that what was promised was fulfilled\nin the handmaid's son, \"when Abram was ninety years old and nine, God\nappeared to him, and said unto him, I am God; be well-pleasing in my\nsight, and be without complaint, and I will make my covenant between\nme and thee, and will fill thee exceedingly.\"[284]\n\nHere there are more distinct promises about the calling of the nations\nin Isaac, that is, in the son of the promise, by which grace is\nsignified, and not nature; for the son is promised from an old man\nand a barren old woman. For although God effects even the natural\ncourse of procreation, yet where the agency of God is manifest, through\nthe decay or failure of nature, grace is more plainly discerned.\nAnd because this was to be brought about, not by generation, but by\nregeneration, circumcision was enjoined now, when a son was promised\nof Sarah. And by ordering all, not only sons, but also home-born and\npurchased servants to be circumcised, he testifies that this grace\npertains to all. For what else does circumcision signify than a nature\nrenewed on the putting off of the old? And what else does the eighth\nday mean than Christ, who rose again when the week was completed, that\nis, after the Sabbath? The very names of the parents are changed: all\nthings proclaim newness, and the new covenant is shadowed forth in the\nold. For what does the term old covenant imply but the concealing of\nthe new? And what does the term new covenant imply but the revealing of\nthe old? The laughter of Abraham is the exultation of one who rejoices,\nnot the scornful laughter of one who mistrusts. And those words of his\nin his heart, \"Shall a son be born to me that am an hundred years old?\nand shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear?\" are not the words of\ndoubt, but of wonder. And when it is said, \"And I will give to thee,\nand to thy seed after thee, the land in which thou art a stranger, all\nthe land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession,\" if it troubles any\none whether this is to be held as fulfilled, or whether its fulfilment\nmay still be looked for, since no kind of earthly possession can\nbe everlasting for any nation whatever, let him know that the word\ntranslated everlasting by our writers is what the Greeks term \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd,\nwhich is derived from \u03b1\u1f30\u1f7c\u03bd, the Greek for _s\u00e6culum_, an age. But the\nLatins have not ventured to translate this by _secular_, lest they\nshould change the meaning into something widely different. For many\nthings are called secular which so happen in this world as to pass away\neven in a short time; but what is termed \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd either has no end, or\nlasts to the very end of this world.\n\n\n  27. _Of the male, who was to lose his soul if he was not\n      circumcised on the eighth day, because he had broken God's\n      covenant._\n\nWhen it is said, \"The male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his\nforeskin, that soul shall be cut off from his people, because he\nhath broken my covenant,\"[285] some may be troubled how that ought to\nbe understood, since it can be no fault of the infant whose life it\nis said must perish, nor has the covenant of God been broken by him,\nbut by his parents, who have not taken care to circumcise him. But\neven the infants, not personally in their own life, but according to\nthe common origin of the human race, have all broken God's covenant\nin that one in whom all have sinned.[286] Now there are many things\ncalled God's covenants besides those two great ones, the old and\nthe new, which any one who pleases may read and know. For the first\ncovenant, which was made with the first man, is just this: \"In the\nday ye eat thereof, ye shall surely die.\"[287] Whence it is written\nin the book called Ecclesiasticus, \"All flesh waxeth old as doth a\ngarment. For the covenant from the beginning is, Thou shalt die the\ndeath.\"[288] Now, as the law was more plainly given afterward, and\nthe apostle says, \"Where no law is, there is no prevarication,\"[289]\non what supposition is what is said in the psalm true, \"I accounted\nall the sinners of the earth prevaricators,\"[290] except that all\nwho are held liable for any sin are accused of dealing deceitfully\n(prevaricating) with some law? If on this account, then, even the\ninfants are, according to the true belief, born in sin, not actual\nbut original, so that we confess they have need of grace for the\nremission of sins, certainly it must be acknowledged that in the\nsame sense in which they are sinners they are also prevaricators of\nthat law which was given in Paradise, according to the truth of both\nscriptures, \"I accounted all the sinners of the earth prevaricators,\"\nand \"Where no law is, there is no prevarication.\" And thus, because\ncircumcision was the sign of regeneration, and the infant, on account\nof the original sin by which God's covenant was first broken, was not\nundeservedly to lose his generation unless delivered by regeneration,\nthese divine words are to be understood as if it had been said,\nWhoever is not born again, that soul shall perish from his people,\nbecause he hath broken my covenant, since he also has sinned in Adam\nwith all others. For had He said, Because he hath broken this my\ncovenant, He would have compelled us to understand by it only this of\ncircumcision; but since He has not expressly said what covenant the\ninfant has broken, we are free to understand Him as speaking of that\ncovenant of which the breach can be ascribed to an infant. Yet if any\none contends that it is said of nothing else than circumcision, that\nin it the infant has broken the covenant of God because he is not\ncircumcised, he must seek some method of explanation by which it may\nbe understood without absurdity (such as this) that he has broken the\ncovenant, because it has been broken in him although not by him. Yet\nin this case also it is to be observed that the soul of the infant,\nbeing guilty of no sin of neglect against itself, would perish\nunjustly, unless original sin rendered it obnoxious to punishment.\n\n\n  28. _Of the change of name in Abraham and Sarah, who received the\n      gift of fecundity when they were incapable of regeneration\n      owing to the barrenness of one, and the old age of both._\n\nNow when a promise so great and clear was made to Abraham, in which\nit was so plainly said to him, \"I have made thee a father of many\nnations, and I will increase thee exceedingly, and I will make\nnations of thee, and kings shall go forth of thee. And I will give\nthee a son of Sarah; and I will bless him, and he shall become\nnations, and kings of nations shall be of him,\"[291]--a promise\nwhich we now see fulfilled in Christ,--from that time forward this\ncouple are not called in Scripture, as formerly, Abram and Sarai, but\nAbraham and Sarah, as we have called them from the first, for every\none does so now. The reason why the name of Abraham was changed is\ngiven: \"For,\" He says, \"I have made thee a father of many nations.\"\nThis, then, is to be understood to be the meaning of _Abraham_; but\n_Abram_, as he was formerly called, means \"exalted father.\" The\nreason of the change of Sarah's name is not given; but as those say\nwho have written interpretations of the Hebrew names contained in\nthese books, Sarah means \"my princess,\" and Sarai \"strength.\" Whence\nit is written in the Epistle to the Hebrews, \"Through faith also\nSarah herself received strength to conceive seed.\"[292] For both\nwere old, as the Scripture testifies; but she was also barren, and\nhad ceased to menstruate, so that she could no longer bear children\neven if she had not been barren. Further, if a woman is advanced in\nyears, yet still retains the custom of women, she can bear children\nto a young man, but not to an old man, although that same old man\ncan beget, but only of a young woman; as after Sarah's death Abraham\ncould of Keturah, because he met with her in her lively age. This,\nthen, is what the apostle mentions as wonderful, saying, besides,\nthat Abraham's body was now dead;[293] because at that age he was no\nlonger able to beget children of any woman who retained now only a\nsmall part of her natural vigour. Of course we must understand that\nhis body was dead only to some purposes, not to all; for if it was\nso to all, it would no longer be the aged body of a living man, but\nthe corpse of a dead one. Although that question, how Abraham begot\nchildren of Keturah, is usually solved in this way, that the gift of\nbegetting which he received from the Lord, remained even after the\ndeath of his wife, yet I think that solution of the question which\nI have followed is preferable, because, although in our days an old\nman of a hundred years can beget children of no woman, it was not so\nthen, when men still lived so long that a hundred years did not yet\nbring on them the decrepitude of old age.\n\n\n    29. _Of the three men or angels, in whom the Lord is related to\n            have appeared to Abraham at the oak of Mamre._\n\nGod appeared again to Abraham at the oak of Mamre in three men,\nwho it is not to be doubted were angels, although some think that\none of them was Christ, and assert that He was visible before He\nput on flesh. Now it belongs to the divine power, and invisible,\nincorporeal, and incommutable nature, without changing itself at\nall, to appear even to mortal men, not by what it is, but by what\nis subject to it. And what is not subject to it? Yet if they try\nto establish that one of these three was Christ by the fact that,\nalthough he saw three, he addressed the Lord in the singular, as it\nis written, \"And, lo, three men stood by him: and, when he saw them,\nhe ran to meet them from the tent-door, and worshipped toward the\nground, and said, Lord, if I have found favour before thee,\"[294]\netc.; why do they not advert to this also, that when two of them came\nto destroy the Sodomites, while Abraham still spoke to one, calling\nhim Lord, and interceding that he would not destroy the righteous\nalong with the wicked in Sodom, Lot received these two in such a\nway that he too in his conversation with them addressed the Lord in\nthe singular? For after saying to them in the plural, \"Behold, my\nlords, turn aside into your servant's house,\"[295] etc., yet it is\nafterwards said, \"And the angels laid hold upon his hand, and the\nhand of his wife, and the hands of his two daughters, because the\nLord was merciful unto him. And it came to pass, whenever they had\nled him forth abroad, that they said, Save thy life; look not behind\nthee, neither stay thou in all this region: save thyself in the\nmountain, lest thou be caught. And Lot said unto them, I pray thee,\nLord, since thy servant hath found grace in thy sight,\"[296] etc. And\nthen after these words the Lord also answered him in the singular,\nalthough He was in two angels, saying, \"See, I have accepted thy\nface,\"[297] etc. This makes it much more credible that both Abraham\nin the three men and Lot in the two recognised the Lord, addressing\nHim in the singular number, even when they were addressing men; for\nthey received them as they did for no other reason than that they\nmight minister human refection to them as men who needed it. Yet\nthere was about them something so excellent, that those who showed\nthem hospitality as men could not doubt that God was in them as He\nwas wont to be in the prophets, and therefore sometimes addressed\nthem in the plural, and sometimes God in them in the singular. But\nthat they were angels the Scripture testifies, not only in this book\nof Genesis, in which these transactions are related, but also in the\nEpistle to the Hebrews, where in praising hospitality it is said,\n\"For thereby some have entertained angels unawares.\"[298] By these\nthree men, then, when a son Isaac was again promised to Abraham by\nSarah, such a divine oracle was also given that it was said, \"Abraham\nshall become a great and numerous nation, and all the nations of the\nearth shall be blessed in him.\"[299] And here these two things are\npromised with the utmost brevity and fulness,--the nation of Israel\naccording to the flesh, and all nations according to faith.\n\n\n  30. _Of Lot's deliverance from Sodom, and its consumption by fire\n      from heaven; and of Abimelech, whose lust could not harm\n      Sarah's chastity._\n\nAfter this promise Lot was delivered out of Sodom, and a fiery rain\nfrom heaven turned into ashes that whole region of the impious city,\nwhere custom had made sodomy as prevalent as laws have elsewhere\nmade other kinds of wickedness. But this punishment of theirs was\na specimen of the divine judgment to come. For what is meant by\nthe angels forbidding those who were delivered to look back, but\nthat we are not to look back in heart to the old life which, being\nregenerated through grace, we have put off, if we think to escape the\nlast judgment? Lot's wife, indeed, when she looked back, remained,\nand, being turned into salt, furnished to believing men a condiment\nby which to savour somewhat the warning to be drawn from that\nexample. Then Abraham did again at Gerar, with Abimelech the king of\nthat city, what he had done in Egypt about his wife, and received\nher back untouched in the same way. On this occasion, when the king\nrebuked Abraham for not saying she was his wife, and calling her\nhis sister, he explained what he had been afraid of, and added this\nfurther, \"And yet indeed she is my sister by the father's side, but\nnot by the mother's;\"[300] for she was Abraham's sister by his own\nfather, and so near of kin. But her beauty was so great, that even at\nthat advanced age she could be fallen in love with.\n\n\n      31. _Of Isaac, who was born according to the promise, whose\n      name was given on account of the laughter of both parents._\n\nAfter these things a son was born to Abraham, according to God's\npromise, of Sarah, and was called Isaac, which means _laughter_. For\nhis father had laughed when he was promised to him, in wondering\ndelight, and his mother, when he was again promised by those three\nmen, had laughed, doubting for joy; yet she was blamed by the angel\nbecause that laughter, although it was for joy, yet was not full of\nfaith. Afterwards she was confirmed in faith by the same angel. From\nthis, then, the boy got his name. For when Isaac was born and called\nby that name, Sarah showed that her laughter was not that of scornful\nreproach, but that of joyful praise; for she said, \"God hath made me\nto laugh, so that every one who hears will laugh with me.\"[301] Then\nin a little while the bond maid was cast out of the house with her\nson; and, according to the apostle, these two women signify the old\nand new covenants,--Sarah representing that of the Jerusalem which is\nabove, that is, the city of God.[302]\n\n\n  32. _Of Abraham's obedience and faith, which were proved by the\n      offering up of his son in sacrifice; and of Sarah's death._\n\nAmong other things, of which it would take too long time to\nmention the whole, Abraham was tempted about the offering up of\nhis well-beloved son Isaac, to prove his pious obedience, and so\nmake it known to the world, not to God. Now every temptation is\nnot blameworthy; it may even be praiseworthy, because it furnishes\nprobation. And, for the most part, the human mind cannot attain to\nself-knowledge otherwise than by making trial of its powers through\ntemptation, by some kind of experimental and not merely verbal\nself-interrogation; when, if it has acknowledged the gift of God,\nit is pious, and is consolidated by stedfast grace and not puffed\nup by vain boasting. Of course Abraham could never believe that\nGod delighted in human sacrifices; yet when the divine commandment\nthundered, it was to be obeyed, not disputed. Yet Abraham is worthy\nof praise, because he all along believed that his son, on being\noffered up, would rise again; for God had said to him, when he was\nunwilling to fulfil his wife's pleasure by casting out the bond maid\nand her son, \"In Isaac shall thy seed be called.\" No doubt He then\ngoes on to say, \"And as for the son of this bond woman, I will make\nhim a great nation, because he is thy seed.\"[303] How then is it\nsaid, \"In Isaac shall thy seed be called,\" when God calls Ishmael\nalso his seed? The apostle, in explaining this, says, \"In Isaac\nshall thy seed be called, that is, they which are the children of\nthe flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of\nthe promise are counted for the seed.\"[304] In order, then, that the\nchildren of the promise may be the seed of Abraham, they are called\nin Isaac, that is, are gathered together in Christ by the call of\ngrace. Therefore the father, holding fast from the first the promise\nwhich behoved to be fulfilled through this son whom God had ordered\nhim to slay, did not doubt that he whom he once thought it hopeless\nhe should ever receive would be restored to him when he had offered\nhim up. It is in this way the passage in the Epistle to the Hebrews\nis also to be understood and explained. \"By faith,\" he says, \"Abraham\novercame, when tempted about Isaac: and he who had received the\npromise offered up his only son, to whom it was said, In Isaac shall\nthy seed be called: thinking that God was able to raise him up, even\nfrom the dead;\" therefore he has added, \"from whence also he received\nhim in a similitude.\"[305] In whose similitude but His of whom the\napostle says, \"He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up\nfor us all?\"[306] And on this account Isaac also himself carried to\nthe place of sacrifice the wood on which he was to be offered up,\njust as the Lord Himself carried His own cross. Finally, since Isaac\nwas not to be slain, after his father was forbidden to smite him, who\nwas that ram by the offering of which that sacrifice was completed\nwith typical blood? For when Abraham saw him, he was caught by the\nhorns in a thicket. What, then, did he represent but Jesus, who,\nbefore He was offered up, was crowned with thorns by the Jews?\n\nBut let us rather hear the divine words spoken through the angel. For\nthe Scripture says, \"And Abraham stretched forth his hand to take the\nknife, that he might slay his son. And the Angel of the Lord called\nunto him from heaven, and said, Abraham. And he said, Here am I. And\nhe said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou anything\nunto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, and hast not spared\nthy beloved son for my sake.\"[307] It is said, \"Now I know,\" that\nis, Now I have made to be known; for God was not previously ignorant\nof this. Then, having offered up that ram instead of Isaac his son,\n\"Abraham,\" as we read, \"called the name of that place The Lord seeth:\nas they say this day, In the mount the Lord hath appeared.\"[308] As it\nis said, \"Now I know,\" for Now I have made to be known, so here, \"The\nLord sees,\" for The Lord hath appeared, that is, made Himself to be\nseen. \"And the Angel of the Lord called unto Abraham from heaven the\nsecond time, saying, By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord; because\nthou hast done this thing, and hast not spared thy beloved son for my\nsake; that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will\nmultiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and as the sand which is upon\nthe sea-shore; and thy seed shall possess by inheritance the cities of\nthe adversaries: and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth\nbe blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.\"[309] In this manner\nis that promise concerning the calling of the nations in the seed of\nAbraham confirmed even by the oath of God, after that burnt-offering\nwhich typified Christ. For He had often promised, but never sworn. And\nwhat is the oath of God, the true and faithful, but a confirmation of\nthe promise, and a certain reproof to the unbelieving?\n\nAfter these things Sarah died, in the 127th year of her life, and\nthe 137th of her husband; for he was ten years older than she, as he\nhimself says, when a son is promised to him by her: \"Shall a son be\nborn to me that am an hundred years old? and shall Sarah, that is\nninety years old, bear?\"[310] Then Abraham bought a field, in which\nhe buried his wife. And then, according to Stephen's account, he was\nsettled in that land, entering then on actual possession of it,--that\nis, after the death of his father, who is inferred to have died two\nyears before.\n\n\n       33. _Of Rebecca, the grand-daughter of Nahor, whom Isaac\n                            took to wife._\n\nIsaac married Rebecca, the grand-daughter of Nahor, his father's\nbrother, when he was forty years old, that is, in the 140th year of his\nfather's life, three years after his mother's death. Now when a servant\nwas sent to Mesopotamia by his father to fetch her, and when Abraham\nsaid to that servant, \"Put thy hand under my thigh, and I will make\nthee swear by the Lord, the God of heaven, and the Lord of the earth,\nthat thou shalt not take a wife unto my son Isaac of the daughters of\nthe Canaanites,\"[311] what else was pointed out by this, but that the\nLord, the God of heaven, and the Lord of the earth, was to come in the\nflesh which was to be derived from that thigh? Are these small tokens\nof the foretold truth which we see fulfilled in Christ?\n\n\n        34. _What is meant by Abraham's marrying Keturah after\n                            Sarah's death._\n\nWhat did Abraham mean by marrying Keturah after Sarah's death? Far\nbe it from us to suspect him of incontinence, especially when he\nhad reached such an age and such sanctity of faith. Or was he still\nseeking to beget children, though he held fast, with most approved\nfaith, the promise of God that his children should be multiplied out\nof Isaac as the stars of heaven and the dust of the earth? And yet,\nif Hagar and Ishmael, as the apostle teaches us, signified the carnal\npeople of the old covenant, why may not Keturah and her sons also\nsignify the carnal people who think they belong to the new covenant?\nFor both are called both the wives and the concubines of Abraham; but\nSarah is never called a concubine (but only a wife). For when Hagar\nis given to Abraham, it is written, \"And Sarai, Abram's wife, took\nHagar the Egyptian, her handmaid, after Abram had dwelt ten years\nin the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his\nwife.\"[312] And of Keturah, whom he took after Sarah's departure, we\nread, \"Then again Abraham took a wife, whose name was Keturah.\"[313]\nLo, both are called wives, yet both are found to have been\nconcubines; for the Scripture afterward says, \"And Abraham gave his\nwhole estate unto Isaac his son. But unto the sons of his concubines\nAbraham gave gifts, and sent them away from his son Isaac, (while\nhe yet lived,) eastward, unto the east country.\"[314] Therefore the\nsons of the concubines, that is, the heretics and the carnal Jews,\nhave some gifts, but do not attain the promised kingdom; \"For they\nwhich are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of\nGod: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed, of\nwhom it was said, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.\"[315] For I do\nnot see why Keturah, who was married after the wife's death, should\nbe called a concubine, except on account of this mystery. But if any\none is unwilling to put such meanings on these things, he need not\ncalumniate Abraham. For what if even this was provided against the\nheretics who were to be the opponents of second marriages, so that it\nmight be shown that it was no sin in the case of the father of many\nnations himself, when, after his wife's death, he married again? And\nAbraham died when he was 175 years old, so that he left his son Isaac\nseventy-five years old, having begotten him when 100 years old.\n\n\n     35. _What was indicated by the divine answer about the twins\n          still shut up in the womb of Rebecca their mother._\n\nLet us now see how the times of the city of God run on from this point\namong Abraham's descendants. In the time from the first year of Isaac's\nlife to the seventieth, when his sons were born, the only memorable\nthing is, that when he prayed God that his wife, who was barren,\nmight bear, and the Lord granted what he sought, and she conceived,\nthe twins leapt while still enclosed in her womb. And when she was\ntroubled by this struggle, and inquired of the Lord, she received this\nanswer: \"Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall\nbe separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall overcome the\nother people, and the elder shall serve the younger.\"[316] The Apostle\nPaul would have us understand this as a great instance of grace;[317]\nfor the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or\nevil, the younger is chosen without any good desert, and the elder is\nrejected, when beyond doubt, as regards original sin, both were alike,\nand as regards actual sin, neither had any. But the plan of the work\non hand does not permit me to speak more fully of this matter now, and\nI have said much about it in other works. Only that saying, \"The elder\nshall serve the younger,\" is understood by our writers, almost without\nexception, to mean that the elder people, the Jews, shall serve the\nyounger people, the Christians. And truly, although this might seem\nto be fulfilled in the Idumean nation, which was born of the elder\n(who had two names, being called both Esau and Edom, whence the name\nIdumeans), because it was afterwards to be overcome by the people\nwhich sprang from the younger, that is, by the Israelites, and was to\nbecome subject to them; yet it is more suitable to believe that, when\nit was said, \"The one people shall overcome the other people, and the\nelder shall serve the younger,\" that prophecy meant some greater thing;\nand what is that except what is evidently fulfilled in the Jews and\nChristians?\n\n\n     36. _Of the oracle and blessing which Isaac received, just as\n             his father did, being beloved for his sake._\n\nIsaac also received such an oracle as his father had often received.\nOf this oracle it is thus written: \"And there was a famine over the\nland, beside the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And\nIsaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines unto Gerar. And the\nLord appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt; but dwell\nin the land which I shall tell thee of. And abide in this land, and I\nwill be with thee, and will bless thee: unto thee and unto thy seed\nI will give all this land; and I will establish mine oath, which I\nsware unto Abraham thy father: and I will multiply thy seed as the\nstars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all this land: and in\nthy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because\nthat Abraham thy father obeyed my voice, and kept my precepts, my\ncommandments, my righteousness, and my laws.\"[318] This patriarch\nneither had another wife, nor any concubine, but was content with\nthe twin-children begotten by one act of generation. He also was\nafraid, when he lived among strangers, of being brought into danger\nowing to the beauty of his wife, and did like his father in calling\nher his sister, and not telling that she was his wife; for she was\nhis near blood-relation by the father's and mother's side. She also\nremained untouched by the strangers, when it was known she was his\nwife. Yet we ought not to prefer him to his father because he knew\nno woman besides his one wife. For beyond doubt the merits of his\nfather's faith and obedience were greater, inasmuch as God says it\nis for his sake He does Isaac good: \"In thy seed,\" He says, \"shall\nall the nations of the earth be blessed, because that Abraham thy\nfather obeyed my voice, and kept my precepts, my commandments, my\nstatutes, and my laws.\" And again in another oracle He says, \"I am\nthe God of Abraham thy father: fear not, for I am with thee, and\nwill bless thee, and multiply thy seed for my servant Abraham's\nsake.\"[319] So that we must understand how chastely Abraham acted,\nbecause imprudent men, who seek some support for their own wickedness\nin the Holy Scriptures, think he acted through lust. We may also\nlearn this, not to compare men by single good things, but to consider\neverything in each; for it may happen that one man has something in\nhis life and character in which he excels another, and it may be far\nmore excellent than that in which the other excels him. And thus,\naccording to sound and true judgment, while continence is preferable\nto marriage, yet a believing married man is better than a continent\nunbeliever; for the unbeliever is not only less praiseworthy, but is\neven highly detestable. We must conclude, then, that both are good;\nyet so as to hold that the married man who is most faithful and most\nobedient is certainly better than the continent man whose faith and\nobedience are less. But if equal in other things, who would hesitate\nto prefer the continent man to the married?\n\n\n     37. _Of the things mystically prefigured in Esau and Jacob._\n\nIsaac's two sons, Esau and Jacob, grew up together. The primacy of\nthe elder was transferred to the younger by a bargain and agreement\nbetween them, when the elder immoderately lusted after the lentiles the\nyounger had prepared for food, and for that price sold his birthright\nto him, confirming it with an oath. We learn from this that a person\nis to be blamed, not for the kind of food he eats, but for immoderate\ngreed. Isaac grew old, and old age deprived him of his eyesight. He\nwished to bless the elder son, and instead of the elder, who was hairy,\nunwittingly blessed the younger, who put himself under his father's\nhands, having covered himself with kid-skins, as if bearing the sins\nof others. Lest we should think this guile of Jacob's was fraudulent\nguile, instead of seeking in it the mystery of a great thing, the\nScripture has predicted in the words just before, \"Esau was a cunning\nhunter, a man of the field; and Jacob was a simple man, dwelling at\nhome.\"[320] Some of our writers have interpreted this, \"without guile.\"\nBut whether the Greek \u1f04\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 means \"without guile,\" or \"simple,\" or\nrather \"without feigning,\" in the receiving of that blessing what is\nthe guile of the man without guile? What is the guile of the simple,\nwhat the fiction of the man who does not lie, but a profound mystery\nof the truth? But what is the blessing itself? \"See,\" he says, \"the\nsmell of my son is as the smell of a full field which the Lord hath\nblessed: therefore God give thee of the dew of heaven, and of the\nfruitfulness of the earth, and plenty of corn and wine: let nations\nserve thee, and princes adore thee: and be lord of thy brethren, and\nlet thy father's sons adore thee: cursed be he that curseth thee,\nand blessed be he that blesseth thee.\"[321] The blessing of Jacob is\ntherefore a proclamation of Christ to all nations. It is this which\nhas come to pass, and is now being fulfilled. Isaac is the law and the\nprophecy: even by the mouth of the Jews Christ is blessed by prophecy\nas by one who knows not, because it is itself not understood. The\nworld like a field is filled with the odour of Christ's name: His is\nthe blessing of the dew of heaven, that is, of the showers of divine\nwords; and of the fruitfulness of the earth, that is, of the gathering\ntogether of the peoples: His is the plenty of corn and wine, that is,\nthe multitude that gathers bread and wine in the sacrament of His body\nand blood. Him the nations serve, Him princes adore. He is the Lord of\nHis brethren, because His people rules over the Jews. Him His Father's\nsons adore, that is, the sons of Abraham according to faith; for He\nHimself is the son of Abraham according to the flesh. He is cursed that\ncurseth Him, and he that blesseth Him is blessed. Christ, I say, who\nis ours is blessed, that is, truly spoken of out of the mouths of the\nJews, when, although erring, they yet sing the law and the prophets,\nand think they are blessing another for whom they erringly hope. So,\nwhen the elder son claims the promised blessing, Isaac is greatly\nafraid, and wonders when he knows that he has blessed one instead of\nthe other, and demands who he is; yet he does not complain that he has\nbeen deceived, yea, when the great mystery is revealed to him, in his\nsecret heart he at once eschews anger, and confirms the blessing. \"Who\nthen,\" he says, \"hath hunted me venison, and brought it me, and I have\neaten of all before thou camest, and have blessed him, and he shall be\nblessed?\"[322] Who would not rather have expected the curse of an angry\nman here, if these things had been done in an earthly manner, and not\nby inspiration from above? O things done, yet done prophetically; on\nthe earth, yet celestially; by men, yet divinely! If everything that\nis fertile of so great mysteries should be examined carefully, many\nvolumes would be filled; but the moderate compass fixed for this work\ncompels us to hasten to other things.\n\n\n  38. _Of Jacob's mission to Mesopotamia to get a wife, and of the\n      vision which he saw in a dream by the way, and of his getting\n      four women when he sought one wife._\n\nJacob was sent by his parents to Mesopotamia that he might take a\nwife there. These were his father's words on sending him: \"Thou\nshalt not take a wife of the daughters of the Canaanites. Arise, fly\nto Mesopotamia, to the house of Bethuel, thy mother's father, and\ntake thee a wife from thence of the daughters of Laban thy mother's\nbrother. And my God bless thee, and increase thee, and multiply\nthee; and thou shalt be an assembly of peoples; and give to thee the\nblessing of Abraham thy father, and to thy seed after thee; that\nthou mayest inherit the land wherein thou dwellest, which God gave\nunto Abraham.\"[323] Now we understand here that the seed of Jacob is\nseparated from Isaac's other seed which came through Esau. For when\nit is said, \"In Isaac shall thy seed be called,\"[324] by this seed is\nmeant solely the city of God; so that from it is separated Abraham's\nother seed, which was in the son of the bond woman, and which was\nto be in the sons of Keturah. But until now it had been uncertain\nregarding Isaac's twin-sons whether that blessing belonged to both or\nonly to one of them; and if to one, which of them it was. This is now\ndeclared when Jacob is prophetically blessed by his father, and it is\nsaid to him, \"And thou shalt be an assembly of peoples, and God give\nto thee the blessing of Abraham thy father.\"\n\nWhen Jacob was going to Mesopotamia, he received in a dream an\noracle, of which it is thus written: \"And Jacob went out from the\nwell of the oath,[325] and went to Haran. And he came to a place,\nand slept there, for the sun was set; and he took of the stones of\nthe place, and put them at his head, and slept in that place, and\ndreamed. And behold a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it\nreached to heaven; and the angels of God ascended and descended by\nit. And the Lord stood above it, and said, I am the God of Abraham\nthy father, and the God of Isaac; fear not: the land whereon thou\nsleepest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed; and thy seed shall\nbe as the dust of the earth; and it shall be spread abroad to the\nsea, and to Africa, and to the north, and to the east: and all the\ntribes of the earth shall be blessed in thee and in thy seed. And,\nbehold, I am with thee, to keep thee in all thy way wherever thou\ngoest, and I will bring thee back into this land; for I will not\nleave thee, until I have done all which I have spoken to thee of. And\nJacob awoke out of his sleep, and said, Surely the Lord is in this\nplace, and I knew it not. And he was afraid, and said, How dreadful\nis this place! this is none other but the house of God, and this is\nthe gate of heaven. And Jacob arose, and took the stone that he had\nput under his head there, and set it up for a memorial, and poured\noil upon the top of it. And Jacob called the name of that place the\nhouse of God.\"[326] This is prophetic. For Jacob did not pour oil on\nthe stone in an idolatrous way, as if making it a god; neither did he\nadore that stone, or sacrifice to it. But since the name of Christ\ncomes from the chrism or anointing, something pertaining to the great\nmystery was certainly represented in this. And the Saviour Himself\nis understood to bring this latter to remembrance in the gospel,\nwhen He says of Nathanael, \"Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is\nno guile!\"[327] because Israel who saw this vision is no other than\nJacob. And in the same place He says, \"Verily, verily, I say unto\nyou, Ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and\ndescending upon the Son of man.\"\n\nJacob went on to Mesopotamia to take a wife from thence. And the\ndivine Scripture points out how, without unlawfully desiring any of\nthem, he came to have four women, of whom he begat twelve sons and\none daughter; for he had come to take only one. But when one was\nfalsely given him in place of the other, he did not send her away\nafter unwittingly using her in the night, lest he should seem to\nhave put her to shame; but as at that time, in order to multiply\nposterity, no law forbade a plurality of wives, he took her also to\nwhom alone he had promised marriage. As she was barren, she gave her\nhandmaid to her husband that she might have children by her; and her\nelder sister did the same thing in imitation of her, although she\nhad borne, because she desired to multiply progeny. We do not read\nthat Jacob sought any but one, or that he used many, except for the\npurpose of begetting offspring, saving conjugal rights; and he would\nnot have done this, had not his wives, who had legitimate power over\ntheir own husband's body, urged him to do it. So he begat twelve sons\nand one daughter by four women. Then he entered into Egypt by his son\nJoseph, who was sold by his brethren for envy, and carried there, and\nwho was there exalted.\n\n\n          39. _The reason why Jacob was also called Israel._\n\nAs I said a little ago, Jacob was also called Israel, the name which\nwas most prevalent among the people descended from him. Now this name\nwas given him by the angel who wrestled with him on the way back from\nMesopotamia, and who was most evidently a type of Christ. For when\nJacob overcame him, doubtless with his own consent, that the mystery\nmight be represented, it signified Christ's passion, in which the\nJews are seen overcoming Him. And yet he besought a blessing from the\nvery angel he had overcome; and so the imposition of this name was\nthe blessing. For Israel means _seeing God_,[328] which will at last\nbe the reward of all the saints. The angel also touched him on the\nbreadth of the thigh when he was overcoming him, and in that way made\nhim lame. So that Jacob was at one and the same time blessed and lame:\nblessed in those among that people who believed in Christ, and lame in\nthe unbelieving. For the breadth of the thigh is the multitude of the\nfamily. For there are many of that race of whom it was prophetically\nsaid beforehand, \"And they have halted in their paths.\"[329]\n\n\n  40. _How it is said that Jacob went into Egypt with seventy-five\n      souls, when most of those who are mentioned were born at a\n      later period._\n\nSeventy-five men are reported to have entered Egypt along with Jacob,\ncounting him with his children. In this number only two women are\nmentioned, one a daughter, the other a grand-daughter. But when\nthe thing is carefully considered, it does not appear that Jacob's\noffspring was so numerous on the day or year when he entered Egypt.\nThere are also included among them the great-grandchildren of Joseph,\nwho could not possibly be born already. For Jacob was then 130 years\nold, and his son Joseph thirty-nine; and as it is plain that he\ntook a wife when he was thirty or more, how could he in nine years\nhave great-grandchildren by the children whom he had by that wife?\nNow, since Ephraim and Manasseh, the sons of Joseph, could not even\nhave children, for Jacob found them boys under nine years old when\nhe entered Egypt, in what way are not only their sons but their\ngrandsons reckoned among those seventy-five who then entered Egypt\nwith Jacob? For there is reckoned there Machir the son of Manasseh,\ngrandson of Joseph, and Machir's son, that is, Gilead, grandson of\nManasseh, great-grandson of Joseph; there, too, is he whom Ephraim,\nJoseph's other son, begot, that is, Shuthelah, grandson of Joseph,\nand Shuthelah's son Ezer, grandson of Ephraim, and great-grandson\nof Joseph, who could not possibly be in existence when Jacob came\ninto Egypt, and there found his grandsons, the sons of Joseph,\ntheir grandsires, still boys under nine years of age.[330] But\ndoubtless, when the Scripture mentions Jacob's entrance into Egypt\nwith seventy-five souls, it does not mean one day, or one year,\nbut that whole time as long as Joseph lived, who was the cause of\nhis entrance. For the same Scripture speaks thus of Joseph: \"And\nJoseph dwelt in Egypt, he and his brethren, and all his father's\nhouse: and Joseph lived 110 years, and saw Ephraim's children\nof the third generation.\"[331] That is, his great-grandson, the\nthird from Ephraim; for the third generation means son, grandson,\ngreat-grandson. Then it is added, \"The children also of Machir, the\nson of Manasseh, were born upon Joseph's knees.\"[332] And this is\nthat grandson of Manasseh, and great-grandson of Joseph. But the\nplural number is employed according to scriptural usage; for the one\ndaughter of Jacob is spoken of as daughters, just as in the usage\nof the Latin tongue _liberi_ is used in the plural for children\neven when there is only one. Now, when Joseph's own happiness is\nproclaimed, because he could see his great-grandchildren, it is by\nno means to be thought they already existed in the thirty-ninth year\nof their great-grandsire Joseph, when his father Jacob came to him\nin Egypt. But those who diligently look into these things will the\nless easily be mistaken, because it is written, \"These are the names\nof the sons of Israel who entered into Egypt along with Jacob their\nfather.\"[333] For this means that the seventy-five are reckoned along\nwith him, not that they were all with him when he entered Egypt; for,\nas I have said, the whole period during which Joseph, who occasioned\nhis entrance, lived, is held to be the time of that entrance.\n\n\n     41. _Of the blessing which Jacob promised in Judah his son._\n\nIf, on account of the Christian people in whom the city of God\nsojourns in the earth, we look for the flesh of Christ in the seed\nof Abraham, setting aside the sons of the concubines, we have Isaac;\nif in the seed of Isaac, setting aside Esau, who is also Edom, we\nhave Jacob, who also is Israel; if in the seed of Israel himself,\nsetting aside the rest, we have Judah, because Christ sprang of the\ntribe of Judah. Let us hear, then, how Israel, when dying in Egypt,\nin blessing his sons, prophetically blessed Judah. He says: \"Judah,\nthy brethren shall praise thee: thy hands shall be on the back of\nthine enemies; thy father's children shall adore thee. Judah is a\nlion's whelp: from the sprouting, my son, thou art gone up: lying\ndown, thou hast slept as a lion, and as a lion's whelp; who shall\nawake him? A prince shall not be lacking out of Judah, and a leader\nfrom his thighs, until the things come that are laid up for him; and\nHe shall be the expectation of the nations. Binding his foal unto\nthe vine, and his ass's foal to the choice vine; he shall wash his\nrobe in wine, and his clothes in the blood of the grape: his eyes\nare red with wine, and his teeth are whiter than milk.\"[334] I have\nexpounded these words in disputing against Faustus the Manich\u00e6an; and\nI think it is enough to make the truth of this prophecy shine, to\nremark that the death of Christ is predicted by the word about his\nlying down, and not the necessity, but the voluntary character of His\ndeath, in the title of lion. That power He Himself proclaims in the\ngospel, saying, \"I have the power of laying down my life, and I have\nthe power of taking it again. No man taketh it from me; but I lay it\ndown of myself, and take it again.\"[335] So the lion roared, so He\nfulfilled what He said. For to this power what is added about the\nresurrection refers, \"Who shall awake him?\" This means that no man\nbut Himself has raised Him, who also said of His own body, \"Destroy\nthis temple, and in three days I will raise it up.\"[336] And the very\nnature of His death, that is, the height of the cross, is understood\nby the single word, \"Thou art gone up.\" The evangelist explains what\nis added, \"Lying down, thou hast slept,\" when he says, \"He bowed\nHis head, and gave up the ghost.\"[337] Or at least His burial is\nto be understood, in which He lay down sleeping, and whence no man\nraised Him, as the prophets did some, and as He Himself did others;\nbut He Himself rose up as if from sleep. As for His robe which He\nwashes in wine, that is, cleanses from sin in His own blood, of which\nblood those who are baptized know the mystery, so that he adds, \"And\nhis clothes in the blood of the grape,\" what is it but the Church?\n\"And his eyes are red with wine,\" [these are] His spiritual people\ndrunken with His cup, of which the psalm sings, \"And thy cup that\nmakes drunken, how excellent it is!\" \"And his teeth are whiter than\nmilk,\"[338]--that is, the nutritive words which, according to the\napostle, the babes drink, being as yet unfit for solid food.[339]\nAnd it is He in whom the promises of Judah were laid up, so that\nuntil they come, princes, that is, the kings of Israel, shall never\nbe lacking out of Judah. \"And He is the expectation of the nations.\"\nThis is too plain to need exposition.\n\n\n     42. _Of the sons of Joseph, whom Jacob blessed, prophetically\n                         changing his hands._\n\nNow, as Isaac's two sons, Esau and Jacob, furnished a type of the\ntwo people, the Jews and the Christians (although as pertains to\ncarnal descent it was not the Jews but the Idumeans who came of the\nseed of Esau, nor the Christian nations but rather the Jews who came\nof Jacob's; for the type holds only as regards the saying, \"The\nelder shall serve the younger\"[340]), so the same thing happened in\nJoseph's two sons; for the elder was a type of the Jews, and the\nyounger of the Christians. For when Jacob was blessing them, and laid\nhis right hand on the younger, who was at his left, and his left\nhand on the elder, who was at his right, this seemed wrong to their\nfather, and he admonished his father by trying to correct his mistake\nand show him which was the elder. But he would not change his hands,\nbut said, \"I know, my son, I know. He also shall become a people, and\nhe also shall be exalted; but his younger brother shall be greater\nthan he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations.\"[341] And\nthese two promises show the same thing. For that one is to become\n\"a people;\" this one \"a multitude of nations.\" And what can be more\nevident than that these two promises comprehend the people of Israel,\nand the whole world of Abraham's seed, the one according to the\nflesh, the other according to faith?\n\n\n  43. _Of the times of Moses and Joshua the son of Nun, of the\n      judges, and thereafter of the kings, of whom Saul was the\n      first, but David is to be regarded as the chief, both by the\n      oath and by merit._\n\nJacob being dead, and Joseph also, during the remaining 144 years\nuntil they went out of the land of Egypt that nation increased to an\nincredible degree, even although wasted by so great persecutions,\nthat at one time the male children were murdered at their birth,\nbecause the wondering Egyptians were terrified at the too great\nincrease of that people. Then Moses, being stealthily kept from\nthe murderers of the infants, was brought to the royal house, God\npreparing to do great things by him, and was nursed and adopted\nby the daughter of Pharaoh (that was the name of all the kings of\nEgypt), and became so great a man that he--yea, rather God, who had\npromised this to Abraham, by him--drew that nation, so wonderfully\nmultiplied, out of the yoke of hardest and most grievous servitude\nit had borne there. At first, indeed, he fled thence (we are told he\nfled into the land of Midian), because, in defending an Israelite,\nhe had slain an Egyptian, and was afraid. Afterward, being divinely\ncommissioned in the power of the Spirit of God, he overcame the\nmagi of Pharaoh who resisted him. Then, when the Egyptians would\nnot let God's people go, ten memorable plagues were brought by Him\nupon them,--the water turned into blood, the frogs and lice, the\nflies, the death of the cattle, the boils, the hail, the locusts, the\ndarkness, the death of the first-born. At last the Egyptians were\ndestroyed in the Red Sea while pursuing the Israelites, whom they had\nlet go when at length they were broken by so many great plagues. The\ndivided sea made a way for the Israelites who were departing, but,\nreturning on itself, it overwhelmed their pursuers with its waves.\nThen for forty years the people of God went through the desert,\nunder the leadership of Moses, when the tabernacle of testimony was\ndedicated, in which God was worshipped by sacrifices prophetic of\nthings to come, and that was after the law had been very terribly\ngiven in the mount, for its divinity was most plainly attested by\nwonderful signs and voices. This took place soon after the exodus\nfrom Egypt, when the people had entered the desert, on the fiftieth\nday after the passover was celebrated by the offering up of a lamb,\nwhich is so completely a type of Christ, foretelling that through\nHis sacrificial passion He should go from this world to the Father\n(for _pascha_ in the Hebrew tongue means _transit_), that when the\nnew covenant was revealed, after Christ our passover was offered\nup, the Holy Spirit came from heaven on the fiftieth day; and He is\ncalled in the gospel the Finger of God, because He recalls to our\nremembrance the things done before by way of types, and because the\ntables of that law are said to have been written by the finger of God.\n\nOn the death of Moses, Joshua the son of Nun ruled the people,\nand led them into the land of promise, and divided it among them.\nBy these two wonderful leaders wars were also carried on most\nprosperously and wonderfully, God calling to witness that they had\ngot these victories not so much on account of the merit of the Hebrew\npeople as on account of the sins of the nations they subdued. After\nthese leaders there were judges, when the people were settled in\nthe land of promise, so that, in the meantime, the first promise\nmade to Abraham began to be fulfilled about the one nation, that\nis, the Hebrew, and about the land of Canaan; but not as yet the\npromise about all nations, and the whole wide world, for that was\nto be fulfilled, not by the observances of the old law, but by the\nadvent of Christ in the flesh, and by the faith of the gospel. And\nit was to prefigure this that it was not Moses, who received the law\nfor the people on Mount Sinai, that led the people into the land of\npromise, but Joshua, whose name also was changed at God's command, so\nthat he was called Jesus. But in the times of the judges prosperity\nalternated with adversity in war, according as the sins of the people\nand the mercy of God were displayed.\n\nWe come next to the times of the kings. The first who reigned was\nSaul; and when he was rejected and laid low in battle, and his\noffspring rejected so that no kings should arise out of it, David\nsucceeded to the kingdom, whose son Christ is chiefly called. He was\nmade a kind of starting-point and beginning of the advanced youth of\nGod's people, who had passed a kind of age of puberty from Abraham to\nthis David. And it is not in vain that the evangelist Matthew records\nthe generations in such a way as to sum up this first period from\nAbraham to David in fourteen generations. For from the age of puberty\nman begins to be capable of generation; therefore he starts the list\nof generations from Abraham, who also was made the father of many\nnations when he got his name changed. So that previously this family\nof God's people was in its childhood, from Noah to Abraham; and for\nthat reason the first language was then learned, that is, the Hebrew.\nFor man begins to speak in childhood, the age succeeding infancy,\nwhich is so termed because then he cannot speak.[342] And that first\nage is quite drowned in oblivion, just as the first age of the human\nrace was blotted out by the flood; for who is there that can remember\nhis infancy? Wherefore in this progress of the city of God, as the\nprevious book contained that first age, so this one ought to contain\nthe second and third ages, in which third age, as was shown by the\nheifer of three years old, the she-goat of three years old, and the\nram of three years old, the yoke of the law was imposed, and there\nappeared abundance of sins, and the beginning of the earthly kingdom\narose, in which there were not lacking spiritual men, of whom the\nturtle-dove and pigeon represented the mystery.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[221] Gen. ix. 25.\n\n[222] Gen. ix. 26, 27.\n\n[223] See _Contra Faust._ xii. c. 22 sqq.\n\n[224] Song of Solomon i. 3.\n\n[225] 1 Cor. xi. 19.\n\n[226] Prov. x. 5 (LXX.).\n\n[227] Matt. vii. 20.\n\n[228] Phil. i. 18.\n\n[229] Isa. v. 7.\n\n[230] Matt. xx. 22.\n\n[231] Matt. xxvi. 39.\n\n[232] 2 Cor. xiii. 4.\n\n[233] 1 Cor. i. 25.\n\n[234] Augustine here follows the Greek version, which introduces the\nname Elisa among the sons of Japheth, though not found in the Hebrew.\nIt is not found in the Complutensian Greek translation, nor in the\nMSS. used by Jerome.\n\n[235] Gen. x. 21.\n\n[236] Gen. xi. 1-9.\n\n[237] Ex. x.\n\n[238] Ps. xcv. 6.\n\n[239] Job xv. 13.\n\n[240] 1 Cor. iii. 9.\n\n[241] Gen. i. 26.\n\n[242] Gen. xi. 6.\n\n[243] Virgil, _\u00c6neid_, iv. 592.\n\n[244] Here Augustine remarks on the addition of the particle _ne_ to\nthe word _non_, which he has made to bring out the sense.\n\n[245] Gen. i. 24.\n\n[246] Pliny, _Hist. Nat._ vii. 2; Aulus Gellius, _Noct. Att._ ix. 4.\n\n[247] From \u03c0\u03c5\u03b3\u03bc\u03ae, a cubit.\n\n[248] Gen. x. 25.\n\n[249] Ps. xiv. 3, 4, liii. 3, 4.\n\n[250] Gen. x. 25.\n\n[251] Josh. xxiv. 2.\n\n[252] Gen. xi. 27-29.\n\n[253] Gen. xi. 31.\n\n[254] Gen. xxiv. 10.\n\n[255] Judith v. 5-9.\n\n[256] Gen. xi. 32.\n\n[257] Gen. xii. 1.\n\n[258] Gen. xii. 4.\n\n[259] Gen. xi. 1.\n\n[260] Gen. xii. 1.\n\n[261] Acts vii. 2, 3.\n\n[262] Acts vii. 4.\n\n[263] Gen. xii. 1.\n\n[264] Various reading, \"of our Lord Jesus Christ.\"\n\n[265] Gen. xii. 1-3.\n\n[266] Acts vii. 2.\n\n[267] Gen. xii. 7.\n\n[268] Gen. xiii. 8, 9.\n\n[269] Gen. xiii. 14-17.\n\n[270] Various reading, \"the express promise.\"\n\n[271] Ps. cx. 4.\n\n[272] Rom. iv. 3; Gen. xv. 6.\n\n[273] Gen. xv. 7.\n\n[274] Gen. xv. 9-21.\n\n[275] Luke i. 34.\n\n[276] Luke i. 35.\n\n[277] Various reading, \"who are to remain.\"\n\n[278] Matt. xxiv. 21.\n\n[279] Gen. xi. 32.\n\n[280] Gal. iii. 17.\n\n[281] 1 Cor. vii. 4.\n\n[282] Gen. xvi. 6.\n\n[283] Gen. xv. 4.\n\n[284] Gen. xvii. 1-22. The passage is given in full by Augustine.\n\n[285] Gen. xvii. 14.\n\n[286] Rom. v. 12, 19.\n\n[287] Gen. ii. 17.\n\n[288] Ecclus. xv. 17.\n\n[289] Rom. iv. 15.\n\n[290] Ps. cxix. 119. Augustine and the Vulgate follow the LXX.\n\n[291] Gen. xvii. 5, 6, 16.\n\n[292] Heb. xi. 11.\n\n[293] Heb. xi. 12.\n\n[294] Gen. xviii. 2, 3.\n\n[295] Gen. xix. 2.\n\n[296] Gen. xix. 16-19.\n\n[297] Gen. xix. 21.\n\n[298] Heb. xiii. 2.\n\n[299] Gen. xviii. 18.\n\n[300] Gen. xx. 12.\n\n[301] Gen. xxi. 6.\n\n[302] Gal. iv. 24-26.\n\n[303] Gen. xxi. 12, 13.\n\n[304] Rom. ix. 7, 8.\n\n[305] Heb. xi. 17-19.\n\n[306] Rom. viii. 32.\n\n[307] Gen. xxii. 10-12.\n\n[308] Gen. xxii. 14.\n\n[309] Gen. xxii. 15-18.\n\n[310] Gen. xvii. 17.\n\n[311] Gen. xxiv. 2, 3.\n\n[312] Gen. xvi. 3.\n\n[313] Gen. xxv. 1.\n\n[314] Gen. xxv. 5, 6.\n\n[315] Rom. ix. 7, 8.\n\n[316] Gen. xxv. 23.\n\n[317] Rom. ix. 10-13.\n\n[318] Gen. xxvi. 1-5.\n\n[319] Gen. xxvi. 24.\n\n[320] Gen. xxv. 27.\n\n[321] Gen. xxvii. 27-29.\n\n[322] Gen. xxvii. 33.\n\n[323] Gen. xxviii. 1-4.\n\n[324] Gen. xxi. 12.\n\n[325] Beer-sheba.\n\n[326] Gen. xxviii. 10-19.\n\n[327] John i. 47, 51.\n\n[328] Gen. xxxii. 28: Israel = \"a prince of God;\" ver. 30: Peniel =\n\"the face of God.\"\n\n[329] Ps. xviii. 45.\n\n[330] Augustine here follows the Septuagint, which at Gen. xlvi. 20\nadds these names to those of Manasseh and Ephraim, and at ver. 27\ngives the whole number as seventy-five.\n\n[331] Gen. l. 22, 23.\n\n[332] Gen. l. 23.\n\n[333] Gen. xlvi. 8.\n\n[334] Gen. xlix. 8-12.\n\n[335] John x. 18.\n\n[336] John ii. 19.\n\n[337] John xix. 30.\n\n[338] Gen. xlix. 12.\n\n[339] 1 Pet. ii. 2; 1 Cor. iii. 2.\n\n[340] Gen. xxv. 23.\n\n[341] Gen. xlviii. 19.\n\n[342] _Infans_, from _in_, not, and _fari_, to speak.\n\n\n\n\n                           BOOK SEVENTEENTH.\n\n                               ARGUMENT.\n\n  IN THIS BOOK THE HISTORY OF THE CITY OF GOD IS TRACED DURING THE\n      PERIOD OF THE KINGS AND PROPHETS FROM SAMUEL TO DAVID, EVEN TO\n      CHRIST; AND THE PROPHECIES WHICH ARE RECORDED IN THE BOOK OF\n      KINGS, PSALMS, AND THOSE OF SOLOMON, ARE INTERPRETED OF CHRIST\n      AND THE CHURCH.\n\n\n                      1. _Of the prophetic age._\n\nBy the favour of God we have treated distinctly of His promises made\nto Abraham, that both the nation of Israel according to the flesh, and\nall nations according to faith, should be his seed, and the City of\nGod, proceeding according to the order of time, will point[343] out how\nthey were fulfilled. Having therefore in the previous book come down\nto the reign of David, we shall now treat of what remains, so far as\nmay seem sufficient for the object of this work, beginning at the same\nreign. Now, from the time when holy Samuel began to prophesy, and ever\nonward until the people of Israel was led captive into Babylonia, and\nuntil, according to the prophecy of holy Jeremiah, on Israel's return\nthence after seventy years, the house of God was built anew, this whole\nperiod is the prophetic age. For although both the patriarch Noah\nhimself, in whose days the whole earth was destroyed by the flood, and\nothers before and after him down to this time when there began to be\nkings over the people of God, may not undeservedly be styled prophets,\non account of certain things pertaining to the city of God and the\nkingdom of heaven, which they either predicted or in any way signified\nshould come to pass, and especially since we read that some of them,\nas Abraham and Moses, were expressly so styled, yet those are most\nand chiefly called the days of the prophets from the time when Samuel\nbegan to prophesy, who at God's command first anointed Saul to be king,\nand, on his rejection, David himself, whom others of his issue should\nsucceed as long as it was fitting they should do so. If, therefore,\nI wished to rehearse all that the prophets have predicted concerning\nChrist, while the city of God, with its members dying and being born\nin constant succession, ran its course through those times, this work\nwould extend beyond all bounds. First, because the Scripture itself,\neven when, in treating in order of the kings and of their deeds and\nthe events of their reigns, it seems to be occupied in narrating as\nwith historical diligence the affairs transacted, will be found, if\nthe things handled by it are considered with the aid of the Spirit of\nGod, either more, or certainly not less, intent on foretelling things\nto come than on relating things past. And who that thinks even a little\nabout it does not know how laborious and prolix a work it would be,\nand how many volumes it would require to search this out by thorough\ninvestigation and demonstrate it by argument? And then, because of that\nwhich without dispute pertains to prophecy, there are so many things\nconcerning Christ and the kingdom of heaven, which is the city of God,\nthat to explain these a larger discussion would be necessary than the\ndue proportion of this work admits of. Therefore I shall, if I can, so\nlimit myself, that in carrying through this work, I may, with God's\nhelp, neither say what is superfluous nor omit what is necessary.\n\n\n     2. _At what time the promise of God was fulfilled concerning\n   the land of Canaan, which even carnal Israel got in possession._\n\nIn the preceding book we said, that in the promise of God to Abraham\ntwo things were promised from the beginning, the one, namely, that his\nseed should possess the land of Canaan, which was intimated when it was\nsaid, \"Go into a land that I will show thee, and I will make of thee a\ngreat nation;\"[344] but the other far more excellent, concerning not\nthe carnal but the spiritual seed, by which he is the father, not of\nthe one nation of Israel, but of all nations who follow the footsteps\nof his faith, which began to be promised in these words, \"And in thee\nshall all families of the earth be blessed.\"[345] And thereafter we\nshowed by yet many other proofs that these two things were promised.\nTherefore the seed of Abraham, that is, the people of Israel according\nto the flesh, already was in the land of promise; and there, not only\nby holding and possessing the cities of the enemies, but also by having\nkings, had already begun to reign, the promises of God concerning\nthat people being already in great part fulfilled: not only those\nthat were made to those three fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and\nwhatever others were made in their times, but those also that were\nmade through Moses himself, by whom the same people was set free from\nservitude in Egypt, and by whom all bygone things were revealed in\nhis times, when he led the people through the wilderness. But neither\nby the illustrious leader Jesus the son of Nun, who led that people\ninto the land of promise, and, after driving out the nations, divided\nit among the twelve tribes according to God's command, and died; nor\nafter him, in the whole time of the judges, was the promise of God\nconcerning the land of Canaan fulfilled, that it should extend from\nsome river of Egypt even to the great river Euphrates; nor yet was it\nstill prophesied as to come, but its fulfilment was expected. And it\nwas fulfilled through David, and Solomon his son, whose kingdom was\nextended over the whole promised space; for they subdued all those\nnations, and made them tributary. And thus, under those kings, the seed\nof Abraham was established in the land of promise according to the\nflesh, that is, in the land of Canaan, so that nothing yet remained to\nthe complete fulfilment of that earthly promise of God, except that,\nso far as pertains to temporal prosperity, the Hebrew nation should\nremain in the same land by the succession of posterity in an unshaken\nstate even to the end of this mortal age, if it obeyed the laws of the\nLord its God. But since God knew it would not do this, He used His\ntemporal punishments also for training His few faithful ones in it, and\nfor giving needful warning to those who should afterwards be in all\nnations, in whom the other promise, revealed in the New Testament, was\nabout to be fulfilled through the incarnation of Christ.\n\n\n  3. _Of the threefold meaning of the prophecies, which are to be\n      referred now to the earthly, now to the heavenly Jerusalem, and\n      now again to both._\n\nWherefore just as that divine oracle to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and\nall the other prophetic signs or sayings which are given in the earlier\nsacred writings, so also the other prophecies from this time of the\nkings pertain partly to the nation of Abraham's flesh, and partly to\nthat seed of his in which all nations are blessed as fellow-heirs of\nChrist by the New Testament, to the possessing of eternal life and the\nkingdom of the heavens. Therefore they pertain partly to the bond maid\nwho gendereth to bondage, that is, the earthly Jerusalem, which is in\nbondage with her children; but partly to the free city of God, that is,\nthe true Jerusalem eternal in the heavens, whose children are all those\nthat live according to God in the earth: but there are some things\namong them which are understood to pertain to both,--to the bond maid\nproperly, to the free woman figuratively.[346]\n\nTherefore prophetic utterances of three kinds are to be found;\nforasmuch as there are some relating to the earthly Jerusalem, some\nto the heavenly, and some to both. I think it proper to prove what I\nsay by examples. The prophet Nathan was sent to convict king David\nof heinous sin, and predict to him what future evils should be\nconsequent on it. Who can question that this and the like pertain\nto the terrestrial city, whether publicly, that is, for the safety\nor help of the people, or privately, when there are given forth for\neach one's private good divine utterances whereby something of the\nfuture may be known for the use of temporal life? But where we read,\n\"Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make for the\nhouse of Israel, and for the house of Judah, a new testament: not\naccording to the testament that I settled for their fathers in the\nday when I laid hold of their hand to lead them out of the land of\nEgypt; because they continued not in my testament, and I regarded\nthem not, saith the Lord. For this is the testament that I will make\nfor the house of Israel: after those days, saith the Lord, I will\ngive my laws in their mind, and will write them upon their hearts,\nand I will see to them; and I will be to them a God, and they shall\nbe to me a people;\"[347]--without doubt this is prophesied to the\nJerusalem above, whose reward is God Himself, and whose chief and\nentire good it is to have Him, and to be His. But this pertains\nto both, that the city of God is called Jerusalem, and that it is\nprophesied the house of God shall be in it; and this prophecy seems\nto be fulfilled when king Solomon builds that most noble temple.\nFor these things both happened in the earthly Jerusalem, as history\nshows, and were types of the heavenly Jerusalem. And this kind of\nprophecy, as it were compacted and commingled of both the others in\nthe ancient canonical books, containing historical narratives, is\nof very great significance, and has exercised and exercises greatly\nthe wits of those who search holy writ. For example, what we read\nof historically as predicted and fulfilled in the seed of Abraham\naccording to the flesh, we must also inquire the allegorical meaning\nof, as it is to be fulfilled in the seed of Abraham according to\nfaith. And so much is this the case, that some have thought there\nis nothing in these books either foretold and effected, or effected\nalthough not foretold, that does not insinuate something else which\nis to be referred by figurative signification to the city of God\non high, and to her children who are pilgrims in this life. But\nif this be so, then the utterances of the prophets, or rather the\nwhole of those Scriptures that are reckoned under the title of the\nOld Testament, will be not of three, but of two different kinds.\nFor there will be nothing there which pertains to the terrestrial\nJerusalem only, if whatever is there said and fulfilled of or\nconcerning her signifies something which also refers by allegorical\nprefiguration to the celestial Jerusalem; but there will be only\ntwo kinds, one that pertains to the free Jerusalem, the other to\nboth. But just as, I think, they err greatly who are of opinion\nthat none of the records of affairs in that kind of writings mean\nanything more than that they so happened, so I think those very\ndaring who contend that the whole gist of their contents lies in\nallegorical significations. Therefore I have said they are threefold,\nnot twofold. Yet, in holding this opinion, I do not blame those who\nmay be able to draw out of everything there a spiritual meaning,\nonly saving, first of all, the historical truth. For the rest, what\nbeliever can doubt that those things are spoken vainly which are such\nthat, whether said to have been done or to be yet to come, they do\nnot beseem either human or divine affairs? Who would not recall these\nto spiritual understanding if he could, or confess that they should\nbe recalled by him who is able?\n\n\n  4. _About the prefigured change of the Israelitic kingdom and\n      priesthood, and about the things Hannah the mother of Samuel\n      prophesied, personating the Church._\n\nTherefore the advance of the city of God, where it reached the times\nof the kings, yielded a figure, when, on the rejection of Saul,\nDavid first obtained the kingdom on such a footing that thenceforth\nhis descendants should reign in the earthly Jerusalem in continual\nsuccession; for the course of affairs signified and foretold, what is\nnot to be passed by in silence, concerning the change of things to\ncome, what belongs to both Testaments, the Old and the New,--where the\npriesthood and kingdom are changed by one who is a priest, and at the\nsame time a king, new and everlasting, even Christ Jesus. For both the\nsubstitution in the ministry of God, on Eli's rejection as priest, of\nSamuel, who executed at once the office of priest and judge, and the\nestablishment of David in the kingdom, when Saul was rejected, typified\nthis of which I speak. And Hannah herself, the mother of Samuel, who\nformerly was barren, and afterwards was gladdened with fertility, does\nnot seem to prophesy anything else, when she exultingly pours forth\nher thanksgiving to the Lord, on yielding up to God the same boy she\nhad born and weaned with the same piety with which she had vowed him.\nFor she says, \"My heart is made strong in the Lord, and my horn is\nexalted in my God; my mouth is enlarged over mine enemies; I am made\nglad in Thy salvation. Because there is none holy as the Lord; and none\nis righteous as our God: there is none holy save Thee. Do not glory\nso proudly, and do not speak lofty things, neither let vaunting talk\ncome out of your mouth: for a God of knowledge is the Lord, and a God\npreparing His curious designs. The bow of the mighty hath He made weak,\nand the weak are girded with strength. They that were full of bread are\ndiminished; and the hungry have passed beyond the earth: for the barren\nhath born seven; and she that hath many children is waxed feeble. The\nLord killeth and maketh alive: He bringeth down to hell, and bringeth\nup again. The Lord maketh poor and maketh rich: He bringeth low and\nlifteth up. He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the\nbeggar from the dunghill, that He may set him among the mighty of\n[His] people, and maketh them inherit the throne of glory; giving the\nvow to him that voweth, and He hath blessed the years of the just: for\nman is not mighty in strength. The Lord shall make His adversary weak:\nthe Lord is holy. Let not the prudent glory in his prudence; and let\nnot the mighty glory in his might; and let not the rich glory in his\nriches: but let him that glorieth glory in this, to understand and know\nthe Lord, and to do judgment and justice in the midst of the earth. The\nLord hath ascended into the heavens, and hath thundered: He shall judge\nthe ends of the earth, for He is righteous: and He giveth strength to\nour kings, and shall exalt the horn of His Christ.\"[348]\n\nDo you say that these are the words of a single weak woman giving\nthanks for the birth of a son? Can the mind of men be so much averse\nto the light of truth as not to perceive that the sayings this\nwoman pours forth exceed her measure? Moreover, he who is suitably\ninterested in these things which have already begun to be fulfilled\neven in this earthly pilgrimage also, does he not apply his mind, and\nperceive, and acknowledge, that through this woman--whose very name,\nwhich is Hannah, means \"His grace\"--the very Christian religion, the\nvery city of God, whose king and founder is Christ, in fine, the very\ngrace of God, hath thus spoken by the prophetic Spirit, whereby the\nproud are cut off so that they fall, and the humble are filled so\nthat they rise, which that hymn chiefly celebrates? Unless perchance\nany one will say that this woman prophesied nothing, but only lauded\nGod with exulting praise on account of the son whom she had obtained\nin answer to prayer. What then does she mean when she says, \"The\nbow of the mighty hath He made weak, and the weak are girded with\nstrength; they that were full of bread are diminished, and the hungry\nhave gone beyond the earth; for the barren hath born seven, and she\nthat hath many children is waxed feeble?\" Had she herself born seven,\nalthough she had been barren? She had only one when she said that;\nneither did she bear seven afterwards, nor six, with whom Samuel\nhimself might be the seventh, but three males and two females. And\nthen, when as yet no one was king over that people, whence, if she\ndid not prophesy, did she say what she puts at the end, \"He giveth\nstrength to our kings, and shall exalt the horn of His Christ?\"\n\nTherefore let the Church of Christ, the city of the great King,[349]\nfull of grace, prolific of offspring, let her say what the prophecy\nuttered about her so long before by the mouth of this pious mother\nconfesses, \"My heart is made strong in the Lord, and my horn is\nexalted in my God.\" Her heart is truly made strong, and her horn\nis truly exalted, because not in herself, but in the Lord her God.\n\"My mouth is enlarged over mine enemies;\" because even in pressing\nstraits the word of God is not bound, not even in preachers who are\nbound.[350] \"I am made glad,\" she says, \"in Thy salvation.\" This is\nChrist Jesus Himself, whom old Simeon, as we read in the Gospel,\nembracing as a little one, yet recognising as great, said, \"Lord, now\nlettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen Thy\nsalvation.\"[351] Therefore may the Church say, \"I am made glad in Thy\nsalvation. For there is none holy as the Lord, and none is righteous\nas our God;\" as holy and sanctifying, just and justifying.[352]\n\"There is none holy beside Thee;\" because no one becomes so except\nby reason of Thee. And then it follows, \"Do not glory so proudly,\nand do not speak lofty things, neither let vaunting talk come out of\nyour mouth. For a God of knowledge is the Lord.\" He knows you even\nwhen no one knows; for \"he who thinketh himself to be something when\nhe is nothing deceiveth himself.\"[353] These things are said to the\nadversaries of the city of God who belong to Babylon, who presume in\ntheir own strength, and glory in themselves, not in the Lord; of whom\nare also the carnal Israelites, the earth-born inhabitants of the\nearthly Jerusalem, who, as saith the apostle, \"being ignorant of the\nrighteousness of God,\"[354] that is, which God, who alone is just,\nand the justifier, gives to man, \"and wishing to establish their\nown,\" that is, which is as it were procured by their own selves,\nnot bestowed by Him, \"are not subject to the righteousness of God,\"\njust because they are proud, and think they are able to please God\nwith their own, not with that which is of God, who is the God of\nknowledge, and therefore also takes the oversight of consciences,\nthere beholding the thoughts of men that they are vain,[355] if they\nare of men, and are not from Him. \"And preparing,\" she says, \"His\ncurious designs.\" What curious designs do we think these are, save\nthat the proud must fall, and the humble rise? These curious designs\nshe recounts, saying, \"The bow of the mighty is made weak, and the\nweak are girded with strength.\" The bow is made weak, that is, the\nintention of those who think themselves so powerful, that without the\ngift and help of God they are able by human sufficiency to fulfil the\ndivine commandments; and those are girded with strength whose inward\ncry is, \"Have mercy upon me, O Lord, for I am weak.\"[356]\n\n\"They that were full of bread,\" she says, \"are diminished, and the\nhungry have gone beyond the earth.\" Who are to be understood as full of\nbread except those same who were as if mighty, that is, the Israelites,\nto whom were committed the oracles of God?[357] But among that people\nthe children of the bond maid were diminished,--by which word minus,\nalthough it is Latin, the idea is well expressed that from being\ngreater they were made less,--because, even in the very bread, that\nis, the divine oracles, which the Israelites alone of all nations have\nreceived, they savour earthly things. But the nations to whom that law\nwas not given, after they have come through the New Testament to these\noracles, by thirsting much have gone beyond the earth, because in them\nthey have savoured not earthly, but heavenly things. And the reason why\nthis is done is as it were sought; \"for the barren,\" she says, \"hath\nborn seven, and she that hath many children is waxed feeble.\" Here\nall that had been prophesied hath shone forth to those who understood\nthe number seven, which signifies the perfection of the universal\nChurch. For which reason also the Apostle John writes to the seven\nchurches,[358] showing in that way that he writes to the totality of\nthe one Church; and in the Proverbs of Solomon it is said aforetime,\nprefiguring this, \"Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath strengthened\nher seven pillars.\"[359] For the city of God was barren in all nations\nbefore that child arose whom we see.[360] We also see that the temporal\nJerusalem, who had many children, is now waxed feeble. Because,\nwhoever in her were sons of the free woman were her strength; but now,\nforasmuch as the letter is there, and not the spirit, having lost her\nstrength, she is waxed feeble.\n\n\"The Lord killeth and maketh alive:\" He has killed her who had many\nchildren, and made this barren one alive, so that she has born seven.\nAlthough it may be more suitably understood that He has made those same\nalive whom He has killed. For she, as it were, repeats that by adding,\n\"He bringeth down to hell, and bringeth up.\" To whom truly the apostle\nsays, \"If ye be dead with Christ, seek those things which are above,\nwhere Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.\"[361] Therefore they are\nkilled by the Lord in a salutary way, so that he adds, \"Savour things\nwhich are above, not things on the earth;\" so that these are they who,\nhungering, have passed beyond the earth. \"For ye are dead,\" he says:\nbehold how God savingly kills! Then there follows, \"And your life is\nhid with Christ in God:\" behold how God makes the same alive! But does\nHe bring them down to hell and bring them up again? It is without\ncontroversy among believers that we best see both parts of this work\nfulfilled in Him, to wit, our Head, with whom the apostle has said our\nlife is hid in God. \"For when He spared not His own Son, but delivered\nHim up for us all,\"[362] in that way, certainly, He has killed Him.\nAnd forasmuch as He raised Him up again from the dead, He has made Him\nalive again. And since His voice is acknowledged in the prophecy, \"Thou\nwilt not leave my soul in hell,\"[363] He has brought Him down to hell\nand brought Him up again. By this poverty of His we are made rich;[364]\nfor \"the Lord maketh poor and maketh rich.\" But that we may know what\nthis is, let us hear what follows: \"He bringeth low and lifteth up;\"\nand truly He humbles the proud and exalts the humble. Which we also\nread elsewhere, \"God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the\nhumble.\"[365] This is the burden of the entire song of this woman whose\nname is interpreted \"His grace.\"\n\nFarther, what is added, \"He raiseth up the poor from the earth,\" I\nunderstand of none better than of Him who, as was said a little ago,\n\"was made poor for us, when He was rich, that by His poverty we might\nbe made rich.\" For He raised Him from the earth so quickly that His\nflesh did not see corruption. Nor shall I divert from Him what is\nadded, \"And raiseth up the poor from the dunghill.\" For indeed he who\nis the poor man is also the beggar.[366] But by the dunghill from which\nhe is lifted up we are with the greatest reason to understand the\npersecuting Jews, of whom the apostle says, when telling that when he\nbelonged to them he persecuted the Church, \"What things were gain to\nme, those I counted loss for Christ; and I have counted them not only\nloss, but even dung, that I might win Christ.\"[367] Therefore that poor\none is raised up from the earth above all the rich, and that beggar is\nlifted up from that dunghill above all the wealthy, \"that he may sit\namong the mighty of the people,\" to whom He says, \"Ye shall sit upon\ntwelve thrones,\"[368] \"and to make them inherit the throne of glory.\"\nFor these mighty ones had said, \"Lo, we have forsaken all and followed\nThee.\" They had most mightily vowed this vow.\n\nBut whence do they receive this, except from Him of whom it is here\nimmediately said, \"Giving the vow to him that voweth?\" Otherwise they\nwould be of those mighty ones whose bow is weakened. \"Giving,\" she\nsaith, \"the vow to him that voweth.\" For no one could vow anything\nacceptable to God, unless he received from Him that which he might\nvow. There follows, \"And He hath blessed the years of the just,\" to\nwit, that he may live for ever with Him to whom it is said, \"And\nThy years shall have no end.\" For there the years abide; but here\nthey pass away, yea, they perish: for before they come they are not,\nand when they shall have come they shall not be, because they bring\ntheir own end with them. Now of these two, that is, \"giving the vow\nto him that voweth,\" and \"He hath blessed the years of the just,\"\nthe one is what we do, the other what we receive. But this other\nis not received from God, the liberal giver, until He, the helper,\nHimself has enabled us for the former; \"for man is not mighty in\nstrength.\" \"The Lord shall make his adversary weak,\" to wit, him who\nenvies the man that vows, and resists him, lest he should fulfil\nwhat he has vowed. Owing to the ambiguity of the Greek, it may also\nbe understood \"his own adversary.\" For when God has begun to possess\nus, immediately he who had been our adversary becomes His, and is\nconquered by us; but not by our own strength, \"for man is not mighty\nin strength.\" Therefore \"the Lord shall make His own adversary weak,\nthe Lord is holy,\" that he may be conquered by the saints, whom the\nLord, the Holy of holies, hath made saints. For this reason, \"let\nnot the prudent glory in his prudence, and let not the mighty glory\nin his might, and let not the rich glory in his riches; but let him\nthat glorieth glory in this,--to understand and know the Lord, and to\ndo judgment and justice in the midst of the earth.\" He in no small\nmeasure understands and knows the Lord who understands and knows that\neven this, that he can understand and know the Lord, is given to him\nby the Lord. \"For what hast thou,\" saith the apostle, \"that thou hast\nnot received? But if thou hast received it, why dost thou glory as\nif thou hadst not received it?\"[369] That is, as if thou hadst of\nthine own self whereof thou mightest glory. Now, he does judgment and\njustice who lives aright. But he lives aright who yields obedience to\nGod when He commands. \"The end of the commandment,\" that is, to which\nthe commandment has reference, \"is charity out of a pure heart, and\na good conscience, and faith unfeigned.\" Moreover, this \"charity,\"\nas the Apostle John testifies, \"is of God.\"[370] Therefore to do\njustice and judgment is of God. But what is \"in the midst of the\nearth?\" For ought those who dwell in the ends of the earth not to do\njudgment and justice? Who would say so? Why, then, is it added, \"In\nthe midst of the earth?\" For if this had not been added, and it had\nonly been said, \"To do judgment and justice,\" this commandment would\nrather have pertained to both kinds of men,--both those dwelling\ninland and those on the sea-coast. But lest any one should think\nthat, after the end of the life led in this body, there remains a\ntime for doing judgment and justice which he has not done while he\nwas in the flesh, and that the divine judgment can thus be escaped,\n\"in the midst of the earth\" appears to me to be said of the time\nwhen every one lives in the body; for in this life every one carries\nabout his own earth, which, on a man's dying, the common earth takes\nback, to be surely returned to him on his rising again. Therefore \"in\nthe midst of the earth,\" that is, while our soul is shut up in this\nearthly body, judgment and justice are to be done, which shall be\nprofitable for us hereafter, when \"every one shall receive according\nto that he hath done in the body, whether good or bad.\"[371] For when\nthe apostle there says \"in the body,\" he means in the time he has\nlived in the body. Yet if any one blaspheme with malicious mind and\nimpious thought, without any member of his body being employed in it,\nhe shall not therefore be guiltless because he has not done it with\nbodily motion, for he will have done it in that time which he has\nspent in the body. In the same way we may suitably understand what we\nread in the psalm, \"But God, our King before the worlds, hath wrought\nsalvation in the midst of the earth;\"[372] so that the Lord Jesus\nmay be understood to be our God who is before the worlds, because by\nHim the worlds were made, working our salvation in the midst of the\nearth, for the Word was made flesh and dwelt in an earthly body.\n\nThen after Hannah has prophesied in these words, that he who glorieth\nought to glory not in himself at all, but in the Lord, she says, on\naccount of the retribution which is to come on the day of judgment,\n\"The Lord hath ascended into the heavens, and hath thundered: He\nshall judge the ends of the earth, for He is righteous.\" Throughout\nshe holds to the order of the creed of Christians: For the Lord\nChrist has ascended into heaven, and is to come thence to judge the\nquick and dead.[373] For, as saith the apostle, \"Who hath ascended\nbut He who hath also descended into the lower parts of the earth? He\nthat descended is the same also that ascended up above all heavens,\nthat He might fill all things.\"[374] Therefore He hath thundered\nthrough His clouds, which He hath filled with His Holy Spirit when\nHe ascended up. Concerning which the bond maid Jerusalem that is,\nthe unfruitful vineyard is threatened in Isaiah the prophet that\nthey shall rain no showers upon her. But \"He shall judge the ends\nof the earth\" is spoken as if it had been said, \"even the extremes\nof the earth.\" For it does not mean that He shall not judge the\nother parts of the earth, who, without doubt, shall judge all men.\nBut it is better to understand by the extremes of the earth the\nextremes of man, since those things shall not be judged which, in\nthe middle time, are changed for the better or the worse, but the\nending in which he shall be found who is judged. For which reason\nit is said, \"He that shall persevere even unto the end, the same\nshall be saved.\"[375] He, therefore, who perseveringly does judgment\nand justice in the midst of the earth shall not be condemned when\nthe extremes of the earth shall be judged. \"And giveth,\" she saith,\n\"strength to our kings,\" that He may not condemn them in judging.\nHe giveth them strength whereby as kings they rule the flesh, and\nconquer the world in Him who hath poured out His blood for them.\n\"And shall exalt the horn of His Christ.\" For He of whom it was said\nabove, \"The Lord hath ascended into the heavens,\" meaning the Lord\nChrist, Himself, as it is said here, \"shall exalt the horn of His\nChrist.\" Who, therefore, is the Christ of His Christ? Does it mean\nthat He shall exalt the horn of each one of His believing people,\nas she says in the beginning of this hymn, \"Mine horn is exalted in\nmy God?\" For we can rightly call all those christs who are anointed\nwith His chrism, forasmuch as the whole body with its head is one\nChrist.[376] These things hath Hannah, the mother of Samuel, the holy\nand much-praised man, prophesied, in which, indeed, the change of the\nancient priesthood was then figured and is now fulfilled, since she\nthat had many children is waxed feeble, that the barren who hath\nborn seven might have the new priesthood in Christ.\n\n\n  5. _Of those things which a man of God spake by the Spirit to Eli\n      the priest, signifying that the priesthood which had been\n      appointed according to Aaron was to be taken away._\n\nBut this is said more plainly by a man of God sent to Eli the priest\nhimself, whose name indeed is not mentioned, but whose office and\nministry show him to have been indubitably a prophet. For it is\nthus written: \"And there came a man of God unto Eli, and said, Thus\nsaith the Lord, I plainly revealed myself unto thy father's house,\nwhen they were in the land of Egypt slaves in Pharaoh's house; and I\nchose thy father's house out of all the sceptres of Israel to fill\nthe office of priest for me, to go up to my altar, to burn incense\nand wear the ephod; and I gave thy father's house for food all the\nofferings made by fire of the children of Israel. Wherefore then hast\nthou looked at mine incense and at mine offerings with an impudent\neye, and hast glorified thy sons above me, to bless the first-fruits\nof every sacrifice in Israel before me? Therefore thus saith the Lord\nGod of Israel, I said thy house and thy father's house should walk\nbefore me for ever: but now the Lord saith, Be it far from me; for\nthem that honour me will I honour, and he that despiseth me shall be\ndespised. Behold, the days come, that I will cut off thy seed, and\nthe seed of thy father's house, and thou shalt never have an old man\nin my house. And I will cut off the man of thine from mine altar, so\nthat his eyes shall be consumed, and his heart shall melt away; and\nevery one of thy house that is left shall fall by the sword of men.\nAnd this shall be a sign unto thee that shall come upon these thy two\nsons, Hophni and Phinehas; in one day they shall die both of them.\nAnd I will raise me up a faithful priest, that shall do according\nto all that is in mine heart and in my soul; and I will build him\na sure house, and he shall walk before my Christ for ever. And it\nshall come to pass that he who is left in thine house shall come to\nworship him with a piece of money, saying, Put me into one part of\nthy priesthood, that I may eat bread.\"[377]\n\nWe cannot say that this prophecy, in which the change of the ancient\npriesthood is foretold with so great plainness, was fulfilled in\nSamuel; for although Samuel was not of another tribe than that which\nhad been appointed by God to serve at the altar, yet he was not of\nthe sons of Aaron, whose offspring was set apart that the priests\nmight be taken out of it. And thus by that transaction also the same\nchange which should come to pass through Christ Jesus is shadowed\nforth, and the prophecy itself in deed, not in word, belonged to the\nOld Testament properly, but figuratively to the New, signifying by\nthe fact just what was said by the word to Eli the priest through the\nprophet. For there were afterwards priests of Aaron's race, such as\nZadok and Abiathar during David's reign, and others in succession,\nbefore the time came when those things which were predicted so long\nbefore about the changing of the priesthood behoved to be fulfilled\nby Christ. But who that now views these things with a believing eye\ndoes not see that they are fulfilled? Since, indeed, no tabernacle,\nno temple, no altar, no sacrifice, and therefore no priest either,\nhas remained to the Jews, to whom it was commanded in the law of\nGod that he should be ordained of the seed of Aaron; which is also\nmentioned here by the prophet, when he says, \"Thus saith the Lord\nGod of Israel, I said thy house and thy father's house shall walk\nbefore me for ever: but now the Lord saith, That be far from me;\nfor them that honour me will I honour, and he that despiseth me\nshall be despised.\" For that in naming his father's house he does\nnot mean that of his immediate father, but that of Aaron, who first\nwas appointed priest, to be succeeded by others descended from him,\nis shown by the preceding words, when he says, \"I was revealed unto\nthy father's house, when they were in the land of Egypt slaves in\nPharaoh's house; and I chose thy father's house out of all the\nsceptres of Israel to fill the office of priest for me.\" Which of\nthe fathers in that Egyptian slavery, but Aaron, was his father,\nwho, when they were set free, was chosen to the priesthood? It was\nof his lineage, therefore, he has said in this passage it should\ncome to pass that they should no longer be priests; which already\nwe see fulfilled. If faith be watchful, the things are before us:\nthey are discerned, they are grasped, and are forced on the eyes of\nthe unwilling, so that they are seen: \"Behold the days come,\" he\nsays, \"that I will cut off thy seed, and the seed of thy father's\nhouse, and thou shalt never have an old man in mine house. And I\nwill cut off the man of thine from mine altar, so that his eyes\nshall be consumed and his heart shall melt away.\" Behold the days\nwhich were foretold have already come. There is no priest after the\norder of Aaron; and whoever is a man of his lineage, when he sees\nthe sacrifice of the Christians prevailing over the whole world, but\nthat great honour taken away from himself, his eyes fail and his soul\nmelts away consumed with grief.\n\nBut what follows belongs properly to the house of Eli, to whom these\nthings were said: \"And every one of thine house that is left shall fall\nby the sword of men. And this shall be a sign unto thee that shall come\nupon these thy two sons, Hophni and Phinehas; in one day they shall die\nboth of them.\" This, therefore, is made a sign of the change of the\npriesthood from this man's house, by which it is signified that the\npriesthood of Aaron's house is to be changed. For the death of this\nman's sons signified the death not of the men, but of the priesthood\nitself of the sons of Aaron. But what follows pertains to that Priest\nwhom Samuel typified by succeeding this one. Therefore the things which\nfollow are said of Christ Jesus the true Priest of the New Testament:\n\"And I will raise me up a faithful Priest that shall do according to\nall that is in mine heart and in my soul; and I will build Him a sure\nhouse.\" The same is the eternal Jerusalem above. \"And He shall walk,\"\nsaith He, \"before my Christ always.\" \"He shall walk\" means \"he shall be\nconversant with,\" just as He had said before of Aaron's house, \"I said\nthat thine house and thy father's house shall walk before me for ever.\"\nBut what He says, \"He shall walk before my Christ,\" is to be understood\nentirely of the house itself, not of the priest, who is Christ Himself,\nthe Mediator and Saviour. His house, therefore, shall walk before Him.\n\"Shall walk\" may also be understood to mean from death to life, all the\ntime this mortality passes through, even to the end of this world. But\nwhere God says, \"Who will do all that is in mine heart and in my soul,\"\nwe must not think that God has a soul, for He is the Author of souls;\nbut this is said of God tropically, not properly, just as He is said to\nhave hands and feet, and other corporal members. And, lest it should\nbe supposed from such language that man in the form of this flesh is\nmade in the image of God, wings also are ascribed to Him, which man has\nnot at all; and it is said to God, \"Hide me under the shadow of Thy\nwings,\"[378] that men may understand that such things are said of that\nineffable nature not in proper but in figurative words.\n\nBut what is added, \"And it shall come to pass that he who is left in\nthine house shall come to worship Him,\" is not said properly of the\nhouse of this Eli, but of that Aaron, the men of which remained even\nto the advent of Jesus Christ, of which race there are not wanting\nmen even to this present. For of that house of Eli it had already\nbeen said above, \"And every one of thine house that is left shall\nfall by the sword of men.\" How, therefore, could it be truly said\nhere, \"And it shall come to pass that every one that is left shall\ncome to worship him,\" if that is true, that no one shall escape the\navenging sword, unless he would have it understood of those who\nbelong to the race of that whole priesthood after the order of Aaron?\nTherefore, if it is of these the predestinated remnant, about whom\nanother prophet has said, \"The remnant shall be saved;\"[379] whence\nthe apostle also says, \"Even so then at this time also the remnant\naccording to the election of grace is saved;\"[380] since it is easily\nunderstood to be of such a remnant that it is said, \"He that is left\nin thine house,\" assuredly he believes in Christ; just as in the time\nof the apostle very many of that nation believed; nor are there now\nwanting those, although very few, who yet believe, and in them is\nfulfilled what this man of God has here immediately added, \"He shall\ncome to worship him with a piece of money;\" to worship whom, if not\nthat Chief Priest, who is also God? For in that priesthood after the\norder of Aaron men did not come to the temple or altar of God for the\npurpose of worshipping the priest. But what is that he says, \"With\na piece of money,\" if not the short word of faith, about which the\napostle quotes the saying, \"A consummating and shortening word will\nthe Lord make upon the earth?\"[381] But that money is put for the\nword the psalm is a witness, where it is sung, \"The words of the Lord\nare pure words, money tried with the fire.\"[382]\n\nWhat then does he say who comes to worship the priest of God, even\nthe Priest who is God? \"Put me into one part of Thy priesthood, to\neat bread.\" I do not wish to be set in the honour of my fathers,\nwhich is none; put me in a part of Thy priesthood. For \"I have\nchosen to be mean in Thine house;\"[383] I desire to be a member, no\nmatter what, or how small, of Thy priesthood. By the priesthood he\nhere means the people itself, of which He is the Priest who is the\nMediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.[384] This people\nthe Apostle Peter calls \"a holy people, a royal priesthood.\"[385] But\nsome have translated, \"Of Thy sacrifice,\" not \"Of Thy priesthood,\"\nwhich no less signifies the same Christian people. Whence the Apostle\nPaul says, \"We being many are one bread, one body.\"[386] [And again\nhe says, \"Present your bodies a living sacrifice.\"[387]] What,\ntherefore, he has added, to \"eat bread,\" also elegantly expresses\nthe very kind of sacrifice of which the Priest Himself says, \"The\nbread which I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.\"[388]\nThe same is the sacrifice not after the order of Aaron, but after\nthe order of Melchisedec:[389] let him that readeth understand.[390]\nTherefore this short and salutarily humble confession, in which it is\nsaid, \"Put me in a part of Thy priesthood, to eat bread,\" is itself\nthe piece of money, for it is both brief, and it is the Word of God\nwho dwells in the heart of one who believes. For because He had said\nabove, that He had given for food to Aaron's house the sacrificial\nvictims of the Old Testament, where He says, \"I have given thy\nfather's house for food all things which are offered by fire of the\nchildren of Israel,\" which indeed were the sacrifices of the Jews;\ntherefore here He has said, \"To eat bread,\" which is in the New\nTestament the sacrifice of the Christians.\n\n\n  6. _Of the Jewish priesthood and kingdom, which, although promised\n      to be established for ever, did not continue; so that other\n      things are to be understood to which eternity is assured._\n\nWhile, therefore, these things now shine forth as clearly as they\nwere loftily foretold, still some one may not vainly be moved to\nask, How can we be confident that all things are to come to pass\nwhich are predicted in these books as about to come, if this very\nthing which is there divinely spoken, \"Thine house and thy father's\nhouse shall walk before me for ever,\" could not have effect? For we\nsee that priesthood has been changed; and there can be no hope that\nwhat was promised to that house may some time be fulfilled, because\nthat which succeeds on its being rejected and changed is rather\npredicted as eternal. He who says this does not yet understand, or\ndoes not recollect, that this very priesthood after the order of\nAaron was appointed as the shadow of a future eternal priesthood; and\ntherefore, when eternity is promised to it, it is not promised to the\nmere shadow and figure, but to what is shadowed forth and prefigured\nby it. But lest it should be thought the shadow itself was to remain,\ntherefore its mutation also behoved to be foretold.\n\nIn this way, too, the kingdom of Saul himself, who certainly was\nreprobated and rejected, was the shadow of a kingdom yet to come which\nshould remain to eternity. For, indeed, the oil with which he was\nanointed, and from that chrism he is called Christ, is to be taken in a\nmystical sense, and is to be understood as a great mystery; which David\nhimself venerated so much in him, that he trembled with smitten heart\nwhen, being hid in a dark cave, which Saul also entered when pressed\nby the necessity of nature, he had come secretly behind him and cut\noff a small piece of his robe, that he might be able to prove how he\nhad spared him when he could have killed him, and might thus remove\nfrom his mind the suspicion through which he had vehemently persecuted\nthe holy David, thinking him his enemy. Therefore he was much afraid\nlest he should be accused of violating so great a mystery in Saul,\nbecause he had thus meddled even his clothes. For thus it is written:\n\"And David's heart smote him because he had taken away the skirt of\nhis cloak.\"[391] But to the men with him, who advised him to destroy\nSaul thus delivered up into his hands, he saith, \"The Lord forbid that\nI should do this thing to my lord, the Lord's christ, to lay my hand\nupon him, because he is the Lord's christ.\" Therefore he showed so\ngreat reverence to this shadow of what was to come, not for its own\nsake, but for the sake of what it prefigured. Whence also that which\nSamuel says to Saul, \"Since thou hast not kept my commandment which\nthe Lord commanded thee, whereas now the Lord would have prepared thy\nkingdom over Israel for ever, yet now thy kingdom shall not continue\nfor thee; and the Lord will seek Him a man after His own heart, and\nthe Lord will command him to be prince over His people, because thou\nhast not kept that which the Lord commanded thee,\"[392] is not to be\ntaken as if God had settled that Saul himself should reign for ever,\nand afterwards, on his sinning, would not keep this promise; nor was He\nignorant that he would sin, but He had established his kingdom that it\nmight be a figure of the eternal kingdom. Therefore he added, \"Yet now\nthy kingdom shall not continue _for thee_.\" Therefore what it signified\nhas stood and shall stand; but it shall not stand for this man, because\nhe himself was not to reign for ever, nor his offspring; so that at\nleast that word \"for ever\" might seem to be fulfilled through his\nposterity one to another. \"And the Lord,\" he saith, \"will seek Him a\nman,\" meaning either David or the Mediator of the New Testament,[393]\nwho was figured in the chrism with which David also and his offspring\nwas anointed. But it is not as if He knew not where he was that God\nthus seeks Him a man, but, speaking through a man, He speaks as a man,\nand in this sense seeks us. For not only to God the Father, but also\nto His Only-begotten, who came to seek what was lost,[394] we had been\nknown already even so far as to be chosen in Him before the foundation\nof the world.[395] \"He will seek him\" therefore means, He will have His\nown (just as if He had said, Whom He already has known to be His own\nHe will show to others to be His friend). Whence in Latin this word\n(_qu\u00e6rit_) receives a preposition and becomes _acquirit_ (acquires),\nthe meaning of which is plain enough; although even without the\naddition of the preposition _qu\u00e6rere_ is understood as _acquirere_,\nwhence gains are called _qu\u00e6stus_.\n\n\n  7. _Of the disruption of the kingdom of Israel, by which the\n      perpetual division of the spiritual from the carnal Israel was\n      prefigured._\n\nAgain Saul sinned through disobedience, and again Samuel says to him\nin the word of the Lord, \"Because thou hast despised the word of the\nLord, the Lord hath despised thee, that thou mayest not be king over\nIsrael.\"[396] And again for the same sin, when Saul confessed it, and\nprayed for pardon, and besought Samuel to return with him to appease\nthe Lord, he said, \"I will not return with thee: for thou hast\ndespised the word of the Lord, and the Lord will despise thee that\nthou mayest not be king over Israel. And Samuel turned his face to go\naway, and Saul laid hold upon the skirt of his mantle, and rent it.\nAnd Samuel said unto him, The Lord hath rent the kingdom from Israel\nout of thine hand this day, and will give it to thy neighbour, who\nis good above thee, and will divide Israel in twain. And He will not\nbe changed, neither will He repent: for He is not as a man, that He\nshould repent; who threatens and does not persist.\"[397] He to whom\nit is said, \"The Lord will despise thee that thou mayest not be king\nover Israel,\" and \"The Lord hath rent the kingdom from Israel out of\nthine hand this day,\" reigned forty years over Israel,--that is, just\nas long a time as David himself,--yet heard this in the first period\nof his reign, that we may understand it was said because none of his\nrace was to reign, and that we may look to the race of David, whence\nalso is sprung, according to the flesh,[398] the Mediator between God\nand men, the man Christ Jesus.[399]\n\nBut the Scripture has not what is read in most Latin copies, \"The Lord\nhath rent the kingdom of Israel out of thine hand this day,\" but just\nas we have set it down it is found in the Greek copies, \"The Lord hath\nrent the kingdom from Israel out of thine hand;\" that the words \"out\nof thine hand\" may be understood to mean \"from Israel.\" Therefore this\nman figuratively represented the people of Israel, which was to lose\nthe kingdom, Christ Jesus our Lord being about to reign, not carnally,\nbut spiritually. And when it is said of Him, \"And will give it to thy\nneighbour,\" that is to be referred to the fleshly kinship, for Christ,\naccording to the flesh, was of Israel, whence also Saul sprang. But\nwhat is added, \"Good above thee,\" may indeed be understood, \"Better\nthan thee,\" and indeed some have thus translated it; but it is better\ntaken thus, \"Good above thee,\" as meaning that because He is good,\ntherefore He must be above thee, according to that other prophetic\nsaying, \"Till I put all Thine enemies under Thy feet.\"[400] And among\nthem is Israel, from whom, as His persecutor, Christ took away the\nkingdom; although the Israel in whom there was no guile may have been\nthere too, a sort of grain, as it were, of that chaff. For certainly\nthence came the apostles, thence so many martyrs, of whom Stephen,\nis the first, thence so many churches, which the Apostle Paul names,\nmagnifying God in their conversion.\n\nOf which thing I do not doubt what follows is to be understood, \"And\nwill divide Israel in twain,\" to wit, into Israel pertaining to the\nbond woman, and Israel pertaining to the free. For these two kinds were\nat first together, as Abraham still clave to the bond woman, until the\nbarren, made, fruitful by the grace of God, cried, \"Cast out the bond\nwoman and her son.\"[401] We know, indeed, that on account of the sin of\nSolomon, in the reign of his son Rehoboam Israel was divided in two,\nand continued so, the separate parts having their own kings, until that\nwhole nation was overthrown with a great destruction, and carried away\nby the Chaldeans. But what was this to Saul, when, if any such thing\nwas threatened, it would be threatened against David himself, whose son\nSolomon was? Finally, the Hebrew nation is not now divided internally,\nbut is dispersed through the earth indiscriminately, in the fellowship\nof the same error. But that division with which God threatened the\nkingdom and people in the person of Saul, who represented them, is\nshown to be eternal and unchangeable by this which is added, \"And He\nwill not be changed, neither will He repent: for He is not as a man,\nthat He should repent; who threatens and does not persist,\"--that is, a\nman threatens and does not persist, but not God, who does not repent\nlike man. For when we read that He repents, a change of circumstance\nis meant, flowing from the divine immutable foreknowledge. Therefore,\nwhen God is said not to repent, it is to be understood that He does not\nchange.\n\nWe see that this sentence concerning this division of the people\nof Israel, divinely uttered in these words, has been altogether\nirremediable and quite perpetual. For whoever have turned, or are\nturning, or shall turn thence to Christ, it has been according to the\nforeknowledge of God, not according to the one and the same nature of\nthe human race. Certainly none of the Israelites, who, cleaving to\nChrist, have continued in Him, shall ever be among those Israelites\nwho persist in being His enemies even to the end of this life, but\nshall for ever remain in the separation which is here foretold.\nFor the Old Testament, from the Mount Sinai, which gendereth to\nbondage,[402] profiteth nothing, unless because it bears witness to\nthe New Testament. Otherwise, however long Moses is read, the veil is\nput over their heart; but when any one shall turn thence to Christ,\nthe veil shall be taken away.[403] For the very desire of those who\nturn is changed from the old to the new, so that each no longer\ndesires to obtain carnal but spiritual felicity. Wherefore that great\nprophet Samuel himself, before he had anointed Saul, when he had\ncried to the Lord for Israel, and He had heard him, and when he had\noffered a whole burnt-offering, as the aliens were coming to battle\nagainst the people of God, and the Lord thundered above them and\nthey were confused, and fell before Israel and were overcome; [then]\nhe took one stone and set it up between the old and new Massephat\n(Mizpeh), and called its name Ebenezer, which means \"the stone of the\nhelper,\" and said, \"Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.\"[404] Massephat\nis interpreted \"desire.\" That stone of the helper is the mediation of\nthe Saviour, by which we go from the old Massephat to the new,--that\nis, from the desire with which carnal happiness was expected in\nthe carnal kingdom to the desire with which the truest spiritual\nhappiness is expected in the kingdom of heaven; and since nothing is\nbetter than that, the Lord helpeth us hitherto.\n\n\n  8. _Of the promises made to David in his son, which are in no wise\n           fulfilled in Solomon, but most fully in Christ._\n\nAnd now I see I must show what, pertaining to the matter I treat of,\nGod promised to David himself, who succeeded Saul in the kingdom,\nwhose change prefigured that final change on account of which all\nthings were divinely spoken, all things were committed to writing.\nWhen many things had gone prosperously with king David, he thought to\nmake a house for God, even that temple of most excellent renown which\nwas afterwards built by king Solomon his son. While he was thinking\nof this, the word of the Lord came to Nathan the prophet, which he\nbrought to the king, in which, after God had said that a house should\nnot be built unto Him by David himself, and that in all that long\ntime He had never commanded any of His people to build Him a house of\ncedar, he says, \"And now thus shalt thou say unto my servant David,\nThus saith God Almighty, I took thee from the sheep-cote that thou\nmightest be for a ruler over my people in Israel: and I was with thee\nwhithersoever thou wentest, and have cut off all thine enemies from\nbefore thy face, and have made thee a name, according to the name of\nthe great ones who are over the earth. And I will appoint a place for\nmy people Israel, and will plant him, and he shall dwell apart, and\nshall be troubled no more; and the son of wickedness shall not humble\nhim any more, as from the beginning, from the days when I appointed\njudges over my people Israel. And I will give thee rest from all\nthine enemies, and the Lord will tell [hath told] thee, because thou\nshalt build an house for Him. And it shall come to pass when thy days\nbe fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, that I will\nraise up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels,\nand I will prepare his kingdom. He shall build me an house for my\nname; and I will order his throne even to eternity. I will be his\nFather, and he shall be my son. And if he commit iniquity, I will\nchasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the sons of\nmen: but my mercy I will not take away from him, as I took it away\nfrom those whom I put away from before my face. And his house shall\nbe faithful, and his kingdom even for evermore before me, and his\nthrone shall be set up even for evermore.\"[405]\n\nHe who thinks this grand promise was fulfilled in Solomon greatly errs;\nfor he attends to the saying, \"He shall build me an house,\" but he\ndoes not attend to the saying, \"His house shall be faithful, and his\nkingdom for evermore before me.\" Let him therefore attend and behold\nthe house of Solomon full of strange women worshipping false gods,\nand the king himself, aforetime wise, seduced by them, and cast down\ninto the same idolatry: and let him not dare to think that God either\npromised this falsely, or was unable to foreknow that Solomon and his\nhouse would become what they did. But we ought not to be in doubt here,\nor to see the fulfilment of these things save in Christ our Lord, who\nwas made of the seed of David according to the flesh,[406] lest we\nshould vainly and uselessly look for some other here, like the carnal\nJews. For even they understand this much, that the son whom they read\nof in that place as promised to David was not Solomon; so that, with\nwonderful blindness to Him who was promised and is now declared with\nso great manifestation, they say they hope for another. Indeed, even\nin Solomon there appeared some image of the future event, in that he\nbuilt the temple, and had peace according to his name (for Solomon\nmeans \"pacific\"), and in the beginning of his reign was wonderfully\npraiseworthy; but while, as a shadow of Him that should come, he\nforeshowed Christ our Lord, he did not also in his own person resemble\nHim. Whence some things concerning him are so written as if they were\nprophesied of himself, while the Holy Scripture, prophesying even by\nevents, somehow delineates in him the figure of things to come. For,\nbesides the books of divine history, in which his reign is narrated,\nthe 72d Psalm also is inscribed in the title with his name, in which so\nmany things are said which cannot at all apply to him, but which apply\nto the Lord Christ with such evident fitness as makes it quite apparent\nthat in the one the figure is in some way shadowed forth, but in the\nother the truth itself is presented. For it is known within what bounds\nthe kingdom of Solomon was enclosed; and yet in that psalm, not to\nspeak of other things, we read, \"He shall have dominion from sea even\nto sea, and from the river to the ends of the earth,\"[407] which we see\nfulfilled in Christ. Truly he took the beginning of His reigning from\nthe river where John baptized; for, when pointed out by him, He began\nto be acknowledged by the disciples, who called Him not only Master,\nbut also Lord.\n\nNor was it for any other reason that, while his father David was\nstill living, Solomon began to reign, which happened to none other of\ntheir kings, except that from this also it might be clearly apparent\nthat it was not himself this prophecy spoken to his father signified\nbeforehand, saying, \"And it shall come to pass when thy days be\nfulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, that I will raise\nup thy seed which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will prepare\nHis kingdom.\" How, therefore, shall it be thought on account of what\nfollows, \"He shall build me an house,\" that this Solomon is prophesied,\nand not rather be understood on account of what precedes, \"When thy\ndays be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will raise\nup thy seed after thee,\" that another pacific One is promised, who is\nforetold as about to be raised up, not before David's death, as he was,\nbut after it? For however long the interval of time might be before\nJesus Christ came, beyond doubt it was after the death of king David,\nto whom He was so promised, that He behoved to come, who should build\nan house of God, not of wood and stone, but of men, such as we rejoice\nHe does build. For to this house, that is, to believers, the apostle\nsaith, \"The temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.\"[408]\n\n\n  9. _How like the prophecy about Christ in the_ 89_th Psalm is\n      to the things promised in Nathan's prophecy in the Books of\n      Samuel._\n\nWherefore also in the 89th Psalm, of which the title is, \"An\ninstruction for himself by Ethan the Israelite,\" mention is made\nof the promises God made to king David, and some things are there\nadded similar to those found in the Book of Samuel, such as this,\n\"I have sworn to David my servant that I will prepare his seed for\never.\"[409] And again, \"Then thou spakest in vision to thy sons, and\nsaidst, I have laid help upon the mighty One, and have exalted the\nchosen One out of my people. I have found David my servant, and with\nmy holy oil I have anointed him. For mine hand shall help him, and\nmine arm shall strengthen him. The enemy shall not prevail against\nhim, and the son of iniquity shall harm him no more. And I will beat\ndown his foes from before his face, and those that hate him will I\nput to flight. And my truth and my mercy shall be with him, and in my\nname shall his horn be exalted. I will set his hand also in the sea,\nand his right hand in the rivers. He shall cry unto me, Thou art my\nFather, my God, and the undertaker of my salvation. Also I will make\nhim my first-born, high among the kings of the earth. My mercy will I\nkeep for him for evermore, and my covenant shall be faithful (sure)\nwith him. His seed also will I set for ever and ever, and his throne\nas the days of heaven.\"[410] Which words, when rightly understood,\nare all understood to be about the Lord Jesus Christ, under the\nname of David, on account of the form of a servant, which the same\nMediator assumed[411] from the virgin of the seed of David.[412] For\nimmediately something is said about the sins of his children, such\nas is set down in the Book of Samuel, and is more readily taken as\nif of Solomon. For there, that is, in the Book of Samuel, he says,\n\"And if he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men,\nand with the stripes of the sons of men; but my mercy will I not take\naway from him,\"[413] meaning by stripes the strokes of correction.\nHence that saying, \"Touch ye not my christs.\"[414] For what else\nis that than, Do not harm them? But in the psalm, when speaking as\nif of David, He says something of the same kind there too. \"If his\nchildren,\" saith He, \"forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments;\nif they profane my righteousnesses, and keep not my commandments;\nI will visit their iniquities with the rod, and their faults with\nstripes: but my mercy I will not make void from him.\"[415] He did not\nsay \"from them,\" although He spoke of his children, not of himself;\nbut he said \"from him,\" which means the same thing if rightly\nunderstood. For of Christ Himself, who is the head of the Church,\nthere could not be found any sins which required to be divinely\nrestrained by human correction, mercy being still continued; but they\nare found in His body and members, which is His people. Therefore\nin the Book of Samuel it is said, \"iniquity of Him,\" but in the\npsalm, \"of His children,\" that we may understand that what is said\nof His body is in some way said of Himself. Wherefore also, when\nSaul persecuted His body, that is, His believing people, He Himself\nsaith from heaven, \"Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?\"[416] Then\nin the following words of the psalm He says, \"Neither will I hurt in\nmy truth, nor profane my covenant, and the things that proceed from\nmy lips I will not disallow. Once have I sworn by my holiness, if I\nlie unto David,\"[417]--that is, I will in no wise lie unto David; for\nScripture is wont to speak thus. But what that is in which He will\nnot lie, He adds, saying, \"His seed shall endure for ever, and his\nthrone as the sun before me, and as the moon perfected for ever, and\na faithful witness in heaven.\"[418]\n\n\n  10. _How different the acts in the kingdom of the earthly Jerusalem\n      are from those which God had promised, so that the truth of the\n      promise should be understood to pertain to the glory of the\n      other King and kingdom._\n\nThat it might not be supposed that a promise so strongly expressed\nand confirmed was fulfilled in Solomon, as if he hoped for, yet did\nnot find it, he says, \"But Thou hast cast off, and hast brought to\nnothing, O Lord.\"[419] This truly was done concerning the kingdom\nof Solomon among his posterity, even to the overthrow of the\nearthly Jerusalem itself, which was the seat of the kingdom, and\nespecially the destruction of the very temple which had been built by\nSolomon. But lest on this account God should be thought to have done\ncontrary to His promise, immediately he adds, \"Thou hast delayed Thy\nChrist.\"[420] Therefore he is not Solomon, nor yet David himself, if\nthe Christ of the Lord is delayed. For while all the kings are called\nHis christs, who were consecrated with that mystical chrism, not only\nfrom king David downwards, but even from that Saul who first was\nanointed king of that same people, David himself indeed calling him\nthe Lord's christ, yet there was one true Christ, whose figure they\nbore by the prophetic unction, who, according to the opinion of men,\nwho thought he was to be understood as come in David or in Solomon,\nwas long delayed, but who, according as God had disposed, was to come\nin His own time. The following part of this psalm goes on to say what\nin the meantime, while He was delayed, was to become of the kingdom\nof the earthly Jerusalem, where it was hoped He would certainly\nreign: \"Thou hast overthrown the covenant of Thy servant; Thou hast\nprofaned in the earth his sanctuary. Thou hast broken down all his\nwalls; Thou hast put his strongholds in fear. All that pass by the\nway spoil him; he is made a reproach to his neighbours. Thou hast set\nup the right hand of his enemies; Thou hast made all his enemies to\nrejoice. Thou hast turned aside the help of his sword, and hast not\nhelped him in war. Thou hast destroyed him from cleansing; Thou hast\ndashed down his seat to the ground. Thou hast shortened the days of\nhis seat; Thou hast poured confusion over him.\"[421] All these things\ncame upon Jerusalem the bond woman, in which some also reigned who\nwere children of the free woman, holding that kingdom in temporary\nstewardship, but holding the kingdom of the heavenly Jerusalem, whose\nchildren they were, in true faith, and hoping in the true Christ. But\nhow these things came upon that kingdom, the history of its affairs\npoints out if it is read.\n\n\n  11. _Of the substance of the people of God, which through His\n      assumption of flesh is in Christ, who alone had power to\n      deliver His own soul from hell._\n\nBut after having prophesied these things, the prophet betakes him\nto praying to God; yet even the very prayer is prophecy: \"How long,\nLord, dost Thou turn away in the end?\"[422] \"Thy face\" is understood,\nas it is elsewhere said, \"How long dost Thou turn away Thy face from\nme?\"[423] For therefore some copies have here not \"dost,\" but \"wilt\nThou turn away;\" although it could be understood, \"Thou turnest\naway Thy mercy, which Thou didst promise to David.\" But when he\nsays, \"in the end,\" what does it mean, except even to the end? By\nwhich end is to be understood the last time, when even that nation\nis to believe in Christ Jesus, before which end what He has just\nsorrowfully bewailed must come to pass. On account of which it is\nalso added here, \"Thy wrath shall burn like fire. Remember what is\nmy substance.\"[424] This cannot be better understood than of Jesus\nHimself, the substance of His people, of whose nature His flesh\nis. \"For not in vain,\" he says, \"hast Thou made all the sons of\nmen.\"[425] For unless the one Son of man had been the substance of\nIsrael, through which Son of man many sons of men should be set free,\nall the sons of men would have been made wholly in vain. But now\nindeed all mankind through the fall of the first man has fallen from\nthe truth into vanity; for which reason another psalm says, \"Man is\nlike to vanity: his days pass away as a shadow;\"[426] yet God has not\nmade all the sons of men in vain, because He frees many from vanity\nthrough the Mediator Jesus, and those whom He did not foreknow as to\nbe delivered, He made not wholly in vain in the most beautiful and\nmost just ordination of the whole rational creation, for the use of\nthose who were to be delivered, and for the comparison of the two\ncities by mutual contrast. Thereafter it follows, \"Who is the man\nthat shall live, and shall not see death? shall he snatch his soul\nfrom the hand of hell?\"[427] Who is this but that substance of Israel\nout of the seed of David, Christ Jesus, of whom the apostle says,\nthat \"rising from the dead He now dieth not, and death shall no more\nhave dominion over Him?\"[428] For He shall so live and not see death,\nthat yet He shall have been dead; but shall have delivered His soul\nfrom the hand of hell, whither He had descended in order to loose\nsome from the chains of hell; but He hath delivered it by that power\nof which He says in the Gospel, \"I have the power of laying down my\nlife, and I have the power of taking it again.\"[429]\n\n\n  12. _To whose person the entreaty for the promises is to be\n      understood to belong, when he says in the psalm, \"Where are\n      Thine ancient compassions, Lord?\" etc._\n\nBut the rest of this psalm runs thus: \"Where are Thine ancient\ncompassions, Lord, which Thou swarest unto David in Thy truth?\nRemember, Lord, the reproach of Thy servants, which I have borne in\nmy bosom of many nations; wherewith Thine enemies have reproached, O\nLord, wherewith they have reproached the change of Thy Christ.\"[430]\nNow it may with very good reason be asked whether this is spoken in\nthe person of those Israelites who desired that the promise made to\nDavid might be fulfilled to them; or rather of the Christians, who\nare Israelites not after the flesh but after the Spirit.[431] This\ncertainly was spoken or written in the time of Ethan, from whose\nname this psalm gets its title, and that was the same as the time of\nDavid's reign; and therefore it would not have been said, \"Where are\nThine ancient compassions, Lord, which Thou hast sworn unto David\nin Thy truth?\" unless the prophet had assumed the person of those\nwho should come long afterwards, to whom that time when these things\nwere promised to David was ancient. But it may be understood thus,\nthat many nations, when they persecuted the Christians, reproached\nthem with the passion of Christ, which Scripture calls His change,\nbecause by dying He is made immortal. The change of Christ, according\nto this passage, may also be understood to be reproached by the\nIsraelites, because, when they hoped He would be theirs, He was made\nthe Saviour of the nations; and many nations who have believed in\nHim by the New Testament now reproach them who remain in the old\nwith this: so that it is said, \"Remember, Lord, the reproach of Thy\nservants;\" because through the Lord's not forgetting, but rather\npitying them, even they after this reproach are to believe. But what\nI have put first seems to me the most suitable meaning. For to the\nenemies of Christ who are reproached with this, that Christ hath left\nthem, turning to the Gentiles,[432] this speech is incongruously\nassigned, \"Remember, Lord, the reproach of Thy servants,\" for such\nJews are not to be styled the servants of God; but these words fit\nthose who, if they suffered great humiliations through persecution\nfor the name of Christ, could call to mind that an exalted kingdom\nhad been promised to the seed of David, and in desire of it, could\nsay not despairingly, but as asking, seeking, knocking,[433] \"Where\nare Thine ancient compassions, Lord, which Thou swarest unto David\nin Thy truth? Remember, Lord, the reproach of Thy servants, that I\nhave borne in my bosom of many nations;\" that is, have patiently\nendured in my inward parts. \"That Thine enemies have reproached,\nO Lord, wherewith they have reproached the change of Thy Christ,\"\nnot thinking it a change, but a consumption.[434] But what does\n\"Remember, Lord,\" mean, but that Thou wouldst have compassion,\nand wouldst for my patiently borne humiliation reward me with the\nexcellency which Thou swarest unto David in Thy truth? But if we\nassign these words to the Jews, those servants of God who, on the\nconquest of the earthly Jerusalem, before Jesus Christ was born after\nthe manner of men, were led into captivity, could say such things,\nunderstanding the change of Christ, because indeed through Him was\nto be surely expected, not an earthly and carnal felicity, such as\nappeared during the few years of king Solomon, but a heavenly and\nspiritual felicity; and when the nations, then ignorant of this\nthrough unbelief, exulted over and insulted the people of God for\nbeing captives, what else was this than ignorantly to reproach with\nthe change of Christ those who understand the change of Christ?\nAnd therefore what follows when this psalm is concluded, \"Let the\nblessing of the Lord be for evermore, amen, amen,\" is suitable enough\nfor the whole people of God belonging to the heavenly Jerusalem,\nwhether for those things that lay hid in the Old Testament before\nthe New was revealed, or for those that, being now revealed in the\nNew Testament, are manifestly discerned to belong to Christ. For the\nblessing of the Lord in the seed of David does not belong to any\nparticular time, such as appeared in the days of Solomon, but is for\nevermore to be hoped for, in which most certain hope it is said,\n\"Amen, amen;\" for this repetition of the word is the confirmation of\nthat hope. Therefore David understanding this, says in the second\nBook of Kings, in the passage from which we digressed to this\npsalm,[435] \"Thou hast spoken also for Thy servant's house for a\ngreat while to come.\"[436] Therefore also a little after he says,\n\"Now begin, and bless the house of Thy servant for evermore,\" etc.,\nbecause the son was then about to be born from whom his posterity\nshould be continued to Christ, through whom his house should be\neternal, and should also be the house of God. For it is called the\nhouse of David on account of David's race; but the selfsame is called\nthe house of God on account of the temple of God, made of men, not\nof stones, where shall dwell for evermore the people with and in\ntheir God, and God with and in His people, so that God may fill His\npeople, and the people be filled with their God, while God shall be\nall in all, Himself their reward in peace who is their strength in\nwar. Therefore, when it is said in the words of Nathan, \"And the\nLord will tell thee what an house thou shalt build for Him,\"[437] it\nis afterwards said in the words of David, \"For Thou, Lord Almighty,\nGod of Israel, hast opened the ear of Thy servant, saying, I will\nbuild thee an house.\"[438] For this house is built both by us through\nliving well, and by God through helping us to live well; for \"except\nthe Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it.\"[439]\nAnd when the final dedication of this house shall take place, then\nwhat God here says by Nathan shall be fulfilled, \"And I will appoint\na place for my people Israel, and will plant him, and he shall dwell\napart, and shall be troubled no more; and the son of iniquity shall\nnot humble him any more, as from the beginning, from the days when I\nappointed judges over my people Israel.\"[440]\n\n\n   13. _Whether the truth of this promised peace can be ascribed to\n                those times passed away under Solomon._\n\nWhoever hopes for this so great good in this world, and in this\nearth, his wisdom is but folly. Can any one think it was fulfilled\nin the peace of Solomon's reign? Scripture certainly commends that\npeace with excellent praise as a shadow of that which is to come.\nBut this opinion is to be vigilantly opposed, since after it is\nsaid, \"And the son of iniquity shall not humble him any more,\" it is\nimmediately added, \"as from the beginning, from the days in which I\nappointed judges over my people Israel.\"[441] For the judges were\nappointed over that people from the time when they received the land\nof promise, before kings had begun to be there. And certainly the\nson of iniquity, that is, the foreign enemy, humbled him through\nperiods of time in which we read that peace alternated with wars; and\nin that period longer times of peace are found than Solomon had, who\nreigned forty years. For under that judge who is called Ehud there\nwere eighty years of peace.[442] Be it far from us, therefore, that\nwe should believe the times of Solomon are predicted in this promise,\nmuch less indeed those of any other king whatever. For none other\nof them reigned in such great peace as he; nor did that nation ever\nat all hold that kingdom so as to have no anxiety lest it should be\nsubdued by enemies: for in the very great mutability of human affairs\nsuch great security is never given to any people, that it should not\ndread invasions hostile to this life. Therefore the place of this\npromised peaceful and secure habitation is eternal, and of right\nbelongs eternally to Jerusalem the free mother, where the genuine\npeople of Israel shall be: for this name is interpreted \"Seeing God;\"\nin the desire of which reward a pious life is to be led through faith\nin this miserable pilgrimage.[443]\n\n\n        14. _Of David's concern in the writing of the Psalms._\n\nIn the progress of the city of God through the ages, therefore, David\nfirst reigned in the earthly Jerusalem as a shadow of that which\nwas to come. Now David was a man skilled in songs, who dearly loved\nmusical harmony, not with a vulgar delight, but with a believing\ndisposition, and by it served his God, who is the true God, by the\nmystical representation of a great thing. For the rational and\nwell-ordered concord of diverse sounds in harmonious variety suggests\nthe compact unity of the well-ordered city. Then almost all his\nprophecy is in psalms, of which a hundred and fifty are contained in\nwhat we call the Book of Psalms, of which some will have it those\nonly were made by David which are inscribed with his name. But there\nare also some who think none of them were made by him except those\nwhich are marked \"Of David;\" but those which have in the title \"For\nDavid\" have been made by others who assumed his person. Which opinion\nis refuted by the voice of the Saviour Himself in the Gospel, when He\nsays that David himself by the Spirit said Christ was his Lord; for\nthe 110th Psalm begins thus, \"The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou\nat my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.\"[444]\nAnd truly that very psalm, like many more, has in the title, not\n\"of David,\" but \"for David.\" But those seem to me to hold the more\ncredible opinion, who ascribe to him the authorship of all these\nhundred and fifty psalms, and think that he prefixed to some of them\nthe names even of other men, who prefigured something pertinent to\nthe matter, but chose to have no man's name in the titles of the\nrest, just as God inspired him in the management of this variety,\nwhich, although dark, is not meaningless. Neither ought it to move\none not to believe this, that the names of some prophets who lived\nlong after the times of king David are read in the inscriptions of\ncertain psalms in that book, and that the things said there seem to\nbe spoken as it were by them. Nor was the prophetic Spirit unable to\nreveal to king David, when he prophesied, even these names of future\nprophets, so that he might prophetically sing something which should\nsuit their persons; just as it was revealed to a certain prophet that\nking Josiah should arise and reign after more than three hundred\nyears, who predicted his future deeds also along with his name.[445]\n\n\n    15. _Whether all the things prophesied in the Psalms concerning\n  Christ and His Church should be taken up in the text of this work._\n\nAnd now I see it may be expected of me that I shall open up in this\npart of this book what David may have prophesied in the Psalms\nconcerning the Lord Jesus Christ or His Church. But although I\nhave already done so in one instance, I am prevented from doing as\nthat expectation seems to demand, rather by the abundance than the\nscarcity of matter. For the necessity of shunning prolixity forbids\nmy setting down all things; yet I fear lest if I select some I shall\nappear to many, who know these things, to have passed by the more\nnecessary. Besides, the proof that is adduced ought to be supported\nby the context of the whole psalm, so that at least there may be\nnothing against it if everything does not support it; lest we should\nseem, after the fashion of the centos, to gather for the thing we\nwish, as it were verses out of a grand poem, what shall be found\nto have been written not about it, but about some other and widely\ndifferent thing. But ere this could be pointed out in each psalm, the\nwhole of it must be expounded; and how great a work that would be,\nthe volumes of others, as well as our own, in which we have done it,\nshow well enough. Let him then who will, or can, read these volumes,\nand he will find out how many and great things David, at once king\nand prophet, has prophesied concerning Christ and His Church, to wit,\nconcerning the King and the city which He has built.\n\n\n     16. _Of the things pertaining to Christ and the Church, said\n           either openly or tropically in the_ 45_th Psalm._\n\nFor whatever direct and manifest prophetic utterances there may be\nabout anything, it is necessary that those which are tropical should\nbe mingled with them; which, chiefly on account of those of slower\nunderstanding, thrust upon the more learned the laborious task of\nclearing up and expounding them. Some of them, indeed, on the very\nfirst blush, as soon as they are spoken, exhibit Christ and the\nChurch, although some things in them that are less intelligible\nremain to be expounded at leisure. We have an example of this in that\nsame Book of Psalms: \"My heart bubbled up a good matter: I utter my\nwords to the king. My tongue is the pen of a scribe, writing swiftly.\nThy form is beautiful beyond the sons of men; grace is poured out\nin Thy lips: therefore God hath blessed Thee for evermore. Gird Thy\nsword about Thy thigh, O Most Mighty. With Thy goodliness and Thy\nbeauty go forward, proceed prosperously, and reign, because of Thy\ntruth, and meekness, and righteousness; and Thy right hand shall\nlead Thee forth wonderfully. Thy sharp arrows are most powerful. The\npeople shall fall under Thee: in the heart of the King's enemies.\nThy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a rod of direction is the\nrod of Thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hast hated\niniquity: therefore God, Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil\nof exultation above Thy fellows. Myrrh and drops, and cassia from\nThy vestments, from the houses of ivory: out of which the daughters\nof kings have delighted Thee in Thine honour.\"[446] Who is there, no\nmatter how slow, but must here recognise Christ whom we preach, and\nin whom we believe, if he hears that He is God, whose throne is for\never and ever, and that He is anointed by God, as God indeed anoints,\nnot with a visible, but with a spiritual and intelligible chrism? For\nwho is so untaught in this religion, or so deaf to its far and wide\nspread fame, as not to know that Christ is named from this chrism,\nthat is, from this anointing? But when it is acknowledged that this\nKing is Christ, let each one who is already subject to Him who reigns\nbecause of truth, meekness, and righteousness, inquire at his leisure\ninto these other things that are here said tropically: how His form\nis beautiful beyond the sons of men, with a certain beauty that is\nthe more to be loved and admired the less it is corporeal; and what\nHis sword, arrows, and other things of that kind may be, which are\nset down, not properly, but tropically.\n\nThen let him look upon His Church, joined to her so great Husband\nin spiritual marriage and divine love, of which it is said in\nthese words which follow, \"The queen stood upon Thy right hand in\ngold-embroidered vestments, girded about with variety. Hearken, O\ndaughter, and look, and incline thine ear; forget also thy people,\nand thy father's house. Because the King hath greatly desired thy\nbeauty; for He is the Lord thy God. And the daughters of Tyre shall\nworship Him with gifts; the rich among the people shall entreat Thy\nface. The daughter of the King has all her glory within, in golden\nfringes, girded about with variety. The virgins shall be brought\nafter her to the King: her neighbours shall be brought to Thee.\nThey shall be brought with gladness and exultation: they shall be\nled into the temple of the King. Instead of thy fathers, sons shall\nbe born to thee: thou shalt establish them as princes over all the\nearth. They shall be mindful of thy name in every generation and\ndescent. Therefore shall the people acknowledge thee for evermore,\neven for ever and ever.\"[447] I do not think any one is so stupid\nas to believe that some poor woman is here praised and described,\nas the spouse, to wit, of Him to whom it is said, \"Thy throne, O\nGod, is for ever and ever: a rod of direction is the rod of Thy\nkingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity: therefore\nGod, Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of exultation above\nThy fellows;\"[448] that is, plainly, Christ above Christians. For\nthese are His fellows, out of the unity and concord of whom in all\nnations that queen is formed, as it is said of her in another psalm,\n\"The city of the great King.\"[449] The same is Sion spiritually,\nwhich name in Latin is interpreted _speculatio_ (discovery); for\nshe descries the great good of the world to come, because her\nattention is directed thither. In the same way she is also Jerusalem\nspiritually, of which we have already said many things. Her enemy is\nthe city of the devil, Babylon, which is interpreted \"confusion.\"\nYet out of this Babylon this queen is in all nations set free by\nregeneration, and passes from the worst to the best King,--that is,\nfrom the devil to Christ. Wherefore it is said to her, \"Forget thy\npeople and thy father's house.\" Of this impious city those also are\na portion who are Israelites only in the flesh and not by faith,\nenemies also of this great King Himself, and of His queen. For\nChrist, having come to them, and been slain by them, has the more\nbecome the King of others, whom He did not see in the flesh. Whence\nour King Himself says through the prophecy of a certain psalm, \"Thou\nwilt deliver me from the contradictions of the people; Thou wilt make\nme head of the nations. A people whom I have not known hath served\nme: in the hearing of the ear it hath obeyed me.\"[450] Therefore\nthis people of the nations, which Christ did not know in His bodily\npresence, yet has believed in that Christ as announced to it; so that\nit might be said of it with good reason, \"In the hearing of the ear\nit hath obeyed me,\" for \"faith is by hearing.\"[451] This people, I\nsay, added to those who are the true Israelites both by the flesh and\nby faith, is the city of God, which has brought forth Christ Himself\naccording to the flesh, since He was in these Israelites only. For\nthence came the Virgin Mary, in whom Christ assumed flesh that He\nmight be man. Of which city another psalm says, \"Mother Sion, shall\na man say, and the man is made in her, and the Highest Himself hath\nfounded her.\"[452] Who is this Highest, save God? And thus Christ,\nwho is God, before He became man through Mary in that city, Himself\nfounded it by the patriarchs and prophets. As therefore was said\nby prophecy so long before to this queen, the city of God, what we\nalready can see fulfilled, \"Instead of thy fathers, sons are born\nto thee; thou shalt make them princes over all the earth;\"[453] so\nout of her sons truly are set up even her fathers [princes] through\nall the earth, when the people, coming together to her, confess to\nher with the confession of eternal praise for ever and ever. Beyond\ndoubt, whatever interpretation is put on what is here expressed\nsomewhat darkly in figurative language, ought to be in agreement with\nthese most manifest things.\n\n\n       17. _Of those things in the_ 110_th Psalm which relate to\n      the priesthood of Christ, and in the_ 22_d to His passion._\n\nJust as in that psalm also where Christ is most openly proclaimed\nas Priest, even as He is here as King, \"The Lord said unto my\nLord, Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy\nfootstool.\"[454] That Christ sits on the right hand of God the Father\nis believed, not seen; that His enemies also are put under His feet\ndoth not yet appear; it is being done, [therefore] it will appear\nat last: yea, this is now believed, afterward it shall be seen. But\nwhat follows, \"The Lord will send forth the rod of Thy strength out\nof Sion, and rule Thou in the midst of Thine enemies,\"[455] is so\nclear, that to deny it would imply not merely unbelief and mistake,\nbut downright impudence. And even enemies must certainly confess\nthat out of Sion has been sent the law of Christ which we call the\ngospel, and acknowledge as the rod of His strength. But that He rules\nin the midst of His enemies, these same enemies among whom He rules\nthemselves bear witness, gnashing their teeth and consuming away, and\nhaving power to do nothing against Him. Then what he says a little\nafter, \"The Lord hath sworn and will not repent,\"[456] by which\nwords He intimates that what He adds is immutable, \"Thou art a priest\nfor ever after the order of Melchizedek,\"[457] who is permitted to\ndoubt of whom these things are said, seeing that now there is nowhere\na priesthood and sacrifice after the order of Aaron, and everywhere\nmen offer under Christ as the Priest, which Melchizedek showed when\nhe blessed Abraham? Therefore to these manifest things are to be\nreferred, when rightly understood, those things in the same psalm\nthat are set down a little more obscurely, and we have already made\nknown in our popular sermons how these things are to be rightly\nunderstood. So also in that where Christ utters through prophecy the\nhumiliation of His passion, saying, \"They pierced my hands and feet;\nthey counted all my bones. Yea, they looked and stared at me.\"[458]\nBy which words he certainly meant His body stretched out on the\ncross, with the hands and feet pierced and perforated by the striking\nthrough of the nails, and that He had in that way made Himself a\nspectacle to those who looked and stared. And he adds, \"They parted\nmy garments among them, and over my vesture they cast lots.\"[459]\nHow this prophecy has been fulfilled the Gospel history narrates.\nThen, indeed, the other things also which are said there less openly\nare rightly understood when they agree with those which shine with\nso great clearness; especially because those things also which we do\nnot believe as past, but survey as present, are beheld by the whole\nworld, being now exhibited just as they are read of in this very\npsalm as predicted so long before. For it is there said a little\nafter, \"All the ends of the earth shall remember, and turn unto the\nLord, and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before Him;\nfor the kingdom is the Lord's, and He shall rule the nations.\"\n\n\n    18. _Of the_ 3_d_, 41_st_, 15_th_, _and_ 68_th Psalms, in which\n        the death and resurrection of the Lord are prophesied._\n\nAbout His resurrection also the oracles of the Psalms are by no\nmeans silent. For what else is it that is sung in His person in the\n3d Psalm, \"I laid me down and took a sleep, [and] I awaked, for\nthe Lord shall sustain me?\"[460] Is there perchance any one so\nstupid as to believe that the prophet chose to point it out to us as\nsomething great that He had slept and risen up, unless that sleep\nhad been death, and that awaking the resurrection, which behoved to\nbe thus prophesied concerning Christ? For in the 41st Psalm also it\nis shown much more clearly, where in the person of the Mediator, in\nthe usual way, things are narrated as if past which were prophesied\nas yet to come, since these things which were yet to come were in\nthe predestination and foreknowledge of God as if they were done,\nbecause they were certain. He says, \"Mine enemies speak evil of me;\nWhen shall he die, and his name perish? And if he came in to see\nme, his heart spake vain things: he gathered iniquity to himself.\nHe went out of doors, and uttered it all at once. Against me all\nmine enemies whisper together: against me do they devise evil. They\nhave planned an unjust thing against me. Shall not he that sleeps\nalso rise again?\"[461] These words are certainly so set down here\nthat he may be understood to say nothing else than if he said, Shall\nnot He that died recover life again? The previous words clearly\nshow that His enemies have meditated and planned His death, and\nthat this was executed by him who came in to see, and went out to\nbetray. But to whom does not Judas here occur, who, from being His\ndisciple, became His betrayer? Therefore because they were about to\ndo what they had plotted,--that is, were about to kill Him,--he,\nto show them that with useless malice they were about to kill Him\nwho should rise again, so adds this verse, as if he said, What vain\nthing are you doing? What will be your crime will be my sleep. \"Shall\nnot He that sleeps also rise again?\" And yet he indicates in the\nfollowing verses that they should not commit so great an impiety with\nimpunity, saying, \"Yea, the man of my peace in whom I trusted, who\nate my bread, hath enlarged the heel over me;\"[462] that is, hath\ntrampled me under foot. \"But Thou,\" he saith, \"O Lord, be merciful\nunto me, and raise me up, that I may requite them.\"[463] Who can\nnow deny this who sees the Jews, after the passion and resurrection\nof Christ, utterly rooted up from their abodes by warlike slaughter\nand destruction? For, being slain by them, He has risen again, and\nhas requited them meanwhile by temporary discipline, save that for\nthose who are not corrected He keeps it in store for the time when He\nshall judge the quick and the dead.[464] For the Lord Jesus Himself,\nin pointing out that very man to the apostles as His betrayer,\nquoted this very verse of this psalm, and said it was fulfilled in\nHimself: \"He that ate my bread enlarged the heel over me.\" But what\nhe says, \"In whom I trusted,\" does not suit the head but the body.\nFor the Saviour Himself was not ignorant of him concerning whom He\nhad already said before, \"One of you is a devil.\"[465] But He is\nwont to assume the person of His members, and to ascribe to Himself\nwhat should be said of them, because the head and the body is one\nChrist;[466] whence that saying in the Gospel, \"I was an hungered,\nand ye gave me to eat.\"[467] Expounding which, He says, \"Since ye\ndid it to one of the least of mine, ye did it to me.\"[468] Therefore\nHe said that He had trusted, because His disciples then had trusted\nconcerning Judas; for he was numbered with the apostles.[469]\n\nBut the Jews do not expect that the Christ whom they expect will\ndie; therefore they do not think ours to be Him whom the law and the\nprophets announced, but feign to themselves I know not whom of their\nown, exempt from the suffering of death. Therefore, with wonderful\nemptiness and blindness, they contend that the words we have set down\nsignify, not death and resurrection, but sleep and awaking again. But\nthe 16th Psalm also cries to them, \"Therefore my heart is jocund, and\nmy tongue hath exulted; moreover, my flesh also shall rest in hope:\nfor Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt Thou give Thine\nHoly One to see corruption.\"[470] Who but He that rose again the\nthird day could say His flesh had rested in this hope; that His soul,\nnot being left in hell, but speedily returning to it, should revive\nit, that it should not be corrupted as corpses are wont to be, which\nthey can in no wise say of David the prophet and king? The 68th Psalm\nalso cries out, \"Our God is the God of salvation: even of the Lord\nthe exit was by death.\"[471] What could be more openly said? For the\nGod of salvation is the Lord Jesus, which is interpreted Saviour, or\nHealing One. For this reason this name was given, when it was said\nbefore He was born of the virgin: \"Thou shalt bring forth a Son, and\nshalt call His name Jesus; for He shall save His people from their\nsins.\"[472] Because His blood was shed for the remission of their\nsins, it behoved Him to have no other exit from this life than death.\nTherefore, when it had been said, \"Our God is the God of salvation,\"\nimmediately it was added, \"Even of the Lord the exit was by death,\"\nin order to show that we were to be saved by His dying. But that\nsaying is marvellous, \"Even of the Lord,\" as if it was said, Such is\nthat life of mortals, that not even the Lord Himself could go out of\nit otherwise save through death.\n\n\n     19. _Of the_ 69_th Psalm, in which the obstinate unbelief of\n                        the Jews is declared._\n\nBut when the Jews will not in the least yield to the testimonies of\nthis prophecy, which are so manifest, and are also brought by events to\nso clear and certain a completion, certainly that is fulfilled in them\nwhich is written in that psalm which here follows. For when the things\nwhich pertain to His passion are prophetically spoken there also in the\nperson, of Christ, that is mentioned which is unfolded in the Gospel:\n\"They gave me gall for my meat; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar\nfor drink.\"[473] And as it were after such a feast and dainties in this\nway given to Himself, presently He brings in [these words]: \"Let their\ntable become a trap before them, and a retribution, and an offence: let\ntheir eyes be dimmed that they see not, and their back be always bowed\ndown,\"[474] etc. Which things are not spoken as wished for, but are\npredicted under the prophetic form of wishing. What wonder, then, if\nthose whose eyes are dimmed that they see not do not see these manifest\nthings? What wonder if those do not look up at heavenly things whose\nback is always bowed down that they may grovel among earthly things?\nFor these words transferred from the body signify mental faults. Let\nthese things which have been said about the Psalms, that is, about king\nDavid's prophecy, suffice, that we may keep within some bound. But let\nthose readers excuse us who knew them all before; and let them not\ncomplain about those perhaps stronger proofs which they know or think I\nhave passed by.\n\n\n  20. _Of David's reign and merit; and of his son Solomon, and that\n      prophecy relating to Christ which is found either in those\n      books which are joined to those written by him, or in those\n      which are indubitably his._\n\nDavid therefore reigned in the earthly Jerusalem, a son of the heavenly\nJerusalem, much praised by the divine testimony; for even his faults\nare overcome by great piety, through the most salutary humility of\nhis repentance, that he is altogether one of those of whom he himself\nsays, \"Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins\nare covered.\"[475] After him Solomon his son reigned over the same\nwhole people, who, as was said before, began to reign while his father\nwas still alive. This man, after good beginnings, made a bad end. For\nindeed \"prosperity, which wears out the minds of the wise,\"[476] hurt\nhim more than that wisdom profited him, which even yet is and shall\nhereafter be renowned, and was then praised far and wide. He also is\nfound to have prophesied in his books, of which three are received as\nof canonical authority, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs.\nBut it has been customary to ascribe to Solomon other two, of which\none is called Wisdom, the other Ecclesiasticus, on account of some\nresemblance of style,--but the more learned have no doubt that they\nare not his; yet of old the Church, especially the Western, received\nthem into authority,--in the one of which, called the Wisdom of\nSolomon, the passion of Christ is most openly prophesied. For indeed\nHis impious murderers are quoted as saying, \"Let us lie in wait for\nthe righteous, for he is unpleasant to us, and contrary to our works;\nand he upbraideth us with our transgressions of the law, and objecteth\nto our disgrace the transgressions of our education. He professeth to\nhave the knowledge of God, and he calleth himself the Son of God. He\nwas made to reprove our thoughts. He is grievous for us even to behold;\nfor his life is unlike other men's, and his ways are different. We\nare esteemed of him as counterfeits; and he abstaineth from our ways\nas from filthiness. He extols the latter end of the righteous; and\nglorieth that he hath God for his Father. Let us see, therefore, if\nhis words be true; and let us try what shall happen to him, and we\nshall know what shall be the end of him. For if the righteous be the\nSon of God, He will undertake for him, and deliver him out of the hand\nof those that are against him. Let us put him to the question with\ncontumely and torture, that we may know his reverence, and prove his\npatience. Let us condemn him to the most shameful death; for by His\nown sayings He shall be respected. These things did they imagine, and\nwere mistaken; for their own malice hath quite blinded them.\"[477] But\nin Ecclesiasticus the future faith of the nations is predicted in this\nmanner: \"Have mercy upon us, O God, Ruler of all, and send Thy fear\nupon all the nations: lift up Thine hand over the strange nations, and\nlet them see Thy power. As Thou wast sanctified in us before them, so\nbe Thou sanctified in them before us, and let them acknowledge Thee,\naccording as we also have acknowledged Thee; for there is not a God\nbeside Thee, O Lord.\"[478] We see this prophecy in the form of a wish\nand prayer fulfilled through Jesus Christ. But the things which are\nnot written in the canon of the Jews cannot be quoted against their\ncontradictions with so great validity.\n\nBut as regards those three books which it is evident are Solomon's,\nand held canonical by the Jews, to show what of this kind may be\nfound in them pertaining to Christ and the Church demands a laborious\ndiscussion, which, if now entered on, would lengthen this work\nunduly. Yet what we read in the Proverbs of impious men saying, \"Let\nus unrighteously hide in the earth the righteous man; yea, let us\nswallow him up alive as hell, and let us take away his memory from\nthe earth: let us seize his precious possession,\"[479] is not so\nobscure that it may not be understood, without laborious exposition,\nof Christ and His possession the Church. Indeed, the gospel parable\nabout the wicked husbandmen shows that our Lord Jesus Himself said\nsomething like it: \"This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the\ninheritance shall be ours.\"[480] In like manner also that passage in\nthis same book, on which we have already touched[481] when we were\nspeaking of the barren woman who hath born seven, must soon after\nit was uttered have come to be understood of only Christ and the\nChurch by those who knew that Christ was the Wisdom of God. \"Wisdom\nhath builded her an house, and hath set up seven pillars; she hath\nsacrificed her victims, she hath mingled her wine in the bowl; she\nhath also furnished her table. She hath sent her servants summoning\nto the bowl with excellent proclamation, saying, Who is simple,\nlet him turn aside to me. And to the void of sense she hath said,\nCome, eat of my bread, and drink of the wine which I have mingled\nfor you.\"[482] Here certainly we perceive that the Wisdom of God,\nthat is, the Word co-eternal with the Father, hath builded Him an\nhouse, even a human body in the virgin womb, and hath subjoined the\nChurch to it as members to a head, hath slain the martyrs as victims,\nhath furnished a table with wine and bread, where appears also the\npriesthood after the order of Melchizedek, and hath called the simple\nand the void of sense, because, as saith the apostle, \"He hath chosen\nthe weak things of this world that He might confound the things which\nare mighty.\"[483] Yet to these weak ones she saith what follows,\n\"Forsake simplicity, that ye may live; and seek prudence, that ye may\nhave life.\"[484] But to be made partakers of this table is itself to\nbegin to have life. For when he says in another book, which is called\nEcclesiastes, \"There is no good for a man, except that he should eat\nand drink,\"[485] what can he be more credibly understood to say, than\nwhat belongs to the participation of this table which the Mediator of\nthe New Testament Himself, the Priest after the order of Melchizedek,\nfurnishes with His own body and blood? For that sacrifice has\nsucceeded all the sacrifices of the Old Testament, which were slain\nas a shadow of that which was to come; wherefore also we recognise\nthe voice in the 40th Psalm as that of the same Mediator speaking\nthrough prophesy, \"Sacrifice and offering Thou didst not desire;\nbut a body hast Thou perfected for me.\"[486] Because, instead of all\nthese sacrifices and oblations, His body is offered, and is served up\nto the partakers of it. For that this Ecclesiastes, in this sentence\nabout eating and drinking, which he often repeats, and very much\ncommends, does not savour the dainties of carnal pleasures, is made\nplain enough when he says, \"It is better to go into the house of\nmourning than to go into the house of feasting.\"[487] And a little\nafter He says, \"The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning,\nand the heart of the simple in the house of feasting.\"[488] But I\nthink that more worthy of quotation from this book which relates to\nboth cities, the one of the devil, the other of Christ, and to their\nkings, the devil and Christ: \"Woe to thee, O land,\" he says, \"when\nthy king is a youth, and thy princes eat in the morning! Blessed art\nthou, O land, when thy king is the son of nobles, and thy princes eat\nin season, in fortitude, and not in confusion!\"[489] He has called\nthe devil a youth, because of the folly and pride, and rashness and\nunruliness, and other vices which are wont to abound at that age;\nbut Christ is the Son of nobles, that is, of the holy patriarchs,\nof those belonging to the free city, of whom He was begotten in\nthe flesh. The princes of that and other cities are eaters in the\nmorning, that is, before the suitable hour, because they do not\nexpect the seasonable felicity, which is the true, in the world to\ncome, desiring to be speedily made happy with the renown of this\nworld, but the princes of the city of Christ patiently wait for the\ntime of a blessedness that is not fallacious. This is expressed by\nthe words, \"in fortitude, and not in confusion,\" because hope does\nnot deceive them, of which the apostle says, \"But hope maketh not\nashamed.\"[490] A psalm also saith, \"For they that hope in Thee shall\nnot be put to shame.\"[491] But now the Song of Songs is a certain\nspiritual pleasure of holy minds, in the marriage of that King and\nQueen-city, that is, Christ and the Church. But this pleasure is\nwrapped up in allegorical veils, that the Bridegroom may be more\nardently desired, and more joyfully unveiled, and may appear; to whom\nit is said in this same song, \"Equity hath delighted Thee;\"[492] and\nthe bride who those hears, \"Charity is in thy delights.\"[493] We pass\nover many things in silence, in our desire to finish this work.\n\n\n      21. _Of the kings after Solomon, both in Judah and Israel._\n\nThe other kings of the Hebrews after Solomon are scarcely found to have\nprophesied, through certain enigmatic words or actions of theirs, what\nmay pertain to Christ and the Church, either in Judah or Israel; for\nso were the parts of that people styled, when, on account of Solomon's\noffence, from the time of Rehoboam his son, who succeeded him in the\nkingdom, it was divided by God as a punishment. The ten tribes, indeed,\nwhich Jeroboam the servant of Solomon received, being appointed the\nking in Samaria, were distinctively called Israel, although this had\nbeen the name of that whole people; but the two tribes, namely, of\nJudah and Benjamin, which for David's sake, lest the kingdom should\nbe wholly wrenched from his race, remained subject to the city of\nJerusalem, were called Judah, because that was the tribe whence David\nsprang. But Benjamin, the other tribe which, as was said, belonged\nto the same kingdom, was that whence Saul sprang before David. But\nthese two tribes together, as was said, were called Judah, and were\ndistinguished by this name from Israel, which was the distinctive title\nof the ten tribes under their own king. For the tribe of Levi, because\nit was the priestly one, bound to the servitude of God, not of the\nkings, was reckoned the thirteenth. For Joseph, one of the twelve sons\nof Israel, did not, like the others, form one tribe, but two, Ephraim\nand Manasseh. Yet the tribe of Levi also belonged more to the kingdom\nof Jerusalem, where was the temple of God whom it served. On the\ndivision of the people, therefore, Rehoboam, son of Solomon, reigned in\nJerusalem as the first king of Judah, and Jeroboam, servant of Solomon,\nin Samaria as king of Israel. And when Rehoboam wished as a tyrant\nto pursue that separated part with war, the people were prohibited\nfrom fighting with their brethren by God, who told them through a\nprophet that He had done this; whence it appeared that in this matter\nthere had been no sin either of the king or people of Israel, but the\naccomplished will of God the avenger. When this was known, both parts\nsettled down peaceably, for the division made was not religious but\npolitical.\n\n\n  22. _Of Jeroboam, who profaned the people put under him by the\n      impiety of idolatry, amid which, however, God did not cease\n      to inspire the prophets, and to guard many from the crime of\n      idolatry._\n\nBut Jeroboam king of Israel, with perverse mind, not believing in God,\nwhom he had proved true in promising and giving him the kingdom, was\nafraid lest, by coming to the temple of God which was in Jerusalem,\nwhere, according to the divine law, that whole nation was to come in\norder to sacrifice, the people should be seduced from him, and return\nto David's line as the seed royal; and set up idolatry in his kingdom,\nand with horrible impiety beguiled the people, ensnaring them to the\nworship of idols with himself. Yet God did not altogether cease to\nreprove by the prophets, not only that king, but also his successors\nand imitators in his impiety, and the people too. For there the great\nand illustrious prophets Elijah and Elisha his disciple arose, who also\ndid many wonderful works. Even there, when Elijah said, \"O Lord, they\nhave slain Thy prophets, they have digged down Thine altars; and I am\nleft alone, and they seek my life,\" it was answered that seven thousand\nmen were there who had not bowed the knee to Baal.[494]\n\n\n  23. _Of the varying condition of both the Hebrew kingdoms, until\n      the people of both were at different times led into captivity,\n      Judah being afterwards recalled into his kingdom, which finally\n      passed into the power of the Romans._\n\nSo also in the kingdom of Judah pertaining to Jerusalem prophets were\nnot lacking even in the times of succeeding kings, just as it pleased\nGod to send them, either for the prediction of what was needful,\nor for correction of sin and instruction in righteousness;[495]\nfor there, too, although far less than in Israel, kings arose who\ngrievously offended God by their impieties, and, along with their\npeople, who were like them, were smitten with moderate scourges. The\nno small merits of the pious kings there are praised indeed. But we\nread that in Israel the kings were, some more, others less, yet all\nwicked. Each part, therefore, as the divine providence either ordered\nor permitted, was both lifted up by prosperity and weighed down by\nadversity of various kinds; and it was afflicted not only by foreign,\nbut also by civil wars with each other, in order that by certain\nexisting causes the mercy or anger of God might be manifested; until,\nby His growing indignation, that whole nation was by the conquering\nChaldeans not only overthrown in its abode, but also for the most\npart transported to the lands of the Assyrians,--first, that part\nof the thirteen tribes called Israel, but afterwards Judah also,\nwhen Jerusalem and that most noble temple was cast down,--in which\nlands it rested seventy years in captivity. Being after that time\nsent forth thence, they rebuilt the overthrown temple. And although\nvery many stayed in the lands of the strangers, yet the kingdom no\nlonger had two separate parts, with different kings over each, but\nin Jerusalem there was one prince over them; and at certain times,\nfrom every direction wherever they were, and from whatever place\nthey could, they all came to the temple of God which was there. Yet\nnot even then were they without foreign enemies and conquerors; yea,\nChrist found them tributaries of the Romans.\n\n\n  24. _Of the prophets, who either were the last among the Jews, or\n      whom the gospel history reports about the time of Christ's\n      nativity._\n\nBut in that whole time after they returned from Babylon, after\nMalachi, Haggai, and Zechariah, who then prophesied, and Ezra, they\nhad no prophets down to the time of the Saviour's advent except\nanother Zechariah, the father of John, and Elisabeth his wife, when\nthe nativity of Christ was already close at hand; and when He was\nalready born, Simeon the aged, and Anna a widow, and now very old;\nand, last of all, John himself, who, being a young man, did not\npredict that Christ, now a young man, was to come, but by prophetic\nknowledge pointed Him out although unknown; for which reason the\nLord Himself says, \"The law and the prophets were until John.\"[496]\nBut the prophesying of these five is made known to us in the gospel,\nwhere the virgin mother of our Lord herself is also found to have\nprophesied before John. But this prophecy of theirs the wicked Jews\ndo not receive; but those innumerable persons received it who from\nthem believed the gospel. For then truly Israel was divided in two,\nby that division which was foretold by Samuel the prophet to king\nSaul as immutable. But even the reprobate Jews hold Malachi, Haggai,\nZechariah, and Ezra as the last received into canonical authority.\nFor there are also writings of these, as of others, who being but\na very few in the great multitude of prophets, have written those\nbooks which have obtained canonical authority, of whose predictions\nit seems good to me to put in this work some which pertain to Christ\nand His Church; and this, by the Lord's help, shall be done more\nconveniently in the following book, that we may not further burden\nthis one, which is already too long.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[343] \"Has pointed.\"\n\n[344] Gen. xii. 1, 2.\n\n[345] Gen. xii. 3.\n\n[346] Gal. iv. 22-31.\n\n[347] Heb. viii. 8-10.\n\n[348] 1 Sam. ii. 1-10.\n\n[349] Ps. xlviii. 2.\n\n[350] 2 Tim. ii. 9; Eph. vi. 20.\n\n[351] Luke ii. 25-30.\n\n[352] Rom. iii. 26?\n\n[353] Gal. vi. 3.\n\n[354] Rom. x. 3.\n\n[355] Ps. xciv. 11; 1 Cor. iii. 20.\n\n[356] Ps. vi. 2.\n\n[357] Rom. iii. 2.\n\n[358] Rev. i. 4.\n\n[359] Prov. ix. 1.\n\n[360] \"By whom we see her made fruitful.\"\n\n[361] Col. iii. 1-3.\n\n[362] Rom. viii. 32.\n\n[363] Ps. xvi. 10; Acts ii. 27, 31.\n\n[364] 2 Cor. viii. 9.\n\n[365] Jas. iv. 6; 1 Pet. v. 5.\n\n[366] \"For the poor man is the same as the beggar.\"\n\n[367] Phil. iii. 7, 8.\n\n[368] Matt. xix. 27, 28.\n\n[369] 1 Cor. iv. 7.\n\n[370] 1 John iv. 7.\n\n[371] 2 Cor. v. 10.\n\n[372] Ps. lxxiv. 12.\n\n[373] Acts x. 42.\n\n[374] Eph. iv. 9, 10.\n\n[375] Matt. xxiv. 13.\n\n[376] 1 Cor. 12.\n\n[377] 1 Sam. ii. 27-36.\n\n[378] Ps. xvii. 8.\n\n[379] Isa. x. 21.\n\n[380] Rom. xi. 5.\n\n[381] Isa. xxviii. 22; Rom. ix 28.\n\n[382] Ps. xii. 6.\n\n[383] Ps. lxxxiv. 10.\n\n[384] 1 Tim. ii. 5.\n\n[385] 1 Pet. ii. 9.\n\n[386] 1 Cor. x. 17.\n\n[387] Rom. xii. 1.\n\n[388] John vi. 51.\n\n[389] Heb. vii. 11, 27.\n\n[390] Matt. xxiv. 15.\n\n[391] 1 Sam. xxiv. 5, 6.\n\n[392] 1 Sam. xiii. 13, 14.\n\n[393] Heb. ix. 15.\n\n[394] Luke xix. 10.\n\n[395] Eph. i. 4.\n\n[396] 1 Sam. xv. 23.\n\n[397] 1 Sam. xv. 26-29.\n\n[398] Rom. i. 3.\n\n[399] 1 Tim. ii. 5.\n\n[400] Ps. cx. 1.\n\n[401] Gen. xxi. 10.\n\n[402] Gal. iv. 25.\n\n[403] 2 Cor. iii. 15, 16.\n\n[404] 1 Sam. vii. 9-12.\n\n[405] 2 Sam. vii. 8-16.\n\n[406] Rom. i. 3.\n\n[407] Ps. lxxii. 8.\n\n[408] 1 Cor. iii. 17.\n\n[409] Ps. lxxxix. 3, 4.\n\n[410] Ps. lxxxix. 19-29.\n\n[411] Phil. ii. 7.\n\n[412] Matt. i. 1, 18; Luke i. 27.\n\n[413] 2 Sam. vii, 14, 15.\n\n[414] Ps. cv. 15.\n\n[415] Ps. lxxxix. 30-33.\n\n[416] Acts ix. 4.\n\n[417] Ps. lxxxix. 34, 35.\n\n[418] Ps. lxxxix. 36, 37.\n\n[419] Ps. lxxxix. 38.\n\n[420] Ps. lxxxix. 38.\n\n[421] Ps. lxxxix. 39-45.\n\n[422] Ps. lxxxix. 46.\n\n[423] Ps. xiii. 1.\n\n[424] Ps. lxxxix. 46, 47.\n\n[425] Ps. lxxxix. 47.\n\n[426] Ps. cxliv. 4.\n\n[427] Ps. lxxxix. 48.\n\n[428] Rom. vi. 9.\n\n[429] John x. 18.\n\n[430] Ps. lxxxix. 49-51.\n\n[431] Rom. iii. 28, 29.\n\n[432] Acts xiii. 46.\n\n[433] Matt. vii. 7, 8.\n\n[434] Another reading, \"consummation.\"\n\n[435] See above, chap. viii.\n\n[436] 2 Sam. vii. 19.\n\n[437] 2 Sam. vii. 8.\n\n[438] 2 Sam. vii. 27.\n\n[439] Ps. cxxvii. 1.\n\n[440] 2 Sam. vii. 10, 11.\n\n[441] 2 Sam. vii. 10, 11.\n\n[442] Judg. iii. 30.\n\n[443] Israel = \"a prince of God;\" Peniel = \"the face of God\" (Gen.\nxxxii. 28-30).\n\n[444] Ps. cx. 1, quoted in Matt. xxii. 44.\n\n[445] 1 Kings xiii. 2; fulfilled 2 Kings xxiii. 15-17.\n\n[446] Ps. xlv. 1-9.\n\n[447] Ps. xlv. 9-17.\n\n[448] Ps. xlv. 7.\n\n[449] Ps. xlviii. 2.\n\n[450] Ps. xviii. 43.\n\n[451] Rom. x. 5.\n\n[452] Ps. lxxxvii. 5.\n\n[453] Ps. xlv. 16.\n\n[454] Ps. cx. 1.\n\n[455] Ps. cx. 2.\n\n[456] Ps. cx. 4.\n\n[457] Ps. cx. 4.\n\n[458] Ps. xxii. 16, 17.\n\n[459] Ps. xxii. 18, 19.\n\n[460] Ps. iii. 5.\n\n[461] Ps. xli. 5-8.\n\n[462] Ps. xli. 9.\n\n[463] Ps. xli. 10.\n\n[464] 2 Tim. iv. 1; 2 Pet. iv. 5.\n\n[465] John vi. 70.\n\n[466] 1 Cor. xii. 12.\n\n[467] Matt. xxv. 35.\n\n[468] Matt. xxv. 40.\n\n[469] Acts i. 17.\n\n[470] Ps. xvi. 9, 10.\n\n[471] Ps. lxviii. 20.\n\n[472] Matt. i. 21.\n\n[473] Ps. lxix. 21; Matt. xxvii. 34, 48.\n\n[474] Ps. lxix. 22, 23.\n\n[475] Ps. xxxii. 1.\n\n[476] Sallust, _Bel. Cat._ c. xi.\n\n[477] Wisd. ii. 12-21.\n\n[478] Ecclus. xxxvi. 1-5.\n\n[479] Prov. i. 11-13.\n\n[480] Matt. xxi. 38.\n\n[481] Ch. 4.\n\n[482] Prov. ix. 1-5 (ver. 1 is quoted above in ch. 4).\n\n[483] 1 Cor. i. 27.\n\n[484] Prov. ix. 6.\n\n[485] Eccles. ii. 24, iii. 13, v. 18, viii. 15.\n\n[486] Ps. xl. 6.\n\n[487] Eccles. vii. 2.\n\n[488] Eccles. vii. 4.\n\n[489] Eccles. x. 16, 17.\n\n[490] Rom. v. 5.\n\n[491] Ps. lxix. 6. ?\n\n[492] Cant. i. 4.\n\n[493] Cant. vii. 6.\n\n[494] 1 Kings xix. 10, 14, 15.\n\n[495] 2 Tim. 16.\n\n[496] Matt. xi. 13.\n\n\n\n\n                           BOOK EIGHTEENTH.\n\n                               ARGUMENT.\n\n  AUGUSTINE TRACES THE PARALLEL COURSES OF THE EARTHLY AND HEAVENLY\n      CITIES FROM THE TIME OF ABRAHAM TO THE END OF THE WORLD; AND\n      ALLUDES TO THE ORACLES REGARDING CHRIST, BOTH THOSE UTTERED BY\n      THE SIBYLS, AND THOSE OF THE SACRED PROPHETS WHO WROTE AFTER\n      THE FOUNDATION OF ROME, HOSEA, AMOS, ISAIAH, MICAH, AND THEIR\n      SUCCESSORS.\n\n\n    1. _Of those things down to the times of the Saviour which have\n                been discussed in the seventeen books._\n\nI promised to write of the rise, progress, and appointed end of the two\ncities, one of which is God's, the other this world's, in which, so\nfar as mankind is concerned, the former is now a stranger. But first\nof all I undertook, so far as His grace should enable me, to refute\nthe enemies of the city of God, who prefer their gods to Christ its\nfounder, and fiercely hate Christians with the most deadly malice. And\nthis I have done in the first ten books. Then, as regards my threefold\npromise which I have just mentioned, I have treated distinctly, in the\nfour books which follow the tenth, of the rise of both cities. After\nthat, I have proceeded from the first man down to the flood in one\nbook, which is the fifteenth of this work; and from that again down to\nAbraham our work has followed both in chronological order. From the\npatriarch Abraham down to the time of the Israelite kings, at which\nwe close our sixteenth book, and thence down to the advent of Christ\nHimself in the flesh, to which period the seventeenth book reaches,\nthe city of God appears from my way of writing to have run its course\nalone; whereas it did not run its course alone in this age, for both\ncities, in their course amid mankind, certainly experienced chequered\ntimes together just as from the beginning. But I did this in order\nthat, first of all, from the time when the promises of God began to\nbe more clear, down to the virgin birth of Him in whom those things\npromised from the first were to be fulfilled, the course of that\ncity which is God's might be made more distinctly apparent, without\ninterpolation of foreign matter from the history of the other city,\nalthough down to the revelation of the new covenant it ran its course,\nnot in light, but in shadow. Now, therefore, I think fit to do what I\npassed by, and show, so far as seems necessary, how that other city ran\nits course from the times of Abraham, so that attentive readers may\ncompare the two.\n\n\n  2. _Of the kings and times of the earthly city which were\n      synchronous with the times of the saints, reckoning from the\n      rise of Abraham._\n\nThe society of mortals spread abroad through the earth everywhere,\nand in the most diverse places, although bound together by a certain\nfellowship of our common nature, is yet for the most part divided\nagainst itself, and the strongest oppress the others, because all\nfollow after their own interests and lusts, while what is longed for\neither suffices for none, or not for all, because it is not the very\nthing. For the vanquished succumb to the victorious, preferring any\nsort of peace and safety to freedom itself; so that they who chose\nto die rather than be slaves have been greatly wondered at. For\nin almost all nations the very voice of nature somehow proclaims,\nthat those who happen to be conquered should choose rather to be\nsubject to their conquerors than to be killed by all kinds of warlike\ndestruction. This does not take place without the providence of God,\nin whose power it lies that any one either subdues or is subdued in\nwar; that some are endowed with kingdoms, others made subject to\nkings. Now, among the very many kingdoms of the earth into which, by\nearthly interest or lust, society is divided (which we call by the\ngeneral name of the city of this world), we see that two, settled and\nkept distinct from each other both in time and place, have grown far\nmore famous than the rest, first that of the Assyrians, then that of\nthe Romans. First came the one, then the other. The former arose in\nthe east, and, immediately on its close, the latter in the west. I\nmay speak of other kingdoms and other kings as appendages of these.\n\nNinus, then, who succeeded his father Belus, the first king of Assyria,\nwas already the second king of that kingdom when Abraham was born in\nthe land of the Chaldees. There was also at that time a very small\nkingdom of Sicyon, with which, as from an ancient date, that most\nuniversally learned man Marcus Varro begins, in writing of the Roman\nrace. For from these kings of Sicyon he passes to the Athenians, from\nthem to the Latins, and from these to the Romans. Yet very little\nis related about these kingdoms, before the foundation of Rome, in\ncomparison with that of Assyria. For although even Sallust, the Roman\nhistorian, admits that the Athenians were very famous in Greece, yet he\nthinks they were greater in fame than in fact. For in speaking of them\nhe says, \"The deeds of the Athenians, as I think, were very great and\nmagnificent, but yet somewhat less than reported by fame. But because\nwriters of great genius arose among them, the deeds of the Athenians\nwere celebrated throughout the world as very great. Thus the virtue\nof those who did them was held to be as great as men of transcendent\ngenius could represent it to be by the power of laudatory words.\"[497]\nThis city also derived no small glory from literature and philosophy,\nthe study of which chiefly flourished there. But as regards empire,\nnone in the earliest times was greater than the Assyrian, or so widely\nextended. For when Ninus the son of Belus was king, he is reported\nto have subdued the whole of Asia, even to the boundaries of Libya,\nwhich as to number is called the third part, but as to size is found\nto be the half of the whole world. The Indians in the eastern regions\nwere the only people over whom he did not reign; but after his death\nSemiramis his wife made war on them. Thus it came to pass that all\nthe people and kings in those countries were subject to the kingdom\nand authority of the Assyrians, and did whatever they were commanded.\nNow Abraham was born in that kingdom among the Chaldees, in the time\nof Ninus. But since Grecian affairs are much better known to us than\nAssyrian, and those who have diligently investigated the antiquity of\nthe Roman nation's origin have followed the order of time through the\nGreeks to the Latins, and from them to the Romans, who themselves are\nLatins, we ought on this account, where it is needful, to mention the\nAssyrian kings, that it may appear how Babylon, like a first Rome, ran\nits course along with the city of God, which is a stranger in this\nworld. But the things proper for insertion in this work in comparing\nthe two cities, that is, the earthly and heavenly, ought to be taken\nmostly from the Greek and Latin kingdoms, where Rome herself is like a\nsecond Babylon.\n\nAt Abraham's birth, then, the second kings of Assyria and Sicyon\nrespectively were Ninus and Europs, the first having been Belus\nand \u00c6gialeus. But when God promised Abraham, on his departure from\nBabylonia, that he should become a great nation, and that in his seed\nall nations of the earth should be blessed, the Assyrians had their\nseventh king, the Sicyons their fifth; for the son of Ninus reigned\namong them after his mother Semiramis, who is said to have been put\nto death by him for attempting to defile him by incestuously lying\nwith him. Some think that she founded Babylon, and indeed she may\nhave founded it anew. But we have told, in the sixteenth book, when\nor by whom it was founded. Now the son of Ninus and Semiramis, who\nsucceeded his mother in the kingdom, is also called Ninus by some,\nbut by others Ninias, a patronymic word. Telexion then held the\nkingdom of the Sicyons. In his reign times were quiet and joyful to\nsuch a degree, that after his death they worshipped him as a god by\noffering sacrifices and by celebrating games, which are said to have\nbeen first instituted on this occasion.\n\n\n  3. _What kings reigned in Assyria and Sicyon when, according to\n      the promise, Isaac was born to Abraham in his hundredth year,\n      and when the twins Esau and Jacob were born of Rebecca to Isaac\n      in his sixtieth year._\n\nIn his times also, by the promise of God, Isaac, the son of Abraham,\nwas born to his father when he was a hundred years old, of Sarah his\nwife, who, being barren and old, had already lost hope of issue.\nAralius was then the fifth king of the Assyrians. To Isaac himself,\nin his sixtieth year, were born twin-sons, Esau and Jacob, whom\nRebecca his wife bore to him, their grandfather Abraham, who died\non completing a hundred and seventy years, being still alive, and\nreckoning his hundred and sixtieth year.[498] At that time there\nreigned as the seventh kings,--among the Assyrians, that more\nancient Xerxes, who was also called Bal\u00e6us; and among the Sicyons,\nThuriachus, or, as some write his name, Thurimachus. The kingdom of\nArgos, in which Inachus reigned first, arose in the time of Abraham's\ngrandchildren. And I must not omit what Varro relates, that the\nSicyons were also wont to sacrifice at the tomb of their seventh king\nThuriachus. In the reign of Armamitres in Assyria and Leucippus in\nSicyon as the eighth kings, and of Inachus as the first in Argos, God\nspoke to Isaac, and promised the same two things to him as to his\nfather,--namely, the land of Canaan to his seed, and the blessing of\nall nations in his seed. These same things were promised to his son,\nAbraham's grandson, who was at first called Jacob, afterwards Israel,\nwhen Belocus was the ninth king of Assyria, and Phoroneus, the son\nof Inachus, reigned as the second king of Argos, Leucippus still\ncontinuing king of Sicyon. In those times, under the Argive king\nPhoroneus, Greece was made more famous by the institution of certain\nlaws and judges. On the death of Phoroneus, his younger brother\nPhegous built a temple at his tomb, in which he was worshipped as\nGod, and oxen were sacrificed to him. I believe they thought him\nworthy of so great honour, because in his part of the kingdom (for\ntheir father had divided his territories between them, in which they\nreigned during his life) he had founded chapels for the worship of\nthe gods, and had taught them to measure time by months and years,\nand to that extent to keep count and reckoning of events. Men still\nuncultivated, admiring him for these novelties, either fancied he\nwas, or resolved that he should be made, a god after his death. Io\nalso is said to have been the daughter of Inachus, who was afterwards\ncalled Isis, when she was worshipped in Egypt as a great goddess;\nalthough others write that she came as a queen out of Ethiopia, and\nbecause she ruled extensively and justly, and instituted for her\nsubjects letters and many useful things, such divine honour was given\nher there after she died, that if any one said she had been human, he\nwas charged with a capital crime.\n\n\n            4. _Of the times of Jacob and his son Joseph._\n\nIn the reign of Bal\u00e6us, the ninth king of Assyria, and Mesappus,\nthe eighth of Sicyon, who is said by some to have been also called\nCephisos (if indeed the same man had both names, and those who put\nthe other name in their writings have not rather confounded him with\nanother man), while Apis was third king of Argos, Isaac died, a\nhundred and eighty years old, and left his twin-sons a hundred and\ntwenty years old. Jacob, the younger of these, belonged to the city\nof God about which we write (the elder being wholly rejected), and\nhad twelve sons, one of whom, called Joseph, was sold by his brothers\nto merchants going down to Egypt, while his grandfather Isaac was\nstill alive. But when he was thirty years of age, Joseph stood before\nPharaoh, being exalted out of the humiliation he endured, because,\nin divinely interpreting the king's dreams, he foretold that there\nwould be seven years of plenty, the very rich abundance of which\nwould be consumed by seven other years of famine that should follow.\nOn this account the king made him ruler over Egypt, liberating him\nfrom prison, into which he had been thrown for keeping his chastity\nintact; for he bravely preserved it from his mistress, who wickedly\nloved him, and told lies to his weakly credulous master, and did not\nconsent to commit adultery with her, but fled from her, leaving his\ngarment in her hands when she laid hold of him. In the second of the\nseven years of famine Jacob came down into Egypt to his son with all\nhe had, being a hundred and thirty years old, as he himself said in\nanswer to the king's question. Joseph was then thirty-nine, if we add\nseven years of plenty and two of famine to the thirty he reckoned\nwhen honoured by the king.\n\n\n     5. _Of Apis king of Argos, whom the Egyptians called Serapis,\n                 and worshipped with divine honours._\n\nIn these times Apis king of Argos crossed over into Egypt in ships,\nand, on dying there, was made Serapis, the chief god of all the\nEgyptians. Now Varro gives this very ready reason why, after his\ndeath, he was called, not Apis, but Serapis. The ark in which he\nwas placed when dead, which every one now calls a sarcophagus, was\nthen called in Greek \u03c3\u03bf\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2, and they began to worship him when\nburied in it before his temple was built; and from Soros and Apis\nhe was called first [Sorosapis, or] Sorapis, and then Serapis, by\nchanging a letter, as easily happens. It was decreed regarding him\nalso, that whoever should say he had been a man should be capitally\npunished. And since in every temple where Isis and Serapis were\nworshipped there was also an image which, with finger pressed on\nthe lips, seemed to warn men to keep silence, Varro thinks this\nsignifies that it should be kept secret that they had been human.\nBut that bull which, with wonderful folly, deluded Egypt nourished\nwith abundant delicacies in honour of him, was not called Serapis,\nbut Apis, because they worshipped him alive without a sarcophagus. On\nthe death of that bull, when they sought and found a calf of the same\ncolour,--that is, similarly marked with certain white spots,--they\nbelieved it was something miraculous, and divinely provided for them.\nYet it was no great thing for the demons, in order to deceive them,\nto show to a cow when she was conceiving and pregnant the image\nof such a bull, which she alone could see, and by it attract the\nbreeding passion of the mother, so that it might appear in a bodily\nshape in her young, just as Jacob so managed with the spotted rods\nthat the sheep and goats were born spotted. For what men can do with\nreal colours and substances, the demons can very easily do by showing\nunreal forms to breeding animals.\n\n\n     6. _Who were kings of Argos, and of Assyria, when Jacob died\n                              in Egypt._\n\nApis, then, who died in Egypt, was not the king of Egypt, but of Argos.\nHe was succeeded by his son Argus, from whose name the land was called\nArgos and the people Argives, for under the earlier kings neither\nthe place nor the nation as yet had this name. While he then reigned\nover Argos, and Eratus over Sicyon, and Bal\u00e6us still remained king of\nAssyria, Jacob died in Egypt a hundred and forty-seven years old, after\nhe had, when dying, blessed his sons and his grandsons by Joseph, and\nprophesied most plainly of Christ, saying in the blessing of Judah, \"A\nprince shall not fail out of Judah, nor a leader from his thighs, until\nthose things come which are laid up for him; and He is the expectation\nof the nations.\"[499] In the reign of Argus Greece began to use fruits,\nand to have crops of corn in cultivated fields, the seed having been\nbrought from other countries. Argus also began to be accounted a god\nafter his death, and was honoured with a temple and sacrifices. This\nhonour was conferred in his reign, before being given to him, on a\nprivate individual for being the first to yoke oxen in the plough. This\nwas one Homogyrus, who was struck by lightning.\n\n\n            7. _Who were kings when Joseph died in Egypt._\n\nIn the reign of Mamitus, the twelfth king of Assyria, and Plemn\u00e6us,\nthe eleventh of Sicyon, while Argus still reigned over the Argives,\nJoseph died in Egypt a hundred and ten years old. After his death,\nthe people of God, increasing wonderfully, remained in Egypt a\nhundred and forty-five years, in tranquillity at first, until those\nwho knew Joseph were dead. Afterward, through envy of their increase,\nand the suspicion that they would at length gain their freedom, they\nwere oppressed with persecutions and the labours of intolerable\nservitude, amid which, however, they still grew, being multiplied\nwith God-given fertility. During this period the same kingdoms\ncontinued in Assyria and Greece.\n\n\n    8. _Who were kings when Moses was born, and what gods began to\n                         be worshipped then._\n\nWhen Saphrus reigned as the fourteenth king of Assyria, and\nOrthopolis as the twelfth of Sicyon, and Criasus as the fifth of\nArgos, Moses was born in Egypt, by whom the people of God were\nliberated from the Egyptian slavery, in which they behoved to be\nthus tried that they might desire the help of their Creator. Some\nhave thought that Prometheus lived during the reign of the kings now\nnamed. He is reported to have formed men out of clay, because he was\nesteemed the best teacher of wisdom; yet it does not appear what\nwise men there were in his days. His brother Atlas is said to have\nbeen a great astrologer; and this gave occasion for the fable that\nhe held up the sky, although the vulgar opinion about his holding\nup the sky appears rather to have been suggested by a high mountain\nnamed after him. Indeed, from those times many other fabulous things\nbegan to be invented in Greece; yet, down to Cecrops king of Athens,\nin whose reign that city received its name, and in whose reign God\nbrought His people out of Egypt by Moses, only a few dead heroes are\nreported to have been deified according to the vain superstition of\nthe Greeks. Among these were Melantomice, the wife of king Criasus,\nand Phorbas their son, who succeeded his father as sixth king of the\nArgives, and Iasus, son of Triopas, their seventh king, and their\nninth king, Sthenelas, or Stheneleus, or Sthenelus,--for his name\nis given differently by different authors. In those times also,\nMercury, the grandson of Atlas by his daughter Maia, is said to have\nlived, according to the common report in books. He was famous for his\nskill in many arts, and taught them to men, for which they resolved\nto make him, and even believed that he deserved to be, a god after\ndeath. Hercules is said to have been later, yet belonging to the same\nperiod; although some, whom I think mistaken, assign him an earlier\ndate than Mercury. But at whatever time they were born, it is agreed\namong grave historians, who have committed these ancient things to\nwriting, that both were men, and that they merited divine honours\nfrom mortals because they conferred on them many benefits to make\nthis life more pleasant to them. Minerva was far more ancient than\nthese; for she is reported to have appeared in virgin age in the\ntimes of Ogyges at the lake called Triton, from which she is also\nstyled Tritonia, the inventress truly of many works, and the more\nreadily believed to be a goddess because her origin was so little\nknown. For what is sung about her having sprung from the head of\nJupiter belongs to the region of poetry and fable, and not to that\nof history and real fact. And historical writers are not agreed when\nOgyges flourished, in whose time also a great flood occurred,--not\nthat greatest one from which no man escaped except those who could\nget into the ark, for neither Greek nor Latin history knew of it, yet\na greater flood than that which happened afterward in Deucalion's\ntime. For Varro begins the book I have already mentioned at this\ndate, and does not propose to himself, as the starting-point from\nwhich he may arrive at Roman affairs, anything more ancient than the\nflood of Ogyges, that is, which happened in the time of Ogyges. Now\nour writers of chronicles--first Eusebius, and afterwards Jerome, who\nentirely follow some earlier historians in this opinion--relate that\nthe flood of Ogyges happened more than three hundred years after,\nduring the reign of Phoroneus, the second king of Argos. But whenever\nhe may have lived, Minerva was already worshipped as a goddess when\nCecrops reigned in Athens, in whose reign the city itself is reported\nto have been rebuilt or founded.\n\n\n    9. _When the city of Athens was founded, and what reason Varro\n                        assigns for its name._\n\nAthens certainly derived its name from Minerva, who in Greek is\ncalled \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b7, and Varro points out the following reason why it was so\ncalled. When an olive-tree suddenly appeared there, and water burst\nforth in another place, these prodigies moved the king to send to\nthe Delphic Apollo to inquire what they meant and what he should do.\nHe answered that the olive signified Minerva, the water Neptune, and\nthat the citizens had it in their power to name their city as they\nchose, after either of these two gods whose signs these were. On\nreceiving this oracle, Cecrops convoked all the citizens of either\nsex to give their vote, for it was then the custom in those parts\nfor the women also to take part in public deliberations. When the\nmultitude was consulted, the men gave their votes for Neptune, the\nwomen for Minerva; and as the women had a majority of one, Minerva\nconquered. Then Neptune, being enraged, laid waste the lands of the\nAthenians, by casting up the waves of the sea; for the demons have no\ndifficulty in scattering any waters more widely. The same authority\nsaid, that to appease his wrath the women should be visited by the\nAthenians with the threefold punishment--that they should no longer\nhave any vote; that none of their children should be named after\ntheir mothers; and that no one should call them Athenians. Thus that\ncity, the mother and nurse of liberal doctrines, and of so many and\nso great philosophers, than whom Greece had nothing more famous and\nnoble, by the mockery of demons about the strife of their gods, a\nmale and female, and from the victory of the female one through\nthe women, received the name of Athens; and, on being damaged by\nthe vanquished god, was compelled to punish the very victory of\nthe victress, fearing the waters of Neptune more than the arms of\nMinerva. For in the women who were thus punished, Minerva, who had\nconquered, was conquered too, and could not even help her voters so\nfar that, although the right of voting was henceforth lost, and the\nmothers could not give their names to the children, they might at\nleast be allowed to be called Athenians, and to merit the name of\nthat goddess whom they had made victorious over a male god by giving\nher their votes. What and how much could be said about this, if we\nhad not to hasten to other things in our discourse, is obvious.\n\n\n      10. _What Varro reports about the term Areopagus, and about\n                          Deucalion's flood._\n\nMarcus Varro, however, is not willing to credit lying fables against\nthe gods, lest he should find something dishonouring to their\nmajesty; and therefore he will not admit that the Areopagus, the\nplace where the Apostle Paul disputed with the Athenians, got this\nname because Mars, who in Greek is called \u1f0c\u03c1\u03b7\u03c2, when he was charged\nwith the crime of homicide, and was judged by twelve gods in that\nfield, was acquitted by the sentence of six; because it was the\ncustom, when the votes were equal, to acquit rather than condemn.\nAgainst this opinion, which is much most widely published, he tries,\nfrom the notices of obscure books, to support another reason for\nthis name, lest the Athenians should be thought to have called it\nAreopagus from the words \"Mars\" and \"field,\"[500] as if it were the\nfield of Mars, to the dishonour of the gods, forsooth, from whom\nhe thinks lawsuits and judgments far removed. And he asserts that\nthis which is said about Mars is not less false than what is said\nabout the three goddesses, to wit, Juno, Minerva, and Venus, whose\ncontest for the palm of beauty, before Paris as judge, in order to\nobtain the golden apple, is not only related, but is celebrated in\nsongs and dances amid the applause of the theatres, in plays meant\nto please the gods who take pleasure in these crimes of their own,\nwhether real or fabled. Varro does not believe these things, because\nthey are incompatible with the nature of the gods and of morality;\nand yet, in giving not a fabulous but a historic reason for the name\nof Athens, he inserts in his books the strife between Neptune and\nMinerva as to whose name should be given to that city, which was so\ngreat that, when they contended by the display of prodigies, even\nApollo dared not judge between them when consulted; but, in order to\nend the strife of the gods, just as Jupiter sent the three goddesses\nwe have named to Paris, so he sent them to men, when Minerva won by\nthe vote, and yet was defeated by the punishment of her own voters,\nfor she was unable to confer the title of Athenians on the women who\nwere her friends, although she could impose it on the men who were\nher opponents. In these times, when Cranaos reigned at Athens as the\nsuccessor of Cecrops, as Varro writes, but, according to our Eusebius\nand Jerome, while Cecrops himself still remained, the flood occurred\nwhich is called Deucalion's, because it occurred chiefly in those\nparts of the earth in which he reigned. But this flood did not at all\nreach Egypt or its vicinity.\n\n\n    11. _When Moses led the people out of Egypt; and who were kings\n            when his successor Joshua the son of Nun died._\n\nMoses led the people out of Egypt in the last time of Cecrops king\nof Athens, when Ascatades reigned in Assyria, Marathus in Sicyon,\nTriopas in Argos; and having led forth the people, he gave them at\nMount Sinai the law he received from God, which is called the Old\nTestament, because it has earthly promises, and because, through\nJesus Christ, there was to be a New Testament, in which the kingdom\nof heaven should be promised. For the same order behoved to be\nobserved in this as is observed in each man who prospers in God,\naccording to the saying of the apostle, \"That is not first which is\nspiritual, but that which is natural,\" since, as he says, and that\ntruly, \"The first man of the earth, is earthly; the second man, from\nheaven, is heavenly.\"[501] Now Moses ruled the people for forty years\nin the wilderness, and died a hundred and twenty years old, after\nhe had prophesied of Christ by the types of carnal observances in\nthe tabernacle, priesthood, and sacrifices, and many other mystic\nordinances. Joshua the son of Nun succeeded Moses, and settled in\nthe land of promise the people he had brought in, having by divine\nauthority conquered the people by whom it was formerly possessed. He\nalso died, after ruling the people twenty-seven years after the death\nof Moses, when Amyntas reigned in Assyria as the eighteenth king,\nCoracos as the sixteenth in Sicyon, Danaos as the tenth in Argos,\nEricthonius as the fourth in Athens.\n\n\n  12. _Of the rituals of false gods instituted by the kings of Greece\n      in the period from Israel's exodus from Egypt down to the death\n      of Joshua the son of Nun._\n\nDuring this period, that is, from Israel's exodus from Egypt down to\nthe death of Joshua the son of Nun, through whom that people received\nthe land of promise, rituals were instituted to the false gods by the\nkings of Greece, which, by stated celebration, recalled the memory of\nthe flood, and of men's deliverance from it, and of that troublous\nlife they then led in migrating to and fro between the heights and the\nplains. For even the Luperci,[502] when they ascend and descend the\nsacred path, are said to represent the men who sought the mountain\nsummits because of the inundation of water, and returned to the\nlowlands on its subsidence. In those times, Dionysus, who was also\ncalled Father Liber, and was esteemed a god after death, is said to\nhave shown the vine to his host in Attica. Then the musical games were\ninstituted for the Delphic Apollo, to appease his anger, through which\nthey thought the regions of Greece were afflicted with barrenness,\nbecause they had not defended his temple which Danaos burnt when he\ninvaded those lands; for they were warned by his oracle to institute\nthese games. But king Ericthonius first instituted games to him in\nAttica, and not to him only, but also to Minerva, in which games the\nolive was given as the prize to the victors, because they relate that\nMinerva was the discoverer of that fruit, as Liber was of the grape. In\nthose years Europa is alleged to have been carried off by Xanthus king\nof Crete (to whom we find some give another name), and to have borne\nhim Rhadamanthus, Sarpedon, and Minos, who are more commonly reported\nto have been the sons of Jupiter by the same woman. Now those who\nworship such gods regard what we have said about Xanthus king of Crete\nas true history; but this about Jupiter, which the poets sing, the\ntheatres applaud, and the people celebrate, as empty fable got up as a\nreason for games to appease the deities, even with the false ascription\nof crimes to them. In those times Hercules was held in honour in\nTyre, but that was not the same one as he whom we spoke of above. In\nthe more secret history there are said to have been several who were\ncalled Father Liber and Hercules. This Hercules, whose great deeds are\nreckoned as twelve (not including the slaughter of Ant\u00e6us the African,\nbecause that affair pertains to another Hercules), is declared in their\nbooks to have burned himself on Mount \u0152ta, because he was not able, by\nthat strength with which he had subdued monsters, to endure the disease\nunder which he languished. At that time the king, or rather tyrant\nBusiris, who is alleged to have been the son of Neptune by Libya the\ndaughter of Epaphus, is said to have offered up his guests in sacrifice\nto the gods. Now it must not be believed that Neptune committed this\nadultery, lest the gods should be criminated; yet such things must be\nascribed to them by the poets and in the theatres, that they may be\npleased with them. Vulcan and Minerva are said to have been the parents\nof Ericthonius king of Athens, in whose last years Joshua the son of\nNun is found to have died. But since they will have it that Minerva\nis a virgin, they say that Vulcan, being disturbed in the struggle\nbetween them, poured out his seed into the earth, and on that account\nthe man born of it received that name; for in the Greek language \u1f14\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2\nis \"strife,\" and \u03c7\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \"earth,\" of which two words Ericthonius is a\ncompound. Yet it must be admitted that the more learned disprove\nand disown such things concerning their gods, and declare that this\nfabulous belief originated in the fact that in the temple at Athens,\nwhich Vulcan and Minerva had in common, a boy who had been exposed was\nfound wrapped up in the coils of a dragon, which signified that he\nwould become great, and, as his parents were unknown, he was called\nthe son of Vulcan and Minerva, because they had the temple in common.\nYet that fable accounts for the origin of his name better than this\nhistory. But what does it matter to us? Let the one in books that speak\nthe truth edify religious men, and the other in lying fables delight\nimpure demons. Yet these religious men worship them as gods. Still,\nwhile they deny these things concerning them, they cannot clear them of\nall crime, because at their demand they exhibit plays in which the very\nthings they wisely deny are basely done, and the gods are appeased by\nthese false and base things. Now, even although the play celebrates an\nunreal crime of the gods, yet to delight in the ascription of an unreal\ncrime is a real one.\n\n\n    13. _What fables were invented at the time when judges began to\n                          rule the Hebrews._\n\nAfter the death of Joshua the son of Nun, the people of God had judges,\nin whose times they were alternately humbled by afflictions on account\nof their sins, and consoled by prosperity through the compassion of\nGod. In those times were invented the fables about Triptolemus, who,\nat the command of Ceres, borne by winged snakes, bestowed corn on\nthe needy lands in flying over them; about that beast the Minotaur,\nwhich was shut up in the Labyrinth, from which men who entered its\ninextricable mazes could find no exit; about the Centaurs, whose form\nwas a compound of horse and man; about Cerberus, the three-headed dog\nof hell; about Phryxus and his sister Hellas, who fled, borne by a\nwinged ram; about the Gorgon, whose hair was composed of serpents,\nand who turned those who looked on her into stone; about Bellerophon,\nwho was carried by a winged horse called Pegasus; about Amphion, who\ncharmed and attracted the stones by the sweetness of his harp; about\nthe artificer D\u00e6dalus and his son Icarus, who flew on wings they had\nfitted on; about \u0152dipus, who compelled a certain four-footed monster\nwith a human face, called a sphynx, to destroy herself by casting\nherself headlong, having solved the riddle she was wont to propose\nas insoluble; about Ant\u00e6us, who was the son of the earth, for which\nreason, on falling on the earth, he was wont to rise up stronger, whom\nHercules slew; and perhaps there are others which I have forgotten.\nThese fables, easily found in histories containing a true account of\nevents, bring us down to the Trojan war, at which Marcus Varro has\nclosed his second book about the race of the Roman people; and they\nare so skilfully invented by men as to involve no scandal to the gods.\nBut whoever have pretended as to Jupiter's rape of Ganymede, a very\nbeautiful boy, that king Tantalus committed the crime, and the fable\nascribed it to Jupiter; or as to his impregnating Dan\u00e4e as a golden\nshower, that it means that the woman's virtue was corrupted by gold:\nwhether these things were really done or only fabled in those days,\nor were really done by others and falsely ascribed to Jupiter, it is\nimpossible to tell how much wickedness must have been taken for granted\nin men's hearts that they should be thought able to listen to such lies\nwith patience. And yet they willingly accepted them, when, indeed, the\nmore devotedly they worshipped Jupiter, they ought the more severely\nto have punished those who durst say such things of him. But they not\nonly were not angry at those who invented these things, but were afraid\nthat the gods would be angry at them if they did not act such fictions\neven in the theatres. In those times Latona bore Apollo, not him of\nwhose oracle we have spoken above as so often consulted, but him who is\nsaid, along with Hercules, to have fed the flocks of king Admetus; yet\nhe was so believed to be a god, that very many, indeed almost all, have\nbelieved him to be the selfsame Apollo. Then also Father Liber made\nwar in India, and led in his army many women called Bacch\u00e6, who were\nnotable not so much for valour as for fury. Some, indeed, write that\nthis Liber was both conquered and bound; and some that he was slain\nin Persia, even telling where he was buried; and yet in his name, as\nthat of a god, the unclean demons have instituted the sacred, or rather\nthe sacrilegious, Bacchanalia, of the outrageous vileness of which the\nsenate, after many years, became so much ashamed as to prohibit them in\nthe city of Rome. Men believed that in those times Perseus and his wife\nAndromeda were raised into heaven after their death, so that they were\nnot ashamed or afraid to mark out their images by constellations, and\ncall them by their names.\n\n\n                    14. _Of the theological poets._\n\nDuring the same period of time arose the poets, who were also called\n_theologues_, because they made hymns about the gods; yet about such\ngods as, although great men, were yet but men, or the elements of\nthis world which the true God made, or creatures who were ordained as\nprincipalities and powers according to the will of the Creator and\ntheir own merit. And if, among much that was vain and false, they\nsang anything of the one true God, yet, by worshipping Him along\nwith others who are not gods, and showing them the service that is\ndue to Him alone, they did not serve Him at all rightly; and even\nsuch poets as Orpheus, Mus\u00e6us, and Linus, were unable to abstain\nfrom dishonouring their gods by fables. But yet these theologues\nworshipped the gods, and were not worshipped as gods, although the\ncity of the ungodly is wont, I know not how, to set Orpheus over\nthe sacred, or rather sacrilegious, rites of hell. The wife of king\nAthamas, who was called Ino, and her son Melicertes, perished by\nthrowing themselves into the sea, and were, according to popular\nbelief, reckoned among the gods, like other men of the same times,\n[among whom were] Castor and Pollux. The Greeks, indeed, called her\nwho was the mother of Melicertes, Leucothea, the Latins Matuta; but\nboth thought her a goddess.\n\n\n    15. _Of the fall of the kingdom of Argos, when Picus the son of\n       Saturn first received his father's kingdom of Laurentum._\n\nDuring those times the kingdom of Argos came to an end, being\ntransferred to Mycene, from which Agamemnon came, and the kingdom of\nLaurentum arose, of which Picus son of Saturn was the first king,\nwhen the woman Deborah judged the Hebrews; but it was the Spirit\nof God who used her as His agent, for she was also a prophetess,\nalthough her prophecy is so obscure that we could not demonstrate,\nwithout a long discussion, that it was uttered concerning Christ.\nNow the Laurentes already reigned in Italy, from whom the origin\nof the Roman people is quite evidently derived after the Greeks;\nyet the kingdom of Assyria still lasted, in which Lampares was the\ntwenty-third king when Picus first began to reign at Laurentum. The\nworshippers of such gods may see what they are to think of Saturn the\nfather of Picus, who deny that he was a man; of whom some also have\nwritten that he himself reigned in Italy before Picus his son; and\nVirgil in his well-known book says,--\n\n          \"That race indocile, and through mountains high\n           Dispersed, he settled, and endowed with laws,\n           And named their country Latium, because\n           Latent within their coasts he dwelt secure.\n           Tradition says the golden ages pure\n           Began when he was king.\"[503]\n\nBut they regard these as poetic fancies, and assert that the father\nof Picus was Sterces rather, and relate that, being a most skilful\nhusbandman, he discovered that the fields could be fertilized by the\ndung of animals, which is called _stercus_ from his name. Some say\nhe was called Stercutius. But for whatever reason they chose to call\nhim Saturn, it is yet certain they made this Sterces or Stercutius\na god for his merit in agriculture; and they likewise received into\nthe number of these gods Picus his son, whom they affirm to have\nbeen a famous augur and warrior. Picus begot Faunus, the second king\nof Laurentum; and he too is, or was, a god with them. These divine\nhonours they gave to dead men before the Trojan war.\n\n\n  16. _Of Diomede, who after the destruction of Troy was placed among\n      the gods, while his companions are said to have been changed\n      into birds._\n\nTroy was overthrown, and its destruction was everywhere sung and made\nwell known even to boys; for it was signally published and spread\nabroad, both by its own greatness and by writers of excellent style.\nAnd this was done in the reign of Latinus the son of Faunus, from\nwhom the kingdom began to be called Latium instead of Laurentum. The\nvictorious Greeks, on leaving Troy destroyed and returning to their own\ncountries, were torn and crushed by divers and horrible calamities.\nYet even from among them they increased the number of their gods, for\nthey made Diomede a god. They allege that his return home was prevented\nby a divinely imposed punishment, and they prove, not by fabulous and\npoetic falsehood, but by historic attestation, that his companions\nwere turned into birds. Yet they think that, even although he was made\na god, he could neither restore them to the human form by his own\npower, nor yet obtain it from Jupiter his king, as a favour granted to\na new inhabitant of heaven. They also say that his temple is in the\nisland of Diomed\u00e6a, not far from Mount Garganus in Apulia, and that\nthese birds fly round about this temple, and worship in it with such\nwonderful obedience, that they fill their beaks with water and sprinkle\nit; and if Greeks, or those born of the Greek race, come there, they\nare not only still, but fly to meet them; but if they are foreigners,\nthey fly up at their heads, and wound them with such severe strokes as\neven to kill them. For they are said to be well enough armed for these\ncombats with their hard and large beaks.\n\n\n    17. _What Varro says of the incredible transformations of men._\n\nIn support of this story, Varro relates others no less incredible\nabout that most famous sorceress Circe, who changed the companions\nof Ulysses into beasts, and about the Arcadians, who, by lot, swam\nacross a certain pool, and were turned into wolves there, and lived\nin the deserts of that region with wild beasts like themselves.\nBut if they never fed on human flesh for nine years, they were\nrestored to the human form on swimming back again through the same\npool. Finally, he expressly names one Dem\u00e6netus, who, on tasting a\nboy offered up in sacrifice by the Arcadians to their god Lyc\u00e6us\naccording to their custom, was changed into a wolf, and, being\nrestored to his proper form in the tenth year, trained himself as\na pugilist, and was victorious at the Olympic games. And the same\nhistorian thinks that the epithet Lyc\u00e6us was applied in Arcadia to\nPan and Jupiter for no other reason than this metamorphosis of men\ninto wolves, because it was thought it could not be wrought except by\na divine power. For a wolf is called in Greek \u03bb\u03c5\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2, from which the\nname Lyc\u00e6us appears to be formed. He says also that the Roman Luperci\nwere as it were sprung of the seed of these mysteries.\n\n\n   18. _What we should believe concerning the transformations which\n           seem to happen to men through the art of demons._\n\nPerhaps our readers expect us to say something about this so great\ndelusion wrought by the demons; and what shall we say but that men\nmust fly out of the midst of Babylon?[504] For this prophetic precept\nis to be understood spiritually in this sense, that by going forward\nin the living God, by the steps of faith, which worketh by love,\nwe must flee out of the city of this world, which is altogether a\nsociety of ungodly angels and men. Yea, the greater we see the power\nof the demons to be in these depths, so much the more tenaciously\nmust we cleave to the Mediator through whom we ascend from these\nlowest to the highest places. For if we should say these things are\nnot to be credited, there are not wanting even now some who would\naffirm that they had either heard on the best authority, or even\nthemselves experienced, something of that kind. Indeed we ourselves,\nwhen in Italy, heard such things about a certain region there, where\nlandladies of inns, imbued with these wicked arts, were said to be\nin the habit of giving to such travellers as they chose, or could\nmanage, something in a piece of cheese by which they were changed on\nthe spot into beasts of burden, and carried whatever was necessary,\nand were restored to their own form when the work was done. Yet their\nmind did not become bestial, but remained rational and human, just\nas Apuleius, in the books he wrote with the title of _The Golden\nAss_, has told, or feigned, that it happened to his own self that, on\ntaking poison, he became an ass, while retaining his human mind.\n\nThese things are either false, or so extraordinary as to be with\ngood reason disbelieved. But it is to be most firmly believed that\nAlmighty God can do whatever He pleases, whether in punishing or\nfavouring, and that the demons can accomplish nothing by their\nnatural power (for their created being is itself angelic, although\nmade malign by their own fault), except what He may permit, whose\njudgments are often hidden, but never unrighteous. And indeed\nthe demons, if they really do such things as these on which this\ndiscussion turns, do not create real substances, but only change\nthe appearance of things created by the true God so as to make them\nseem to be what they are not. I cannot therefore believe that even\nthe body, much less the mind, can really be changed into bestial\nforms and lineaments by any reason, art, or power of the demons; but\nthe phantasm of a man, which even in thought or dreams goes through\ninnumerable changes, may, when the man's senses are laid asleep or\noverpowered, be presented to the senses of others in a corporeal\nform, in some indescribable way unknown to me, so that men's bodies\nthemselves may lie somewhere, alive, indeed, yet with their senses\nlocked up much more heavily and firmly than by sleep, while that\nphantasm, as it were embodied in the shape of some animal, may appear\nto the senses of others, and may even seem to the man himself to be\nchanged, just as he may seem to himself in sleep to be so changed,\nand to bear burdens; and these burdens, if they are real substances,\nare borne by the demons, that men may be deceived by beholding at the\nsame time the real substance of the burdens and the simulated bodies\nof the beasts of burden. For a certain man called Pr\u00e6stantius used\nto tell that it had happened to his father in his own house, that\nhe took that poison in a piece of cheese, and lay in his bed as if\nsleeping, yet could by no means be aroused. But he said that after a\nfew days he as it were woke up and related the things he had suffered\nas if they had been dreams, namely, that he had been made a sumpter\nhorse, and, along with other beasts of burden, had carried provisions\nfor the soldiers of what is called the Rh\u0153tian Legion, because it was\nsent to Rh\u0153tia. And all this was found to have taken place just as\nhe told, yet it had seemed to him to be his own dream. And another\nman declared that in his own house at night, before he slept, he\nsaw a certain philosopher, whom he knew very well, come to him and\nexplain to him some things in the Platonic philosophy which he had\npreviously declined to explain when asked. And when he had asked this\nphilosopher why he did in his house what he had refused to do at\nhome, he said, \"I did not do it, but I dreamed I had done it.\" And\nthus what the one saw when sleeping was shown to the other when awake\nby a phantasmal image.\n\nThese things have not come to us from persons we might deem unworthy\nof credit, but from informants we could not suppose to be deceiving\nus. Therefore what men say and have committed to writing about the\nArcadians being often changed into wolves by the Arcadian gods, or\ndemons rather, and what is told in song about Circe transforming the\ncompanions of Ulysses,[505] if they were really done, may, in my\nopinion, have been done in the way I have said. As for Diomede's\nbirds, since their race is alleged to have been perpetuated by\nconstant propagation, I believe they were not made through the\nmetamorphosis of men, but were slyly substituted for them on their\nremoval, just as the hind was for Iphigenia, the daughter of king\nAgamemnon. For juggleries of this kind could not be difficult for the\ndemons if permitted by the judgment of God; and since that virgin was\nafterward found alive, it is easy to see that a hind had been slyly\nsubstituted for her. But because the companions of Diomede were of\na sudden nowhere to be seen, and afterward could nowhere be found,\nbeing destroyed by bad avenging angels, they were believed to have\nbeen changed into those birds, which were secretly brought there from\nother places where such birds were, and suddenly substituted for them\nby fraud. But that they bring water in their beaks and sprinkle it\non the temple of Diomede, and that they fawn on men of Greek race\nand persecute aliens, is no wonderful thing to be done by the inward\ninfluence of the demons, whose interest it is to persuade men that\nDiomede was made a god, and thus to beguile them into worshipping\nmany false gods, to the great dishonour of the true God; and to\nserve dead men, who even in their lifetime did not truly live, with\ntemples, altars, sacrifices, and priests, all which, when of the\nright kind, are due only to the one living and true God.\n\n\n    19. _That \u00c6neas came into Italy when Abdon the judge ruled over\n                             the Hebrews._\n\nAfter the capture and destruction of Troy, \u00c6neas, with twenty ships\nladen with the Trojan relics, came into Italy, when Latinus reigned\nthere, Menestheus in Athens, Polyphidos in Sicyon, and Tautanos\nin Assyria, and Abdon was judge of the Hebrews. On the death of\nLatinus, \u00c6neas reigned three years, the same kings continuing in the\nabove-named places, except that Pelasgus was now king in Sicyon, and\nSampson was judge of the Hebrews, who is thought to be Hercules,\nbecause of his wonderful strength. Now the Latins made \u00c6neas one\nof their gods, because at his death he was nowhere to be found.\nThe Sabines also placed among the gods their first king, Sancus,\n[Sangus], or Sanctus, as some call him. At that time Codrus king of\nAthens exposed himself _incognito_ to be slain by the Peloponnesian\nfoes of that city, and so was slain. In this way, they say, he\ndelivered his country. For the Peloponnesians had received a response\nfrom the oracle, that they should overcome the Athenians only on\ncondition that they did not slay their king. Therefore he deceived\nthem by appearing in a poor man's dress, and provoking them, by\nquarrelling, to murder him. Whence Virgil says, \"Or the quarrels of\nCodrus.\"[506] And the Athenians worshipped this man as a god with\nsacrificial honours. The fourth king of the Latins was Silvius the\nson of \u00c6neas, not by Cre\u00fcsa, of whom Ascanius the third king was\nborn, but by Lavinia the daughter of Latinus, and he is said to\nhave been his posthumous child. Oneus was the twenty-ninth king of\nAssyria, Melanthus the sixteenth of the Athenians, and Eli the priest\nwas judge of the Hebrews; and the kingdom of Sicyon then came to an\nend, after lasting, it is said, for nine hundred and fifty-nine years.\n\n\n   20. _Of the succession of the line of kings among the Israelites\n                    after the times of the judges._\n\nWhile these kings reigned in the places mentioned, the period of the\njudges being ended, the kingdom of Israel next began with king Saul,\nwhen Samuel the prophet lived. At that date those Latin kings began\nwho were surnamed Silvii, having that surname, in addition to their\nproper name, from their predecessor, that son of \u00c6neas who was called\nSilvius; just as, long afterward, the successors of C\u00e6sar Augustus\nwere surnamed C\u00e6sars. Saul being rejected, so that none of his issue\nshould reign, on his death David succeeded him in the kingdom, after\nhe had reigned forty years. Then the Athenians ceased to have kings\nafter the death of Codrus, and began to have a magistracy to rule\nthe republic. After David, who also reigned forty years, his son\nSolomon was king of Israel, who built that most noble temple of God\nat Jerusalem. In his time Alba was built among the Latins, from which\nthereafter the kings began to be styled kings not of the Latins, but\nof the Albans, although in the same Latium. Solomon was succeeded\nby his son Rehoboam, under whom that people was divided into two\nkingdoms, and its separate parts began to have separate kings.\n\n\n      21. _Of the kings of Latium, the first and twelfth of whom,\n                 \u00c6neas and Aventinus, were made gods._\n\nAfter \u00c6neas, whom they deified, Latium had eleven kings, none of\nwhom was deified. But Aventinus, who was the twelfth after \u00c6neas,\nhaving been laid low in war, and buried in that hill still called\nby his name, was added to the number of such gods as they made for\nthemselves. Some, indeed, were unwilling to write that he was slain\nin battle, but said he was nowhere to be found, and that it was not\nfrom his name, but from the alighting of birds, that hill was called\nAventinus.[507] After this no god was made in Latium except Romulus\nthe founder of Rome. But two kings are found between these two, the\nfirst of whom I shall describe in the Virgilian verse:\n\n          \"Next came that Procas, glory of the Trojan race.\"[508]\n\nThat greatest of all kingdoms, the Assyrian, had its long duration\nbrought to a close in his time, the time of Rome's birth drawing\nnigh. For the Assyrian empire was transferred to the Medes after\nnearly thirteen hundred and five years, if we include the reign of\nBelus, who begot Ninus, and, content with a small kingdom, was the\nfirst king there. Now Procas reigned before Amulius. And Amulius\nhad made his brother Numitor's daughter, Rhea by name, who was also\ncalled Ilia, a vestal virgin, who conceived twin sons by Mars, as\nthey will have it, in that way honouring or excusing her adultery,\nadding as a proof that a she-wolf nursed the infants when exposed.\nFor they think this kind of beast belongs to Mars, so that the\nshe-wolf is believed to have given her teats to the infants, because\nshe knew they were the sons of Mars her lord; although there are not\nwanting persons who say that when the crying babes lay exposed, they\nwere first of all picked up by I know not what harlot, and sucked\nher breasts first (now harlots were called _lup\u00e6_, she-wolves, from\nwhich their vile abodes are even yet called _lupanaria_), and that\nafterwards they came into the hands of the shepherd Faustulus, and\nwere nursed by Acca his wife. Yet what wonder is it, if, to rebuke\nthe king who had cruelly ordered them to be thrown into the water,\nGod was pleased, after divinely delivering them from the water, to\nsuccour, by means of a wild beast giving milk, these infants by whom\nso great a city was to be founded? Amulius was succeeded in the\nLatian kingdom by his brother Numitor, the grandfather of Romulus;\nand Rome was founded in the first year of this Numitor, who from that\ntime reigned along with his grandson Romulus.\n\n\n    22. _That Rome was founded when the Assyrian kingdom perished,\n               at which time Hezekiah reigned in Judah._\n\nTo be brief, the city of Rome was founded, like another Babylon, and as\nit were the daughter of the former Babylon, by which God was pleased\nto conquer the whole world, and subdue it far and wide by bringing it\ninto one fellowship of government and laws. For there were already\npowerful and brave peoples and nations trained to arms, who did not\neasily yield, and whose subjugation necessarily involved great danger\nand destruction as well as great and horrible labour. For when the\nAssyrian kingdom subdued almost all Asia, although this was done by\nfighting, yet the wars could not be very fierce or difficult, because\nthe nations were as yet untrained to resist, and neither so many nor\nso great as afterward; forasmuch as, after that greatest and indeed\nuniversal flood, when only eight men escaped in Noah's ark, not much\nmore than a thousand years had passed when Ninus subdued all Asia\nwith the exception of India. But Rome did not with the same quickness\nand facility wholly subdue all those nations of the east and west\nwhich we see brought under the Roman empire, because, in its gradual\nincrease, in whatever direction it was extended, it found them strong\nand warlike. At the time when Rome was founded, then, the people of\nIsrael had been in the land of promise seven hundred and eighteen\nyears. Of these years twenty-seven belong to Joshua the son of Nun, and\nafter that three hundred and twenty-nine to the period of the judges.\nBut from the time when the kings began to reign there, three hundred\nand sixty-two years had passed. And at that time there was a king in\nJudah called Ahaz, or, as others compute, Hezekiah his successor, the\nbest and most pious king, who it is admitted reigned in the times of\nRomulus. And in that part of the Hebrew nation called Israel, Hoshea\nhad begun to reign.\n\n\n  23. _Of the Erythr\u00e6an sibyl, who is known to have sung many things\n           about Christ more plainly than the other sibyls._\n\nSome say the Erythr\u00e6an sibyl prophesied at this time. Now Varro\ndeclares there were many sibyls, and not merely one. This sibyl of\nErythr\u00e6 certainly wrote some things concerning Christ which are\nquite manifest, and we first read them in the Latin tongue in verses\nof bad Latin, and unrhythmical, through the unskilfulness, as we\nafterward learned, of some interpreter unknown to me. For Flaccianus,\na very famous man, who was also a proconsul, a man of most ready\neloquence and much learning, when we were speaking about Christ,\nproduced a Greek manuscript, saying that it was the prophecies of\nthe Erythr\u00e6an sibyl, in which he pointed out a certain passage which\nhad the initial letters of the lines so arranged that these words\ncould be read in them: \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c5\u1f31\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1, which mean,\n\"Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Saviour.\" And these verses, of\nwhich the initial letters yield that meaning, contain what follows as\ntranslated by some one into Latin in good rhythm:\n\n          \u0399 Judgment shall moisten the earth with the sweat of its\n              standard,\n          \u0397 Ever enduring, behold the King shall come through the ages,\n          \u03a3 Sent to be here in the flesh, and Judge at the last of the\n              world.\n          \u039f O God, the believing and faithless alike shall behold Thee\n          \u03a5 Uplifted with saints, when at last the ages are ended.\n          \u03a3 Sisted before Him are souls in the flesh for His judgment.\n\n          \u03a7 Hid in thick vapours, the while desolate lieth the earth.\n          \u03a1 Rejected by men are the idols and long hidden treasures;\n          \u0395 Earth is consumed by the fire, and it searcheth the ocean\n              and heaven;\n          \u0399 Issuing forth, it destroyeth the terrible portals of hell.\n          \u03a3 Saints in their body and soul freedom and light shall\n              inherit;\n          \u03a4 Those who are guilty shall burn in fire and brimstone for\n              ever.\n          \u039f Occult actions revealing, each one shall publish his\n              secrets;\n          \u03a3 Secrets of every man's heart God shall reveal in the light.\n\n          \u0398 Then shall be weeping and wailing, yea; and gnashing of\n               teeth;\n          \u0395 Eclipsed is the sun, and silenced the stars in their chorus.\n          \u039f Over and gone is the splendour of moonlight, melted the\n               heaven.\n          \u03a5 Uplifted by Him are the valleys, and cast down the\n               mountains.\n\n          \u03a5 Utterly gone among men are distinctions of lofty and lowly.\n          \u0399 Into the plains rush the hills, the skies and oceans are\n               mingled.\n          \u039f Oh, what an end of all things! earth broken in pieces shall\n               perish;\n          \u03a3 Swelling together at once shall the waters and flames flow\n               in rivers.\n\n          \u03a3 Sounding the archangel's trumpet shall peal down from\n               heaven,\n          \u03a9 Over the wicked who groan in their guilt and their manifold\n               sorrows.\n          \u03a4 Trembling, the earth shall be opened, revealing chaos and\n               hell.\n          \u0397 Every king before God shall stand in that day to be judged.\n          \u03a1 Rivers of fire and of brimstone shall fall from the heavens.\n\nIn these Latin verses the meaning of the Greek is correctly given,\nalthough not in the exact order of the lines as connected with the\ninitial letters; for in three of them, the fifth, eighteenth, and\nnineteenth, where the Greek letter \u03a5 occurs, Latin words could not\nbe found beginning with the corresponding letter, and yielding a\nsuitable meaning. So that, if we note down together the initial\nletters of all the lines in our Latin translation except those\nthree in which we retain the letter \u03a5 in the proper place, they\nwill express in five Greek words this meaning, \"Jesus Christ the\nSon of God, the Saviour.\" And the verses are twenty-seven, which is\nthe cube of three. For three times three are nine; and nine itself,\nif tripled, so as to rise from the superficial square to the cube,\ncomes to twenty-seven. But if you join the initial letters of these\nfive Greek words, \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c5\u1f31\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1, which mean, \"Jesus\nChrist the Son of God, the Saviour,\" they will make the word \u1f30\u03c7\u03b8\u1f7a\u03c2,\nthat is, \"fish,\" in which word Christ is mystically understood,\nbecause He was able to live, that is, to exist, without sin in the\nabyss of this mortality as in the depth of waters.\n\nBut this sibyl, whether she is the Erythr\u00e6an, or, as some rather\nbelieve, the Cum\u00e6an, in her whole poem, of which this is a very small\nportion, not only has nothing that can relate to the worship of the\nfalse or feigned gods, but rather speaks against them and their\nworshippers in such a way that we might even think she ought to be\nreckoned among those who belong to the city of God. Lactantius also\ninserted in his work the prophecies about Christ of a certain sibyl,\nhe does not say which. But I have thought fit to combine in a single\nextract, which may seem long, what he has set down in many short\nquotations. She says, \"Afterward He shall come into the injurious\nhands of the unbelieving, and they will give God buffets with profane\nhands, and with impure mouth will spit out envenomed spittle; but He\nwill with simplicity yield His holy back to stripes. And He will\nhold His peace when struck with the fist, that no one may find out\nwhat word, or whence, He comes to speak to hell; and He shall be\ncrowned with a crown of thorns. And they gave Him gall for meat, and\nvinegar for His thirst: they will spread this table of inhospitality.\nFor thou thyself, being foolish, hast not understood thy God,\ndeluding the minds of mortals, but hast both crowned Him with thorns\nand mingled for Him bitter gall. But the veil of the temple shall be\nrent; and at midday it shall be darker than night for three hours.\nAnd He shall die the death, taking sleep for three days; and then\nreturning from hell, He first shall come to the light, the beginning\nof the resurrection being shown to the recalled.\" Lactantius made\nuse of these sibylline testimonies, introducing them bit by bit in\nthe course of his discussion as the things he intended to prove\nseemed to require, and we have set them down in one connected series,\nuninterrupted by comment, only taking care to mark them by capitals,\nif only the transcribers do not neglect to preserve them hereafter.\nSome writers, indeed, say that the Erythr\u00e6an sibyl was not in the\ntime of Romulus, but of the Trojan war.\n\n\n  24. _That the seven sages flourished in the reign of Romulus, when\n      the ten tribes which were called Israel were led into captivity\n      by the Chaldeans, and Romulus, when dead, had divine honours\n      conferred on him._\n\nWhile Romulus reigned, Thales the Milesian is said to have lived, being\none of the seven sages, who succeeded the theological poets, of whom\nOrpheus was the most renowned, and were called \u03a3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03af, that is, sages.\nDuring that time the ten tribes, which on the division of the people\nwere called Israel, were conquered by the Chaldeans and led captive\ninto their lands, while the two tribes which were called Judah, and\nhad the seat of their kingdom in Jerusalem, remained in the land of\nJudea. As Romulus, when dead, could nowhere be found, the Romans, as\nis everywhere notorious, placed him among the gods,--a thing which\nby that time had already ceased to be done, and which was not done\nafterwards till the time of the C\u00e6sars, and then not through error,\nbut in flattery; so that Cicero ascribes great praises to Romulus,\nbecause he merited such honours not in rude and unlearned times, when\nmen were easily deceived, but in times already polished and learned,\nalthough the subtle and acute loquacity of the philosophers had not\nyet culminated. But although the later times did not deify dead men,\nstill they did not cease to hold and worship as gods those deified of\nold; nay, by images, which the ancients never had, they even increased\nthe allurements of vain and impious superstition, the unclean demons\neffecting this in their heart, and also deceiving them by lying\noracles, so that even the fabulous crimes of the gods, which were not\nonce imagined by a more polite age, were yet basely acted in the plays\nin honour of these same false deities. Numa reigned after Romulus; and\nalthough he had thought that Rome would be better defended the more\ngods there were, yet on his death he himself was not counted worthy\nof a place among them, as if it were supposed that he had so crowded\nheaven that a place could not be found for him there. They report that\nthe Samian sibyl lived while he reigned at Rome, and when Manasseh\nbegan to reign over the Hebrews,--an impious king, by whom the prophet\nIsaiah is said to have been slain.\n\n\n  25. _What philosophers were famous when Tarquinius Priscus reigned\n      over the Romans, and Zedekiah over the Hebrews, when Jerusalem\n      was taken and the temple overthrown._\n\nWhen Zedekiah reigned over the Hebrews, and Tarquinius Priscus,\nthe successor of Ancus Martius, over the Romans, the Jewish people\nwas led captive into Babylon, Jerusalem and the temple built by\nSolomon being overthrown. For the prophets, in chiding them for\ntheir iniquity and impiety, predicted that these things should come\nto pass, especially Jeremiah, who even stated the number of years.\nPittacus of Mitylene, another of the sages, is reported to have lived\nat that time. And Eusebius writes that, while the people of God were\nheld captive in Babylon, the five other sages lived, who must be\nadded to Thales, whom we mentioned above, and Pittacus, in order to\nmake up the seven. These are Solon of Athens, Chilo of Laced\u00e6mon,\nPeriander of Corinth, Cleobulus of Lindus, and Bias of Priene. These\nflourished after the theological poets, and were called sages,\nbecause they excelled other men in a certain laudable line of life,\nand summed up some moral precepts in epigrammatic sayings. But they\nleft posterity no literary monuments, except that Solon is alleged\nto have given certain laws to the Athenians, and Thales was a natural\nphilosopher, and left books of his doctrine in short proverbs. In\nthat time of the Jewish captivity, Anaximander, Anaximenes, and\nXenophanes, the natural philosophers, flourished. Pythagoras also\nlived then, and at this time the name philosopher was first used.\n\n\n  26. _That at the time when the captivity of the Jews was brought\n      to an end, on the completion of seventy years, the Romans also\n      were freed from kingly rule._\n\nAt this time, Cyrus king of Persia, who also ruled the Chaldeans and\nAssyrians, having somewhat relaxed the captivity of the Jews, made\nfifty thousand of them return in order to rebuild the temple. They only\nbegan the first foundations and built the altar; but, owing to hostile\ninvasions, they were unable to go on, and the work was put off to the\ntime of Darius. During the same time also those things were done which\nare written in the book of Judith, which, indeed, the Jews are said not\nto have received into the canon of the Scriptures. Under Darius king\nof Persia, then, on the completion of the seventy years predicted by\nJeremiah the prophet, the captivity of the Jews was brought to an end,\nand they were restored to liberty. Tarquin then reigned as the seventh\nking of the Romans. On his expulsion, they also began to be free from\nthe rule of their kings. Down to this time the people of Israel had\nprophets; but, although they were numerous, the canonical writings of\nonly a few of them have been preserved among the Jews and among us. In\nclosing the previous book, I promised to set down something in this one\nabout them, and I shall now do so.\n\n\n  27. _Of the times of the prophets whose oracles are contained in\n      books, and who sang many things about the call of the Gentiles\n      at the time when the Roman kingdom began and the Assyrian came\n      to an end._\n\nIn order that we may be able to consider these times, let us go back a\nlittle to earlier times. At the beginning of the book of the prophet\nHosea, who is placed first of twelve, it is written, \"The word of the\nLord which came to Hosea in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and\nHezekiah, kings of Judah.\"[509] Amos also writes that he prophesied\nin the days of Uzziah, and adds the name of Jeroboam king of Israel,\nwho lived at the same time.[510] Isaiah the son of Amos--either the\nabove-named prophet, or, as is rather affirmed, another who was not a\nprophet, but was called by the same name--also puts at the head of his\nbook these four kings named by Hosea, saying by way of preface that\nhe prophesied in their days.[511] Micah also names the same times as\nthose of his prophecy, after the days of Uzziah;[512] for he names the\nsame three kings as Hosea named,--Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. We find\nfrom their own writings that these men prophesied contemporaneously.\nTo these are added Jonah in the reign of Uzziah, and Joel in that of\nJotham, who succeeded Uzziah. But we can find the date of these two\nprophets in the chronicles,[513] not in their own writings, for they\nsay nothing about it themselves. Now these days extend from Procas king\nof the Latins, or his predecessor Aventinus, down to Romulus king of\nthe Romans, or even to the beginning of the reign of his successor,\nNuma Pompilius. Hezekiah king of Judah certainly reigned till then.\nSo that thus these fountains of prophecy, as I may call them, burst\nforth at once during those times when the Assyrian kingdom failed and\nthe Roman began; so that, just as in the first period of the Assyrian\nkingdom Abraham arose, to whom the most distinct promises were made\nthat all nations should be blessed in his seed, so at the beginning\nof the western Babylon, in the time of whose government Christ was to\ncome in whom these promises were to be fulfilled, the oracles of the\nprophets were given not only in spoken but in written words, for a\ntestimony that so great a thing should come to pass. For although the\npeople of Israel hardly ever lacked prophets from the time when they\nbegan to have kings, these were only for their own use, not for that of\nthe nations. But when the more manifestly prophetic Scripture began to\nbe formed, which was to benefit the nations too, it was fitting that it\nshould begin when this city was founded which was to rule the nations.\n\n\n   28. _Of the things pertaining to the gospel of Christ which Hosea\n                         and Amos prophesied._\n\nThe prophet Hosea speaks so very profoundly that it is laborious\nwork to penetrate his meaning. But, according to promise, we must\ninsert something from his book. He says, \"And it shall come to pass\nthat in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people,\nthere they shall be called the sons of the living God.\"[514] Even the\napostles understood this as a prophetic testimony of the calling of\nthe nations who did not formerly belong to God; and because this same\npeople of the Gentiles is itself spiritually among the children of\nAbraham, and for that reason is rightly called Israel, therefore he\ngoes on to say, \"And the children of Judah and the children of Israel\nshall be gathered together in one, and shall appoint themselves\none headship, and shall ascend from the earth.\"[515] We should but\nweaken the savour of this prophetic oracle if we set ourselves\nto expound it. Let the reader but call to mind that corner-stone\nand those two walls of partition, the one of the Jews, the other\nof the Gentiles,[516] and he will recognise them, the one under\nthe term sons of Judah, the other as sons of Israel, supporting\nthemselves by one and the same headship, and ascending from the\nearth. But that those carnal Israelites who are now unwilling to\nbelieve in Christ shall afterward believe, that is, their children\nshall (for they themselves, of course, shall go to their own place\nby dying), this same prophet testifies, saying, \"For the children\nof Israel shall abide many days without a king, without a prince,\nwithout a sacrifice, without an altar, without a priesthood, without\nmanifestations.\"[517] Who does not see that the Jews are now thus?\nBut let us hear what he adds: \"And afterward shall the children of\nIsrael return, and seek the Lord their God, and David their king,\nand shall be amazed at the Lord and at His goodness in the latter\ndays.\"[518] Nothing is clearer than this prophecy, in which by David,\nas distinguished by the title of king, Christ is to be understood,\n\"who is made,\" as the apostle says, \"of the seed of David according\nto the flesh.\"[519] This prophet has also foretold the resurrection\nof Christ on the third day, as it behoved to be foretold, with\nprophetic loftiness, when he says, \"He will heal us after two days,\nand in the third day we shall rise again.\"[520] In agreement with\nthis the apostle says to us, \"If ye be risen with Christ, seek those\nthings which are above.\"[521] Amos also prophesies thus concerning\nsuch things: \"Prepare thee, that thou mayst invoke thy God, O Israel;\nfor lo, I am binding the thunder, and creating the spirit, and\nannouncing to men their Christ.\"[522] And in another place he says,\n\"In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen,\nand build up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins,\nand will build them up again as in the days of old: that the residue\nof men may inquire for me, and all the nations upon whom my name is\ninvoked, saith the Lord that doeth this.\"[523]\n\n\n    29. _What things are predicted by Isaiah concerning Christ and\n                             the Church._\n\nThe prophecy of Isaiah is not in the book of the twelve prophets, who\nare called the minor from the brevity of their writings, as compared\nwith those who are called the greater prophets because they published\nlarger volumes. Isaiah belongs to the latter, yet I connect him\nwith the two above named, because he prophesied at the same time.\nIsaiah, then, together with his rebukes of wickedness, precepts of\nrighteousness, and predictions of evil, also prophesied much more\nthan the rest about Christ and the Church, that is, about the King\nand that city which he founded; so that some say he should be called\nan evangelist rather than a prophet. But, in order to finish this\nwork, I quote only one out of many in this place. Speaking in the\nperson of the Father, he says, \"Behold, my servant shall understand,\nand shall be exalted and glorified very much. As many shall be\nastonished at Thee.\"[524] This is about Christ.\n\nBut let us now hear what follows about the Church. He says, \"Rejoice,\nO barren, thou that barest not; break forth and cry, thou that\ndidst not travail with child: for many more are the children of\nthe desolate than of her that has an husband.\"[525] But these must\nsuffice; and some things in them ought to be expounded; yet I think\nthose parts sufficient which are so plain that even enemies must be\ncompelled against their will to understand them.\n\n\n  30. _What Micah, Jonah, and Joel prophesied in accordance with the\n                           New Testament._\n\nThe prophet Micah, representing Christ under the figure of a great\nmountain, speaks thus: \"It shall come to pass in the last days, that\nthe manifested mountain of the Lord shall be prepared on the tops of\nthe mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people\nshall hasten unto it. Many nations shall go, and shall say, Come, let\nus go up into the mountain of the Lord, and into the house of the God\nof Jacob; and He will show us His way, and we will go in His paths:\nfor out of Zion shall proceed the law, and the word of the Lord\nout of Jerusalem. And He shall judge among many people, and rebuke\nstrong nations afar off.\"[526] This prophet predicts the very place\nin which Christ was born, saying, \"And thou, Bethlehem, of the house\nof Ephratah, art the least that can be reckoned among the thousands\nof Judah; out of thee shall come forth unto me a leader, to be the\nprince in Israel; and His going forth is from the beginning, even\nfrom the days of eternity. Therefore will He give them [up] even\nuntil the time when she that travaileth shall bring forth; and the\nremnant of His brethren shall be converted to the sons of Israel. And\nHe shall stand, and see, and feed His flock in the strength of the\nLord, and in the dignity of the name of the Lord His God: for now\nshall He be magnified even to the utmost of the earth.\"[527]\n\nThe prophet Jonah, not so much by speech as by his own painful\nexperience, prophesied Christ's death and resurrection much more\nclearly than if he had proclaimed them with his voice. For why was he\ntaken into the whale's belly and restored on the third day, but that\nhe might be a sign that Christ should return from the depths of hell\non the third day?\n\nI should be obliged to use many words in explaining all that Joel\nprophesies in order to make clear those that pertain to Christ and\nthe Church. But there is one passage I must not pass by, which the\napostles also quoted when the Holy Spirit came down from above on\nthe assembled believers according to Christ's promise. He says, \"And\nit shall come to pass after these things, that I will pour out\nmy Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall\nprophesy, and your old men shall dream, and your young men shall see\nvisions: and even on my servants and mine handmaids in those days\nwill I pour out my Spirit.\"[528]\n\n\n     31. _Of the predictions concerning the salvation of the world\n             in Christ, in Obadiah, Nahum, and Habakkuk._\n\nThe date of three of the minor prophets, Obadiah, Nahum, and\nHabakkuk, is neither mentioned by themselves nor given in the\nchronicles of Eusebius and Jerome. For although they put Obadiah\nwith Micah, yet when Micah prophesied does not appear from that part\nof their writings in which the dates are noted. And this, I think,\nhas happened through their error in negligently copying the works\nof others. But we could not find the two others now mentioned in\nthe copies of the chronicles which we have; yet because they are\ncontained in the canon, we ought not to pass them by.\n\nObadiah, so far as his writings are concerned, the briefest of all\nthe prophets, speaks against Idumea, that is, the nation of Esau,\nthat reprobate elder of the twin sons of Isaac and grandsons of\nAbraham. Now if, by that form of speech in which a part is put for\nthe whole, we take Idumea as put for the nations, we may understand\nof Christ what he says among other things, \"But upon Mount Sion\nshall be safety, and there shall be a Holy One.\"[529] And a little\nafter, at the end of the same prophecy, he says, \"And those who\nare saved again shall come up out of Mount Sion, that they may\ndefend Mount Esau, and it shall be a kingdom to the Lord.\"[530] It\nis quite evident this was fulfilled when those saved again out of\nMount Sion--that is, the believers in Christ from Judea, of whom\nthe apostles are chiefly to be acknowledged--went up to defend\nMount Esau. How could they defend it except by making safe, through\nthe preaching of the gospel, those who believed that they might be\n\"delivered from the power of darkness and translated into the kingdom\nof God?\"[531] This he expressed as an inference, adding, \"And it\nshall be to the Lord a kingdom.\" For Mount Sion signifies Judea,\nwhere it is predicted there shall be safety, and a Holy One, that\nis, Christ Jesus. But Mount Esau is Idumea, which signifies the\nChurch of the Gentiles, which, as I have expounded, those saved again\nout of Sion have defended that it should be a kingdom to the Lord.\nThis was obscure before it took place; but what believer does not\nfind it out now that it is done?\n\nAs for the prophet Nahum, through him God says, \"I will exterminate\nthe graven and the molten things: I will make thy burial. For lo,\nthe feet of Him that bringeth good tidings and announceth peace are\nswift upon the mountains! O Judah, celebrate thy festival days,\nand perform thy vows; for now they shall not go on any more so as\nto become antiquated. It is completed, it is consumed, it is taken\naway. He ascendeth who breathes in thy face, delivering thee out of\ntribulation.\"[532] Let him that remembers the gospel call to mind who\nhath ascended from hell and breathed the Holy Spirit in the face of\nJudah, that is, of the Jewish disciples; for they belong to the New\nTestament, whose festival days are so spiritually renewed that they\ncannot become antiquated. Moreover, we already see the graven and\nmolten things, that is, the idols of the false gods, exterminated\nthrough the gospel, and given up to oblivion as of the grave, and we\nknow that this prophecy is fulfilled in this very thing.\n\nOf what else than the advent of Christ, who was to come, is Habakkuk\nunderstood to say, \"And the Lord answered me, and said, Write the\nvision openly on a tablet of boxwood, that he that readeth these things\nmay understand. For the vision is yet for a time appointed, and it will\narise in the end, and will not become void: if it tarry, wait for it;\nbecause it will surely come, and will not be delayed?\"[533]\n\n\n     32. _Of the prophecy that is contained in the prayer and song\n                             of Habakkuk._\n\nIn his prayer, with a song, to whom but the Lord Christ does he say,\n\"O Lord, I have heard Thy hearing, and was afraid: O Lord, I have\nconsidered Thy works, and was greatly afraid?\"[534] What is this\nbut the inexpressible admiration of the foreknown, new, and sudden\nsalvation of men? \"In the midst of two living creatures thou shalt be\nrecognised.\" What is this but either between the two testaments, or\nbetween the two thieves, or between Moses and Elias talking with Him\non the mount? \"While the years draw nigh, Thou wilt be recognised;\nat the coming of the time Thou wilt be shown,\" does not even need\nexposition. \"While my soul shall be troubled at Him, in wrath Thou\nwilt be mindful of mercy.\" What is this but that He puts Himself\nfor the Jews, of whose nation He was, who were troubled with great\nanger and crucified Christ, when He, mindful of mercy, said, \"Father,\nforgive them, for they know not what they do?\"[535] \"God shall come\nfrom Teman, and the Holy One from the shady and close mountain.\"[536]\nWhat is said here, \"He shall come from Teman,\" some interpret \"from\nthe south,\" or \"from the south-west,\" by which is signified the\nnoonday, that is, the fervour of charity and the splendour of truth.\n\"The shady and close mountain\" might be understood in many ways, yet\nI prefer to take it as meaning the depth of the divine Scriptures,\nin which Christ is prophesied: for in the Scriptures there are many\nthings shady and close which exercise the mind of the reader; and\nChrist comes thence when he who has understanding finds Him there.\n\"His power covereth up the heavens, and the earth is full of His\npraise.\" What is this but what is also said in the psalm, \"Be Thou\nexalted, O God, above the heavens; and Thy glory above all the\nearth?\"[537] \"His splendour shall be as the light.\" What is it but\nthat the fame of Him shall illuminate believers? \"Horns are in His\nhands.\" What is this but the trophy of the cross? \"And He hath placed\nthe firm charity of His strength\"[538] needs no exposition. \"Before\nHis face shall go the word, and it shall go forth into the field\nafter His feet.\" What is this but that He should both be announced\nbefore His coming hither and after His return hence? \"He stood, and\nthe earth was moved.\" What is this but that \"He stood\" for succour,\n\"and the earth was moved\" to believe? \"He regarded, and the nations\nmelted;\" that is, He had compassion, and made the people penitent.\n\"The mountains are broken with violence;\" that is, through the power\nof those who work miracles the pride of the haughty is broken. \"The\neverlasting hills flowed down;\" that is, they are humbled in time\nthat they may be lifted up for eternity. \"I saw His goings [made]\neternal for His labours;\" that is, I beheld His labour of love not\nleft without the reward of eternity. \"The tents of Ethiopia shall\nbe greatly afraid, and the tents of the land of Midian;\" that is,\neven those nations which are not under the Roman authority, being\nsuddenly terrified by the news of Thy wonderful works, shall become\na Christian people. \"Wert Thou angry at the rivers, O Lord? or was\nThy fury against the rivers? or was Thy rage against the sea?\" This\nis said because He does not now come to condemn the world, but that\nthe world through Him might be saved.[539] \"For Thou shalt mount\nupon Thy horses, and Thy riding shall be salvation;\" that is, Thine\nevangelists shall carry Thee, for they are guided by Thee, and Thy\ngospel is salvation to them that believe in Thee. \"Bending, Thou\nwilt bend Thy bow against the sceptres, saith the Lord;\" that is,\nThou wilt threaten even the kings of the earth with Thy judgment.\n\"The earth shall be cleft with rivers;\" that is, by the sermons of\nthose who preach Thee flowing in upon them, men's hearts shall be\nopened to make confession, to whom it is said, \"Rend your hearts\nand not your garments.\"[540] What does \"The people shall see Thee\nand grieve\" mean, but that in mourning they shall be blessed?[541]\nWhat is \"Scattering the waters in marching,\" but that by walking in\nthose who everywhere proclaim Thee, Thou wilt scatter hither and\nthither the streams of Thy doctrine? What is \"The abyss uttered its\nvoice?\" Is it not that the depth of the human heart expressed what it\nperceived? The words, \"The depth of its phantasy,\" are an explanation\nof the previous verse, for the depth is the abyss; and \"Uttered its\nvoice\" is to be understood before them, that is, as we have said,\nit expressed what it perceived. Now the phantasy is the vision,\nwhich it did not hold or conceal, but poured forth in confession.\n\"The sun was raised up, and the moon stood still in her course;\"\nthat is, Christ ascended into heaven, and the Church was established\nunder her King. \"Thy darts shall go in the light;\" that is, Thy\nwords shall not be sent in secret, but openly. For He had said to\nHis own disciples, \"What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in\nthe light.\"[542] \"By threatening thou shalt diminish the earth;\"\nthat is, by that threatening Thou shalt humble men. \"And in fury\nThou shalt cast down the nations;\" for in punishing those who exalt\nthemselves Thou dashest them one against another. \"Thou wentest forth\nfor the salvation of Thy people, that Thou mightest save Thy Christ;\nThou hast sent death on the heads of the wicked.\" None of these\nwords require exposition. \"Thou hast lifted up the bonds, even to\nthe neck.\" This may be understood even of the good bonds of wisdom,\nthat the feet may be put into its fetters, and the neck into its\ncollar. \"Thou hast struck off in amazement of mind the bonds\" must be\nunderstood for, He lifts up the good and strikes off the bad, about\nwhich it is said to Him, \"Thou hast broken asunder my bonds,\"[543]\nand that \"in amazement of mind,\" that is, wonderfully. \"The heads of\nthe mighty shall be moved in it;\" to wit, in that wonder. \"They shall\nopen their teeth like a poor man eating secretly.\" For some of the\nmighty among the Jews shall come to the Lord, admiring His works and\nwords, and shall greedily eat the bread of His doctrine in secret\nfor fear of the Jews, just as the Gospel has shown they did. \"And\nThou hast sent into the sea Thy horses, troubling many waters,\" which\nare nothing else than many people; for unless all were troubled,\nsome would not be converted with fear, others pursued with fury. \"I\ngave heed, and my belly trembled at the voice of the prayer of my\nlips; and trembling entered into my bones, and my habit of body was\ntroubled under me.\" He gave heed to those things which he said, and\nwas himself terrified at his own prayer, which he had poured forth\nprophetically, and in which he discerned things to come. For when\nmany people are troubled, he saw the threatening tribulation of the\nChurch, and at once acknowledged himself a member of it, and said, \"I\nshall rest in the day of tribulation,\" as being one of those who are\nrejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation.[544] \"That I may ascend,\"\nhe says, \"among the people of my pilgrimage,\" departing quite from\nthe wicked people of his carnal kinship, who are not pilgrims in\nthis earth, and do not seek the country above.[545] \"Although the\nfig-tree,\" he says, \"shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the\nvines; the labour of the olive shall lie, and the fields shall yield\nno meat; the sheep shall be cut off from the meat, and there shall\nbe no oxen in the stalls.\" He sees that nation which was to slay\nChrist about to lose the abundance of spiritual supplies, which, in\nprophetic fashion, he has set forth by the figure of earthly plenty.\nAnd because that nation was to suffer such wrath of God, because,\nbeing ignorant of the righteousness of God, it wished to establish\nits own,[546] he immediately says, \"Yet will I rejoice in the Lord;\nI will joy in God my salvation. The Lord God is my strength, and He\nwill set my feet in completion; He will place me above the heights,\nthat I may conquer in His song,\" to wit, in that song of which\nsomething similar is said in the psalm, \"He set my feet upon a rock,\nand directed my goings, and put in my mouth a new song, a hymn to our\nGod.\"[547] He therefore conquers in the song of the Lord, who takes\npleasure in His praise, not in his own; that \"He that glorieth, let\nhim glory in the Lord.\"[548] But some copies have, \"I will joy in God\nmy Jesus,\" which seems to me better than the version of those who,\nwishing to put it in Latin, have not set down that very name which\nfor us it is dearer and sweeter to name.\n\n\n    33. _What Jeremiah and Zephaniah have, by the prophetic Spirit,\n   spoken before concerning Christ and the calling of the nations._\n\nJeremiah, like Isaiah, is one of the greater prophets, not of\nthe minor, like the others from whose writings I have just given\nextracts. He prophesied when Josiah reigned in Jerusalem, and Ancus\nMartius at Rome, when the captivity of the Jews was already at\nhand; and he continued to prophesy down to the fifth month of the\ncaptivity, as we find from his writings. Zephaniah, one of the minor\nprophets, is put along with him, because he himself says that he\nprophesied in the days of Josiah; but he does not say till when.\nJeremiah thus prophesied not only in the times of Ancus Martius, but\nalso in those of Tarquinius Priscus, whom the Romans had for their\nfifth king. For he had already begun to reign when that captivity\ntook place. Jeremiah, in prophesying of Christ, says, \"The breath\nof our mouth, the Lord Christ, was taken in our sins,\"[549] thus\nbriefly showing both that Christ is our Lord and that He suffered for\nus. Also in another place he says, \"This is my God, and there shall\nnone other be accounted of in comparison of Him; who hath found out\nall the way of prudence, and hath given it to Jacob His servant,\nand to Israel His beloved: afterward He was seen on the earth, and\nconversed with men.\"[550] Some attribute this testimony not to\nJeremiah, but to his secretary, who was called Baruch; but it is more\ncommonly ascribed to Jeremiah. Again the same prophet says concerning\nHim, \"Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise up\nunto David a righteous shoot, and a King shall reign and shall be\nwise, and shall do judgment and justice in the earth. In those days\nJudah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell confidently: and this\nis the name which they shall call Him, Our righteous Lord.\"[551] And\nof the calling of the nations which was to come to pass, and which\nwe now see fulfilled, he thus spoke: \"O Lord my God, and my refuge\nin the day of evils, to Thee shall the nations come from the utmost\nend of the earth, saying, Truly our fathers have worshipped lying\nimages, wherein there is no profit.\"[552] But that the Jews, by whom\nHe behoved even to be slain, were not going to acknowledge Him, this\nprophet thus intimates: \"Heavy is the heart through all; and He is\na man, and who shall know Him?\"[553] That passage also is his which\nI have quoted in the seventeenth book concerning the new testament,\nof which Christ is the Mediator. For Jeremiah himself says, \"Behold,\nthe days come, saith the Lord, that I will complete over the house of\nJacob a new testament,\" and the rest, which may be read there.[554]\n\nFor the present I shall put down those predictions about Christ by\nthe prophet Zephaniah, who prophesied with Jeremiah. \"Wait ye upon\nme, saith the Lord, in the day of my resurrection, in the future;\nbecause it is my determination to assemble the nations, and gather\ntogether the kingdoms.\"[555] And again he says, \"The Lord will be\nterrible upon them, and will exterminate all the gods of the earth;\nand they shall worship Him every man from his place, even all the\nisles of the nations.\"[556] And a little after he says, \"Then will\nI turn to the people a tongue, and to His offspring, that they may\ncall upon the name of the Lord, and serve Him under one yoke. From\nthe borders of the rivers of Ethiopia shall they bring sacrifices\nunto me. In that day thou shalt not be confounded for all thy curious\ninventions, which thou hast done impiously against me: for then I\nwill take away from thee the naughtiness of thy trespass; and thou\nshalt no more magnify thyself above thy holy mountain. And I will\nleave in thee a meek and humble people, and they who shall be left of\nIsrael shall fear the name of the Lord.\"[557] These are the remnant\nof whom the apostle quotes that which is elsewhere prophesied:\n\"Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the\nsea, a remnant shall be saved.\"[558] These are the remnant of that\nnation who have believed in Christ.\n\n\n     34. _Of the prophecy of Daniel and Ezekiel, other two of the\n                          greater prophets._\n\nDaniel and Ezekiel, other two of the greater prophets, also first\nprophesied in the very captivity of Babylon. Daniel even defined the\ntime when Christ was to come and suffer by the exact date. It would\ntake too long to show this by computation, and it has been done often\nby others before us. But of His power and glory he has thus spoken:\n\"I saw in a night vision, and, behold, one like the Son of man was\ncoming with the clouds of heaven, and He came even to the Ancient\nof days, and He was brought into His presence. And to Him there was\ngiven dominion, and honour, and a kingdom: and all people, tribes,\nand tongues shall serve Him. His power is an everlasting power, which\nshall not pass away, and His kingdom shall not be destroyed.\"[559]\n\nEzekiel also, speaking prophetically in the person of God the Father,\nthus foretells Christ, speaking of Him in the prophetic manner as\nDavid because He assumed flesh of the seed of David, and on account\nof that form of a servant in which He was made man, He who is the Son\nof God is also called the servant of God. He says, \"And I will set\nup over my sheep one Shepherd, who will feed them, even my servant\nDavid; and He shall feed them, and He shall be their shepherd. And\nI the Lord will be their God, and my servant David a prince in the\nmidst of them. I the Lord have spoken.\"[560] And in another place\nhe says, \"And one King shall be over them all: and they shall no\nmore be two nations, neither shall they be divided any more into two\nkingdoms: neither shall they defile themselves any more with their\nidols, and their abominations, and all their iniquities. And I will\nsave them out of all their dwelling-places wherein they have sinned,\nand will cleanse them; and they shall be my people, and I will be\ntheir God. And my servant David shall be king over them, and there\nshall be one Shepherd for them all.\"[561]\n\n\n    35. _Of the prophecy of the three prophets, Haggai, Zechariah,\n                             and Malachi._\n\nThere remain three minor prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi,\nwho prophesied at the close of the captivity. Of these Haggai more\nopenly prophesies of Christ and the Church thus briefly: \"Thus\nsaith the Lord of hosts, Yet one little while, and I will shake the\nheaven, and the earth, and the sea, and the dry land; and I will\nmove all nations, and the desired of all nations shall come.\"[562]\nThe fulfilment of this prophecy is in part already seen, and in part\nhoped for in the end. For He moved the heaven by the testimony of\nthe angels and the stars, when Christ became incarnate. He moved the\nearth by the great miracle of His birth of the virgin. He moved the\nsea and the dry land, when Christ was proclaimed both in the isles\nand in the whole world. So we see all nations moved to the faith; and\nthe fulfilment of what follows, \"And the desired of all nations shall\ncome,\" is looked for at His last coming. For ere men can desire and\nwait for Him, they must believe and love Him.\n\nZechariah says of Christ and the Church, \"Rejoice greatly, O daughter\nof Sion; shout joyfully, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King\nshall come unto thee, just and the Saviour; Himself poor, and\nmounting an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass: and His dominion\nshall be from sea to sea, and from the river even to the ends of the\nearth.\"[563] How this was done, when the Lord Christ on His journey\nused a beast of burden of this kind, we read in the Gospel, where,\nalso, as much of this prophecy is quoted as appears sufficient for\nthe context. In another place, speaking in the Spirit of prophecy\nto Christ Himself of the remission of sins through His blood, he\nsays, \"Thou also, by the blood of Thy testament, hast sent forth Thy\nprisoners from the lake wherein is no water.\"[564] Different opinions\nmay be held, consistently with right belief, as to what he meant by\nthis lake. Yet it seems to me that no meaning suits better than that\nof the depth of human misery, which is, as it were, dry and barren,\nwhere there are no streams of righteousness, but only the mire of\niniquity. For it is said of it in the Psalms, \"And He led me forth\nout of the lake of misery, and from the miry clay.\"[565]\n\nMalachi, foretelling the Church which we now behold propagated through\nChrist, says most openly to the Jews, in the person of God, \"I have no\npleasure in you, and I will not accept a gift at your hand. For from\nthe rising even to the going down of the sun, my name is great among\nthe nations; and in every place sacrifice shall be made, and a pure\noblation shall be offered unto my name: for my name shall be great\namong the nations, saith the Lord.\"[566] Since we can already see\nthis sacrifice offered to God in every place, from the rising of the\nsun to his going down, through Christ's priesthood after the order of\nMelchisedec, while the Jews, to whom it was said, \"I have no pleasure\nin you, neither will I accept a gift at your hand,\" cannot deny that\ntheir sacrifice has ceased, why do they still look for another Christ,\nwhen they read this in the prophecy, and see it fulfilled, which could\nnot be fulfilled except through Him? And a little after he says of Him,\nin the person of God, \"My covenant was with Him of life and peace; and\nI gave to Him that He might fear me with fear, and be afraid before\nmy name. The law of truth was in His mouth: directing in peace He\nhath walked with me, and hath turned many away from iniquity. For the\nPriest's lips shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law at His\nmouth: for He is the Angel of the Lord Almighty.\"[567] Nor is it to\nbe wondered at that Christ Jesus is called the Angel of the Almighty\nGod. For just as He is called a servant on account of the form of a\nservant in which He came to men, so He is called an angel on account\nof the _evangel_ which He proclaimed to men. For if we interpret these\nGreek words, _evangel_ is \"good news,\" and _angel_ is \"messenger.\"\nAgain he says of Him, \"Behold I will send mine angel, and He will look\nout the way before my face: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly\ncome into His temple, even the Angel of the testament, whom ye desire.\nBehold, He cometh, saith the Lord Almighty, and who shall abide the day\nof His entry, or who shall stand at His appearing?\"[568] In this place\nhe has foretold both the first and second advent of Christ: the first,\nto wit, of which he says, \"And He shall come suddenly into His temple;\"\nthat is, into His flesh, of which He said in the Gospel, \"Destroy this\ntemple, and in three days I will raise it up again.\"[569] And of the\nsecond advent he says, \"Behold, He cometh, saith the Lord Almighty,\nand who shall abide the day of His entry, or who shall stand at His\nappearing?\" But what he says, \"The Lord whom ye seek, and the Angel of\nthe testament whom ye desire,\" just means that even the Jews, according\nto the Scriptures which they read, shall seek and desire Christ. But\nmany of them did not acknowledge that He whom they sought and desired\nhad come, being blinded in their hearts, which were preoccupied with\ntheir own merits. Now what he here calls the testament, either above,\nwhere he says, \"My testament had been with Him,\" or here, where he has\ncalled Him the Angel of the testament, we ought, beyond a doubt, to\ntake to be the new testament, in which the things promised are eternal,\nand not the old, in which they are only temporal. Yet many who are weak\nare troubled when they see the wicked abound in such temporal things,\nbecause they value them greatly, and serve the true God to be rewarded\nwith them. On this account, to distinguish the eternal blessedness of\nthe new testament, which shall be given only to the good, from the\nearthly felicity of the old, which for the most part is given to the\nbad as well, the same prophet says, \"Ye have made your words burdensome\nto me: yet ye have said, In what have we spoken ill of Thee? Ye have\nsaid, Foolish is every one who serves God; and what profit is it that\nwe have kept His observances, and that we have walked as suppliants\nbefore the face of the Lord Almighty? And now we call the aliens\nblessed; yea, all that do wicked things are built up again; yea, they\nare opposed to God and are saved. They that feared the Lord uttered\nthese reproaches every one to his neighbour: and the Lord hearkened and\nheard; and He wrote a book of remembrance before Him, for them that\nfear the Lord and that revere His name.\"[570] By that book is meant the\nNew Testament. Finally, let us hear what follows: \"And they shall be an\nacquisition for me, saith the Lord Almighty, in the day which I make;\nand I will choose them as a man chooseth his son that serveth him. And\nye shall return, and shall discern between the just and the unjust, and\nbetween him that serveth God and him that serveth Him not. For, behold,\nthe day cometh burning as an oven, and it shall burn them up; and all\nthe aliens and all that do wickedly shall be stubble: and the day that\nshall come will set them on fire, saith the Lord Almighty, and shall\nleave neither root nor branch. And unto you that fear my name shall the\nSun of Righteousness arise, and health shall be in His wings; and ye\nshall go forth, and exult as calves let loose from bonds. And ye shall\ntread down the wicked, and they shall be ashes under your feet, in the\nday in which I shall do [this], saith the Lord Almighty.\"[571] This\nday is the day of judgment, of which, if God will, we shall speak more\nfully in its own place.\n\n\n          36. _About Esdras and the books of the Maccabees._\n\nAfter these three prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, during\nthe same period of the liberation of the people from the Babylonian\nservitude Esdras also wrote, who is historical rather than prophetical,\nas is also the book called Esther, which is found to relate, for the\npraise of God, events not far from those times; unless, perhaps,\nEsdras is to be understood as prophesying of Christ in that passage\nwhere, on a question having arisen among certain young men as to what\nis the strongest thing, when one had said kings, another wine, the\nthird women, who for the most part rule kings, yet that same third\nyouth demonstrated that the truth is victorious over all.[572] For by\nconsulting the Gospel we learn that Christ is the Truth. From this\ntime, when the temple was rebuilt, down to the time of Aristobulus, the\nJews had not kings but princes; and the reckoning of their dates is\nfound, not in the Holy Scriptures which are called canonical, but in\nothers, among which are also the books of the Maccabees. These are held\nas canonical, not by the Jews, but by the Church, on account of the\nextreme and wonderful sufferings of certain martyrs, who, before Christ\nhad come in the flesh, contended for the law of God even unto death,\nand endured most grievous and horrible evils.\n\n\n     37. _That prophetic records are found which are more ancient\n             than any fountain of the Gentile philosophy._\n\nIn the time of our prophets, then, whose writings had already come to\nthe knowledge of almost all nations, the philosophers of the nations\nhad not yet arisen,--at least, not those who were called by that\nname, which originated with Pythagoras the Samian, who was becoming\nfamous at the time when the Jewish captivity ended. Much more, then,\nare the other philosophers found to be later than the prophets. For\neven Socrates the Athenian, the master of all who were then most\nfamous, holding the pre-eminence in that department that is called\nthe moral or active, is found after Esdras in the chronicles. Plato\nalso was born not much later, who far outwent the other disciples\nof Socrates. If, besides these, we take their predecessors, who had\nnot yet been styled philosophers, to wit, the seven sages, and then\nthe physicists, who succeeded Thales, and imitated his studious\nsearch into the nature of things, namely, Anaximander, Anaximenes,\nand Anaxagoras, and some others, before Pythagoras first professed\nhimself a philosopher, even these did not precede the whole of\nour prophets in antiquity of time, since Thales, whom the others\nsucceeded, is said to have flourished in the reign of Romulus, when\nthe stream of prophecy burst forth from the fountains of Israel in\nthose writings which spread over the whole world. So that only those\ntheological poets, Orpheus, Linus, and Mus\u00e6us, and, it may be, some\nothers among the Greeks, are found earlier in date than the Hebrew\nprophets whose writings we hold as authoritative. But not even\nthese preceded in time our true divine, Moses, who authentically\npreached the one true God, and whose writings are first in the\nauthoritative canon; and therefore the Greeks, in whose tongue the\nliterature of this age chiefly appears, have no ground for boasting\nof their wisdom, in which our religion, wherein is true wisdom, is\nnot evidently more ancient at least, if not superior. Yet it must be\nconfessed that before Moses there had already been, not indeed among\nthe Greeks, but among barbarous nations, as in Egypt, some doctrine\nwhich might be called their wisdom, else it would not have been\nwritten in the holy books that Moses was learned in all the wisdom of\nthe Egyptians,[573] as he was, when, being born there, and adopted\nand nursed by Pharaoh's daughter, he was also liberally educated.\nYet not even the wisdom of the Egyptians could be antecedent in time\nto the wisdom of our prophets, because even Abraham was a prophet.\nAnd what wisdom could there be in Egypt before Isis had given them\nletters, whom they thought fit to worship as a goddess after her\ndeath? Now Isis is declared to have been the daughter of Inachus, who\nfirst began to reign in Argos when the grandsons of Abraham are known\nto have been already born.\n\n\n  38. _That the ecclesiastical canon has not admitted certain\n      writings on account of their too great antiquity, lest through\n      them false things should be inserted instead of true._\n\nIf I may recall far more ancient times, our patriarch Noah was\ncertainly even before that great deluge, and I might not undeservedly\ncall him a prophet, forasmuch as the ark he made, in which he escaped\nwith his family, was itself a prophecy of our times.[574] What of\nEnoch, the seventh from Adam? Does not the canonical epistle of the\nApostle Jude declare that he prophesied?[575] But the writings of\nthese men could not be held as authoritative either among the Jews\nor us, on account of their too great antiquity, which made it seem\nneedful to regard them with suspicion, lest false things should be\nset forth instead of true. For some writings which are said to be\ntheirs are quoted by those who, according to their own humour,\nloosely believe what they please. But the purity of the canon has\nnot admitted these writings, not because the authority of these men\nwho pleased God is rejected, but because they are not believed to\nbe theirs. Nor ought it to appear strange if writings for which so\ngreat antiquity is claimed are held in suspicion, seeing that in the\nvery history of the kings of Judah and Israel containing their acts,\nwhich we believe to belong to the canonical Scripture, very many\nthings are mentioned which are not explained there, but are said to\nbe found in other books which the prophets wrote, the very names of\nthese prophets being sometimes given, and yet they are not found in\nthe canon which the people of God received. Now I confess the reason\nof this is hidden from me; only I think that even those men, to whom\ncertainly the Holy Spirit revealed those things which ought to be\nheld as of religious authority, might write some things as men by\nhistorical diligence, and others as prophets by divine inspiration;\nand these things were so distinct, that it was judged that the former\nshould be ascribed to themselves, but the latter to God speaking\nthrough them: and so the one pertained to the abundance of knowledge,\nthe other to the authority of religion. In that authority the canon\nis guarded. So that, if any writings outside of it are now brought\nforward under the name of the ancient prophets, they cannot serve\neven as an aid to knowledge, because it is uncertain whether they are\ngenuine; and on this account they are not trusted, especially those\nof them in which some things are found that are even contrary to the\ntruth of the canonical books, so that it is quite apparent they do\nnot belong to them.\n\n\n     39. _About the Hebrew written characters which that language\n                          always possessed._\n\nNow we must not believe that Heber, from whose name the word Hebrew\nis derived, preserved and transmitted the Hebrew language to Abraham\nonly as a spoken language, and that the Hebrew letters began with\nthe giving of the law through Moses; but rather that this language,\nalong with its letters, was preserved by that succession of fathers.\nMoses, indeed, appointed some among the people of God to teach\nletters, before they could know any letters of the divine law. The\nScripture calls these men \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2, who may be called in\nLatin _inductores_ or _introductores_ of letters, because they, as\nit were, introduce them into the hearts of the learners, or rather\nlead those whom they teach into them. Therefore no nation could vaunt\nitself over our patriarchs and prophets by any wicked vanity for the\nantiquity of its wisdom; since not even Egypt, which is wont falsely\nand vainly to glory in the antiquity of her doctrines, is found to\nhave preceded in time the wisdom of our patriarchs in her own wisdom,\nsuch as it is. Neither will any one dare to say that they were most\nskilful in wonderful sciences before they knew letters, that is,\nbefore Isis came and taught them there. Besides, what, for the most\npart, was that memorable doctrine of theirs which was called wisdom\nbut astronomy, and it may be some other sciences of that kind, which\nusually have more power to exercise men's wit than to enlighten their\nminds with true wisdom? As regards philosophy, which professes to\nteach men something which shall make them happy, studies of that kind\nflourished in those lands about the times of Mercury whom they called\nTrismegistus, long before the sages and philosophers of Greece, but\nyet after Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph, and even after Moses\nhimself. At that time, indeed, when Moses was born, Atlas is found\nto have lived, that great astronomer, the brother of Prometheus,\nand maternal grandson of the elder Mercury, of whom that Mercury\nTrismegistus was the grandson.\n\n\n  40. _About the most mendacious vanity of the Egyptians, in which\n      they ascribe to their science an antiquity of a hundred\n      thousand years._\n\nIn vain, then, do some babble with most empty presumption, saying\nthat Egypt has understood the reckoning of the stars for more than a\nhundred thousand years. For in what books have they collected that\nnumber who learned letters from Isis their mistress, not much more\nthan two thousand years ago? Varro, who has declared this, is no\nsmall authority in history, and it does not disagree with the truth\nof the divine books. For as it is not yet six thousand years since\nthe first man, who is called Adam, are not those to be ridiculed\nrather than refuted who try to persuade us of anything regarding a\nspace of time so different from, and contrary to, the ascertained\ntruth? For what historian of the past should we credit more than him\nwho has also predicted things to come which we now see fulfilled? And\nthe very disagreement of the historians among themselves furnishes\na good reason why we ought rather to believe him who does not\ncontradict the divine history which we hold. But, on the other hand,\nthe citizens of the impious city, scattered everywhere through the\nearth, when they read the most learned writers, none of whom seems\nto be of contemptible authority, and find them disagreeing among\nthemselves about affairs most remote from the memory of our age,\ncannot find out whom they ought to trust. But we, being sustained\nby divine authority in the history of our religion, have no doubt\nthat whatever is opposed to it is most false, whatever may be the\ncase regarding other things in secular books, which, whether true or\nfalse, yield nothing of moment to our living rightly and happily.\n\n\n   41. _About the discord of philosophic opinion, and the concord of\n       the Scriptures that are held as canonical by the Church._\n\nBut let us omit further examination of history, and return to the\nphilosophers from whom we digressed to these things. They seem to\nhave laboured in their studies for no other end than to find out\nhow to live in a way proper for laying hold of blessedness. Why,\nthen, have the disciples dissented from their masters, and the\nfellow-disciples from one another, except because as men they have\nsought after these things by human sense and human reasonings? Now,\nalthough there might be among them a desire of glory, so that each\nwished to be thought wiser and more acute than another, and in no\nway addicted to the judgment of others, but the inventor of his own\ndogma and opinion, yet I may grant that there were some, or even very\nmany of them, whose love of truth severed them from their teachers or\nfellow-disciples, that they might strive for what they thought was\nthe truth, whether it was so or not. But what can human misery do,\nor how or where can it reach forth, so as to attain blessedness, if\ndivine authority does not lead it? Finally, let our authors, among\nwhom the canon of the sacred books is fixed and bounded, be far from\ndisagreeing in any respect. It is not without good reason, then,\nthat not merely a few people prating in the schools and gymnasia in\ncaptious disputations, but so many and great people, both learned\nand unlearned, in countries and cities, have believed that God spoke\nto them or by them, _i.e._ the canonical writers, when they wrote\nthese books. There ought, indeed, to be but few of them, lest on\naccount of their multitude what ought to be religiously esteemed\nshould grow cheap; and yet not so few that their agreement should not\nbe wonderful. For among the multitude of philosophers, who in their\nworks have left behind them the monuments of their dogmas, no one\nwill easily find any who agree in all their opinions. But to show\nthis is too long a task for this work.\n\nBut what author of any sect is so approved in this demon-worshipping\ncity, that the rest who have differed from or opposed him in opinion\nhave been disapproved? The Epicureans asserted that human affairs\nwere not under the providence of the gods; and the Stoics, holding\nthe opposite opinion, agreed that they were ruled and defended by\nfavourable and tutelary gods. Yet were not both sects famous among\nthe Athenians? I wonder, then, why Anaxagoras was accused of a crime\nfor saying that the sun was a burning stone, and denying that it was\na god at all; while in the same city Epicurus flourished gloriously\nand lived securely, although he not only did not believe that the\nsun or any star was a god, but contended that neither Jupiter nor\nany of the gods dwelt in the world at all, so that the prayers and\nsupplications of men might reach them! Were not both Aristippus\nand Antisthenes there, two noble philosophers and both Socratic?\nyet they placed the chief end of life within bounds so diverse and\ncontradictory, that the first made the delight of the body the chief\ngood, while the other asserted that man was made happy mainly by\nthe virtue of the mind. The one also said that the wise man should\nflee from the republic; the other, that he should administer its\naffairs. Yet did not each gather disciples to follow his own sect?\nIndeed, in the conspicuous and well-known porch, in gymnasia, in\ngardens, in places public and private, they openly strove in bands\neach for his own opinion, some asserting there was one world, others\ninnumerable worlds; some that this world had a beginning, others\nthat it had not; some that it would perish, others that it would\nexist always; some that it was governed by the divine mind, others by\nchance and accident; some that souls are immortal, others that they\nare mortal,--and of those who asserted their immortality, some said\nthey transmigrated through beasts, others that it was by no means so,\nwhile of those who asserted their mortality, some said they perished\nimmediately after the body, others that they survived either a little\nwhile or a longer time, but not always; some fixing supreme good in\nthe body, some in the mind, some in both; others adding to the mind\nand body external good things; some thinking that the bodily senses\nought to be trusted always, some not always, others never. Now what\npeople, senate, power, or public dignity of the impious city has ever\ntaken care to judge between all these and other well-nigh innumerable\ndissensions of the philosophers, approving and accepting some, and\ndisapproving and rejecting others? Has it not held in its bosom at\nrandom, without any judgment, and confusedly, so many controversies\nof men at variance, not about fields, houses, or anything of a\npecuniary nature, but about those things which make life either\nmiserable or happy? Even if some true things were said in it, yet\nfalsehoods were uttered with the same licence; so that such a city\nhas not amiss received the title of the mystic Babylon. For Babylon\nmeans confusion, as we remember we have already explained. Nor does\nit matter to the devil, its king, how they wrangle among themselves\nin contradictory errors, since all alike deservedly belong to him on\naccount of their great and varied impiety.\n\nBut that nation, that people, that city, that republic, these\nIsraelites, to whom the oracles of God were entrusted, by no means\nconfounded with similar licence false prophets with the true prophets;\nbut, agreeing together, and differing in nothing, acknowledged and\nupheld the authentic authors of their sacred books. These were their\nphilosophers, these were their sages, divines, prophets, and teachers\nof probity and piety. Whoever was wise and lived according to them was\nwise and lived not according to men, but according to God who hath\nspoken by them. If sacrilege is forbidden there, God hath forbidden\nit. If it is said, \"Honour thy father and thy mother,\"[576] God\nhath commanded it. If it is said, \"Thou shalt not commit adultery,\nThou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal,\"[577] and other similar\ncommandments, not human lips but the divine oracles have enounced\nthem. Whatever truth certain philosophers, amid their false opinions,\nwere able to see, and strove by laborious discussions to persuade men\nof,--such as that God has made this world, and Himself most providently\ngoverns it, or of the nobility of the virtues, of the love of country,\nof fidelity in friendship, of good works and everything pertaining to\nvirtuous manners, although they knew not to what end and what rule all\nthese things were to be referred,--all these, by words prophetic, that\nis, divine, although spoken by men, were commended to the people in\nthat city, and not inculcated by contention in arguments, so that he\nwho should know them might be afraid of contemning, not the wit of men,\nbut the oracle of God.\n\n\n  42. _By what dispensation of God's providence the sacred Scriptures\n      of the Old Testament were translated out of Hebrew into Greek,\n      that they might be made known to all the nations._\n\nOne of the Ptolemies, kings of Egypt, desired to know and have these\nsacred books. For after Alexander of Macedon, who is also styled the\nGreat, had by his most wonderful, but by no means enduring power,\nsubdued the whole of Asia, yea, almost the whole world, partly by\nforce of arms, partly by terror, and, among other kingdoms of the\nEast, had entered and obtained Judea also, on his death his generals\ndid not peaceably divide that most ample kingdom among them for a\npossession, but rather dissipated it, wasting all things by wars.\nThen Egypt began to have the Ptolemies as her kings. The first of\nthem, the son of Lagus, carried many captive out of Judea into\nEgypt. But another Ptolemy, called Philadelphus, who succeeded him,\npermitted all whom he had brought under the yoke to return free; and,\nmore than that, sent kingly gifts to the temple of God, and begged\nEleazar, who was the high priest, to give him the Scriptures, which\nhe had heard by report were truly divine, and therefore greatly\ndesired to have in that most noble library he had made. When the\nhigh priest had sent them to him in Hebrew, he afterwards demanded\ninterpreters of him, and there were given him seventy-two, out of\neach of the twelve tribes six men, most learned in both languages,\nto wit, the Hebrew and Greek; and their translation is now by custom\ncalled the Septuagint. It is reported, indeed, that there was an\nagreement in their words so wonderful, stupendous, and plainly\ndivine, that when they had sat at this work, each one apart (for so\nit pleased Ptolemy to test their fidelity), they differed from each\nother in no word which had the same meaning and force, or in the\norder of the words; but, as if the translators had been one, so what\nall had translated was one, because in very deed the one Spirit had\nbeen in them all. And they received so wonderful a gift of God, in\norder that the authority of these Scriptures might be commended not\nas human but divine, as indeed it was, for the benefit of the nations\nwho should at some time believe, as we now see them doing.\n\n\n  43. _Of the authority of the Septuagint translation, which, saving\n      the honour of the Hebrew original, is to be preferred to all\n      translations._\n\nFor while there were other interpreters who translated these sacred\noracles out of the Hebrew tongue into Greek, as Aquila, Symmachus, and\nTheodotion, and also that translation which, as the name of the author\nis unknown, is quoted as the fifth edition, yet the Church has received\nthis Septuagint translation just as if it were the only one; and it has\nbeen used by the Greek Christian people, most of whom are not aware\nthat there is any other. From this translation there has also been made\na translation in the Latin tongue, which the Latin churches use. Our\ntimes, however, have enjoyed the advantage of the presbyter Jerome, a\nman most learned, and skilled in all three languages, who translated\nthese same Scriptures into the Latin speech, not from the Greek, but\nfrom the Hebrew. But although the Jews acknowledge this very learned\nlabour of his to be faithful, while they contend that the Septuagint\ntranslators have erred in many places, still the churches of Christ\njudge that no one should be preferred to the authority of so many men,\nchosen for this very great work by Eleazar, who was then high priest;\nfor even if there had not appeared in them one spirit, without doubt\ndivine, and the seventy learned men had, after the manner of men,\ncompared together the words of their translation, that what pleased\nthem all might stand, no single translator ought to be preferred to\nthem; but since so great a sign of divinity has appeared in them,\ncertainly, if any other translator of their Scriptures from the Hebrew\ninto any other tongue is faithful, in that case he agrees with these\nseventy translators, and if he is not found to agree with them, then\nwe ought to believe that the prophetic gift is with them. For the same\nSpirit who was in the prophets when they spoke these things was also in\nthe seventy men when they translated them, so that assuredly they could\nalso say something else, just as if the prophet himself had said both,\nbecause it would be the same Spirit who said both; and could say the\nsame thing differently, so that, although the words were not the same,\nyet the same meaning should shine forth to those of good understanding;\nand could omit or add something, so that even by this it might be shown\nthat there was in that work not human bondage, which the translator\nowed to the words, but rather divine power, which filled and ruled the\nmind of the translator. Some, however, have thought that the Greek\ncopies of the Septuagint version should be emended from the Hebrew\ncopies; yet they did not dare to take away what the Hebrew lacked and\nthe Septuagint had, but only added what was found in the Hebrew copies\nand was lacking in the Septuagint, and noted them by placing at the\nbeginning of the verses certain marks in the form of stars which they\ncall asterisks. And those things which the Hebrew copies have not, but\nthe Septuagint have, they have in like manner marked at the beginning\nof the verses by horizontal spit-shaped marks like those by which\nwe denote ounces; and many copies having these marks are circulated\neven in Latin.[578] But we cannot, without inspecting both kinds of\ncopies, find out those things which are neither omitted nor added, but\nexpressed differently, whether they yield another meaning not in itself\nunsuitable, or can be shown to explain the same meaning in another way.\nIf, then, as it behoves us, we behold nothing else in these Scriptures\nthan what the Spirit of God has spoken through men, if anything is\nin the Hebrew copies and is not in the version of the Seventy, the\nSpirit of God did not choose to say it through them, but only through\nthe prophets. But whatever is in the Septuagint and not in the Hebrew\ncopies, the same Spirit chose rather to say through the latter, thus\nshowing that both were prophets. For in that manner He spoke as He\nchose, some things through Isaiah, some through Jeremiah, some through\nseveral prophets, or else the same thing through this prophet and\nthrough that. Further, whatever is found in both editions, that one and\nthe same Spirit willed to say through both, but so as that the former\npreceded in prophesying, and the latter followed in prophetically\ninterpreting them; because, as the one Spirit of peace was in the\nformer when they spoke true and concordant words, so the selfsame one\nSpirit hath appeared in the latter, when, without mutual conference,\nthey yet interpreted all things as if with one mouth.\n\n\n  44. _How the threat of the destruction of the Ninevites is to be\n      understood, which in the Hebrew extends to forty days, while in\n      the Septuagint it is contracted to three._\n\nBut some one may say, \"How shall I know whether the prophet Jonah\nsaid to the Ninevites, 'Yet _three_ days and Nineveh shall be\noverthrown,' or _forty_ days?\"[579] For who does not see that the\nprophet could not say both, when he was sent to terrify the city\nby the threat of imminent ruin? For if its destruction was to take\nplace on the third day, it certainly could not be on the fortieth;\nbut if on the fortieth, then certainly not on the third. If, then, I\nam asked which of these Jonah may have said, I rather think what is\nread in the Hebrew, \"Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown.\"\nYet the Seventy, interpreting long afterward, could say what was\ndifferent and yet pertinent to the matter, and agree in the selfsame\nmeaning, although under a different signification. And this may\nadmonish the reader not to despise the authority of either, but to\nraise himself above the history, and search for those things which\nthe history itself was written to set forth. These things, indeed,\ntook place in the city of Nineveh, but they also signified something\nelse too great to apply to that city; just as, when it happened\nthat the prophet himself was three days in the whale's belly, it\nsignified besides, that He who is Lord of all the prophets should be\nthree days in the depths of hell. Wherefore, if that city is rightly\nheld as prophetically representing the Church of the Gentiles, to\nwit, as brought down by penitence, so as no longer to be what it had\nbeen, since this was done by Christ in the Church of the Gentiles,\nwhich Nineveh represented, Christ Himself was signified both by the\nforty and by the three days: by the forty, because He spent that\nnumber of days with His disciples after the resurrection, and then\nascended into heaven, but by the three days, because He rose on the\nthird day. So that, if the reader desires nothing else than to adhere\nto the history of events, he may be aroused from his sleep by the\nSeptuagint interpreters, as well as the prophets, to search into the\ndepth of the prophecy, as if they had said, In the forty days seek\nHim in whom thou mayest also find the three days,--the one thou wilt\nfind in His ascension, the other in His resurrection. Because that\nwhich could be most suitably signified by both numbers, of which\none is used by Jonah the prophet, the other by the prophecy of the\nSeptuagint version, the one and selfsame Spirit hath spoken. I dread\nprolixity, so that I must not demonstrate this by many instances in\nwhich the seventy interpreters may be thought to differ from the\nHebrew, and yet, when well understood, are found to agree. For which\nreason I also, according to my capacity, following the footsteps of\nthe apostles, who themselves have quoted prophetic testimonies from\nboth, that is, from the Hebrew and the Septuagint, have thought that\nboth should be used as authoritative, since both are one, and divine.\nBut let us now follow out as we can what remains.\n\n\n  45. _That the Jews ceased to have prophets after the rebuilding of\n      the temple, and from that time until the birth of Christ were\n      afflicted with continual adversity, to prove that the building\n      of another temple had been promised by prophetic voices._\n\nThe Jewish nation no doubt became worse after it ceased to have\nprophets, just at the very time when, on the rebuilding of the temple\nafter the captivity in Babylon, it hoped to become better. For so,\nindeed, did that carnal people understand what was foretold by\nHaggai the prophet, saying, \"The glory of this latter house shall be\ngreater than that of the former.\"[580] Now, that this is said of the\nnew testament, he showed a little above, where he says, evidently\npromising Christ, \"And I will move all nations, and the desired One\nshall come to all nations.\"[581] In this passage the Septuagint\ntranslators, giving another sense more suitable to the body than the\nHead, that is, to the Church than to Christ, have said by prophetic\nauthority, \"The things shall come that are chosen of the Lord from\nall nations,\" that is, _men_, of whom Jesus saith in the Gospel,\n\"Many are called, but few are chosen.\"[582] For by such chosen ones\nof the nations there is built, through the new testament, with living\nstones, a house of God far more glorious than that temple was which\nwas constructed by king Solomon, and rebuilt after the captivity.\nFor this reason, then, that nation had no prophets from that time,\nbut was afflicted with many plagues by kings of alien race, and by\nthe Romans themselves, lest they should fancy that this prophecy of\nHaggai was fulfilled by that rebuilding of the temple.\n\nFor not long after, on the arrival of Alexander, it was subdued,\nwhen, although there was no pillaging, because they dared not resist\nhim, and thus, being very easily subdued, received him peaceably,\nyet the glory of that house was not so great as it was when under\nthe free power of their own kings. Alexander, indeed, offered up\nsacrifices in the temple of God, not as a convert to His worship\nin true piety, but thinking, with impious folly, that He was to be\nworshipped along with false gods. Then Ptolemy son of Lagus, whom I\nhave already mentioned, after Alexander's death carried them captive\ninto Egypt. His successor, Ptolemy Philadelphus, most benevolently\ndismissed them; and by him it was brought about, as I have narrated\na little before, that we should have the Septuagint version of the\nScriptures. Then they were crushed by the wars which are explained\nin the books of the Maccabees. Afterward they were taken captive by\nPtolemy king of Alexandria, who was called Epiphanes. Then Antiochus\nking of Syria compelled them by many and most grievous evils to\nworship idols, and filled the temple itself with the sacrilegious\nsuperstitions of the Gentiles. Yet their most vigorous leader\nJudas, who is also called Maccab\u00e6us, after beating the generals of\nAntiochus, cleansed it from all that defilement of idolatry.\n\nBut not long after, one Alcimus, although an alien from the\nsacerdotal tribe, was, through ambition, made pontiff, which was an\nimpious thing. After almost fifty years, during which they never\nhad peace, although they prospered in some affairs, Aristobulus\nfirst assumed the diadem among them, and was made both king and\npontiff. Before that, indeed, from the time of their return from the\nBabylonish captivity and the rebuilding of the temple, they had not\nkings, but generals or _principes_. Although a king himself may be\ncalled a prince, from his principality in governing, and a leader,\nbecause he leads the army, but it does not follow that all who are\nprinces and leaders may also be called kings, as that Aristobulus\nwas. He was succeeded by Alexander, also both king and pontiff, who\nis reported to have reigned over them cruelly. After him his wife\nAlexandra was queen of the Jews, and from her time downwards more\ngrievous evils pursued them; for this Alexandra's sons, Aristobulus\nand Hyrcanus, when contending with each other for the kingdom, called\nin the Roman forces against the nation of Israel. For Hyrcanus asked\nassistance from them against his brother. At that time Rome had\nalready subdued Africa and Greece, and ruled extensively in other\nparts of the world also, and yet, as if unable to bear her own\nweight, had, in a manner, broken herself by her own size. For indeed\nshe had come to grave domestic seditions, and from that to social\nwars, and by and by to civil wars, and had enfeebled and worn herself\nout so much, that the changed state of the republic, in which she\nshould be governed by kings, was now imminent. Pompey then, a most\nillustrious prince of the Roman people, having entered Judea with an\narmy, took the city, threw open the temple, not with the devotion of\na suppliant, but with the authority of a conqueror, and went, not\nreverently, but profanely, into the holy of holies, where it was\nlawful for none but the pontiff to enter. Having established Hyrcanus\nin the pontificate, and set Antipater over the subjugated nation as\nguardian or procurator, as they were then called, he led Aristobulus\nwith him bound. From that time the Jews also began to be Roman\ntributaries. Afterward Cassius plundered the very temple. Then after\na few years it was their desert to have Herod, a king of foreign\nbirth, in whose reign Christ was born. For the time had now come\nsignified by the prophetic Spirit through the mouth of the patriarch\nJacob, when he says, \"There shall not be lacking a prince out of\nJudah, nor a teacher from his loins, until He shall come for whom it\nis reserved; and He is the expectation of the nations.\"[583] There\nlacked not therefore a Jewish prince of the Jews until that Herod,\nwho was the first king of a foreign race received by them. Therefore\nit was now the time when He should come for whom that was reserved\nwhich is promised in the New Testament, that He should be the\nexpectation of the nations. But it was not possible that the nations\nshould expect He would come, as we see they did, to do judgment in\nthe splendour of power, unless they should first believe in Him when\nHe came to suffer judgment in the humility of patience.\n\n\n  46. _Of the birth of our Saviour, whereby the Word was made flesh;\n      and of the dispersion of the Jews among all nations, as had\n      been prophesied._\n\nWhile Herod, therefore, reigned in Judea, and C\u00e6sar Augustus was\nemperor at Rome, the state of the republic being already changed, and\nthe world being set at peace by him, Christ was born in Bethlehem\nof Judah, man manifest out of a human virgin, God hidden out of God\nthe Father. For so had the prophet foretold: \"Behold, a virgin shall\nconceive in the womb, and bring forth a Son, and they shall call\nHis name Immanuel, which, being interpreted, is, God with us.\"[584]\nHe did many miracles that He might commend God in Himself, some\nof which, even as many as seemed sufficient to proclaim Him, are\ncontained in the evangelic Scripture. The first of these is, that\nHe was so wonderfully born, and the last, that with His body raised\nup again from the dead He ascended into heaven. But the Jews who\nslew Him, and would not believe in Him, because it behoved Him to\ndie and rise again, were yet more miserably wasted by the Romans,\nand utterly rooted out from their kingdom, where aliens had already\nruled over them, and were dispersed through the lands (so that indeed\nthere is no place where they are not), and are thus by their own\nScriptures a testimony to us that we have not forged the prophecies\nabout Christ. And very many of them, considering this, even before\nHis passion, but chiefly after His resurrection, believed on Him, of\nwhom it was predicted, \"Though the number of the children of Israel\nbe as the sand of the sea, the remnant shall be saved.\"[585] But\nthe rest are blinded, of whom it was predicted, \"Let their table be\nmade before them a trap, and a retribution, and a stumbling-block.\nLet their eyes be darkened lest they see, and bow down their back\nalway.\"[586] Therefore, when they do not believe our Scriptures,\ntheir own, which they blindly read, are fulfilled in them, lest\nperchance any one should say that the Christians have forged these\nprophecies about Christ which are quoted under the name of the sibyl,\nor of others, if such there be, who do not belong to the Jewish\npeople. For us, indeed, those suffice which are quoted from the books\nof our enemies, to whom we make our acknowledgment, on account of\nthis testimony which, in spite of themselves, they contribute by\ntheir possession of these books, while they themselves are dispersed\namong all nations, wherever the Church of Christ is spread abroad.\nFor a prophecy about this thing was sent before in the Psalms, which\nthey also read, where it is written, \"My God, His mercy shall prevent\nme. My God hath shown me concerning mine enemies, that Thou shalt not\nslay them, lest they should at last forget Thy law: disperse them in\nThy might.\"[587] Therefore God has shown the Church in her enemies\nthe Jews the grace of His compassion, since, as saith the apostle,\n\"their offence is the salvation of the Gentiles.\"[588] And therefore\nHe has not slain them, that is, He has not let the knowledge that\nthey are Jews be lost in them, although they have been conquered\nby the Romans, lest they should forget the law of God, and their\ntestimony should be of no avail in this matter of which we treat.\nBut it was not enough that he should say, \"Slay them not, lest they\nshould at last forget Thy law,\" unless he had also added, \"Disperse\nthem;\" because if they had only been in their own land with that\ntestimony of the Scriptures, and not everywhere, certainly the Church\nwhich is everywhere could not have had them as witnesses among all\nnations to the prophecies which were sent before concerning Christ.\n\n\n  47. _Whether before Christian times there were any outside of the\n      Israelite race who belonged to the fellowship of the heavenly\n      city._\n\nWherefore if we read of any foreigner--that is, one neither born\nof Israel nor received by that people into the canon of the sacred\nbooks--having prophesied something about Christ, if it has come or\nshall come to our knowledge, we can refer to it over and above;\nnot that this is necessary, even if wanting, but because it is not\nincongruous to believe that even in other nations there may have been\nmen to whom this mystery was revealed, and who were also impelled to\nproclaim it, whether they were partakers of the same grace or had no\nexperience of it, but were taught by bad angels, who, as we know, even\nconfessed the present Christ, whom the Jews did not acknowledge. Nor\ndo I think the Jews themselves dare contend that no one has belonged\nto God except the Israelites, since the increase of Israel began on\nthe rejection of his elder brother. For in very deed there was no\nother people who were specially called the people of God; but they\ncannot deny that there have been certain men even of other nations\nwho belonged, not by earthly but heavenly fellowship, to the true\nIsraelites, the citizens of the country that is above. Because, if they\ndeny this, they can be most easily confuted by the case of the holy and\nwonderful man Job, who was neither a native nor a proselyte, that is, a\nstranger joining the people of Israel, but, being bred of the Idumean\nrace, arose there and died there too, and who is so praised by the\ndivine oracle, that no man of his times is put on a level with him as\nregards justice and piety. And although we do not find his date in the\nchronicles, yet from his book, which for its merit the Israelites have\nreceived as of canonical authority, we gather that he was in the third\ngeneration after Israel. And I doubt not it was divinely provided, that\nfrom this one case we might know that among other nations also there\nmight be men pertaining to the spiritual Jerusalem who have lived\naccording to God and have pleased Him. And it is not to be supposed\nthat this was granted to any one, unless the one Mediator between God\nand men, the Man Christ Jesus,[589] was divinely revealed to him; who\nwas pre-announced to the saints of old as yet to come in the flesh,\neven as He is announced to us as having come, that the selfsame faith\nthrough Him may lead all to God who are predestinated to be the city of\nGod, the house of God, and the temple of God. But whatever prophecies\nconcerning the grace of God through Christ Jesus are quoted, they\nmay be thought to have been forged by the Christians. So that there\nis nothing of more weight for confuting all sorts of aliens, if they\ncontend about this matter, and for supporting our friends, if they are\ntruly wise, than to quote those divine predictions about Christ which\nare written in the books of the Jews, who have been torn from their\nnative abode and dispersed over the whole world in order to bear this\ntestimony, so that the Church of Christ has everywhere increased.\n\n\n  48. _That Haggai's prophecy, in which he said that the glory of\n      the house of God would be greater than that of the first had\n      been,_[590] _was really fulfilled, not in the rebuilding of the\n      temple, but in the Church of Christ._\n\nThis house of God is more glorious than that first one which was\nconstructed of wood and stone, metals, and other precious things.\nTherefore the prophecy of Haggai was not fulfilled in the rebuilding\nof that temple. For it can never be shown to have had so much glory\nafter it was rebuilt as it had in the time of Solomon; yea, rather,\nthe glory of that house is shown to have been diminished, first by the\nceasing of prophecy, and then by the nation itself suffering so great\ncalamities, even to the final destruction made by the Romans, as the\nthings above-mentioned prove. But this house which pertains to the new\ntestament is just as much more glorious as the living stones, even\nbelieving, renewed men, of which it is constructed are better. But it\nwas typified by the rebuilding of that temple for this reason, because\nthe very renovation of that edifice typifies in the prophetic oracle\nanother testament which is called the new. When, therefore, God said\nby the prophet just named, \"And I will give peace in this place,\"[591]\nHe is to be understood who is typified by that typical place; for since\nby that rebuilt place is typified the Church which was to be built by\nChrist, nothing else can be accepted as the meaning of the saying, \"I\nwill give peace in this place,\" except I will give peace in the place\nwhich that place signifies. For all typical things seem in some way to\npersonate those whom they typify, as it is said by the apostle, \"That\nRock was Christ.\"[592] Therefore the glory of this new testament house\nis greater than the glory of the old testament house; and it will show\nitself as greater when it shall be dedicated. For then \"shall come the\ndesired of all nations,\"[593] as we read in the Hebrew. For before His\nadvent He had not yet been desired by all nations. For they knew not\nHim whom they ought to desire, in whom they had not believed. Then,\nalso, according to the Septuagint interpretation (for it also is a\nprophetic meaning), \"shall come those who are elected of the Lord out\nof all nations.\" For then indeed there shall come only those who are\nelected, whereof the apostle saith, \"According as He hath chosen us in\nHim before the foundation of the world.\"[594] For the Master Builder\nwho said, \"Many are called, but few are chosen,\"[595] did not say this\nof those who, on being called, came in such a way as to be cast out\nfrom the feast, but would point out the house built up of the elect,\nwhich henceforth shall dread no ruin. Yet because the churches are\nalso full of those who shall be separated by the winnowing as in the\nthreshing-floor, the glory of this house is not so apparent now as it\nshall be when every one who is there shall be there always.\n\n\n    49. _Of the indiscriminate increase of the Church, wherein many\n          reprobate are in this world mixed with the elect._\n\nIn this wicked world, in these evil days, when the Church measures\nher future loftiness by her present humility, and is exercised\nby goading fears, tormenting sorrows, disquieting labours, and\ndangerous temptations, when she soberly rejoices, rejoicing only in\nhope, there are many reprobate mingled with the good, and both are\ngathered together by the gospel as in a drag net;[596] and in this\nworld, as in a sea, both swim enclosed without distinction in the\nnet, until it is brought ashore, when the wicked must be separated\nfrom the good, that in the good, as in His temple, God may be all\nin all. We acknowledge, indeed, that His word is now fulfilled who\nspake in the psalm, and said, \"I have announced and spoken; they are\nmultiplied above number.\"[597] This takes place now, since He has\nspoken, first by the mouth of his forerunner John, and afterward\nby His own mouth, saying, \"Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at\nhand.\"[598] He chose disciples, whom He also called apostles,[599]\nof lowly birth, unhonoured, and illiterate, so that whatever great\nthing they might be or do, He might be and do it in them. He had one\namong them whose wickedness He could use well in order to accomplish\nHis appointed passion, and furnish His Church an example of bearing\nwith the wicked. Having sown the holy gospel as much as that behoved\nto be done by His bodily presence, He suffered, died, and rose again,\nshowing by His passion what we ought to suffer for the truth, and\nby His resurrection what we ought to hope for in adversity; saving\nalways the mystery of the sacrament, by which His blood was shed for\nthe remission of sins. He held converse on the earth forty days with\nHis disciples, and in their sight ascended into heaven, and after\nten days sent the promised Holy Spirit. It was given as the chief\nand most necessary sign of His coming on those who had believed,\nthat every one of them spoke in the tongues of all nations; thus\nsignifying that the unity of the catholic Church would embrace all\nnations, and would in like manner speak in all tongues.\n\n\n    50. _Of the preaching of the gospel, which is made more famous\n           and powerful by the sufferings of its preachers._\n\nThen was fulfilled that prophecy, \"Out of Sion shall go forth the\nlaw, and the word of the Lord out of Jerusalem;\"[600] and the\nprediction of the Lord Christ Himself, when, after the resurrection,\n\"He opened the understanding\" of His amazed disciples \"that they\nmight understand the Scriptures, and said unto them that thus it\nis written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from\nthe dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins\nshould be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at\nJerusalem.\"[601] And again, when, in reply to their questioning about\nthe day of His last coming, He said, \"It is not for you to know the\ntimes or the seasons which the Father hath put in His own power; but\nye shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you, and ye\nshall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and\nSamaria, and even unto the ends of the earth.\"[602] First of all, the\nChurch spread herself abroad from Jerusalem; and when very many in\nJudea and Samaria had believed, she also went into other nations by\nthose who announced the gospel, whom, as lights, He Himself had both\nprepared by His word and kindled by His Holy Spirit. For He had said\nto them, \"Fear ye not them which kill the body, but are not able to\nkill the soul.\"[603] And that they might not be frozen with fear,\nthey burned with the fire of charity. Finally, the gospel of Christ\nwas preached in the whole world, not only by those who had seen\nand heard Him both before His passion and after His resurrection,\nbut also after their death by their successors, amid the horrible\npersecutions, diverse torments and deaths of the martyrs, God also\nbearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and divers\nmiracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost,[604] that the people of the\nnations, believing in Him who was crucified for their redemption,\nmight venerate with Christian love the blood of the martyrs which\nthey had poured forth with devilish fury, and the very kings by\nwhose laws the Church had been laid waste might become profitably\nsubject to that name they had cruelly striven to take away from the\nearth, and might begin to persecute the false gods for whose sake the\nworshippers of the true God had formerly been persecuted.\n\n\n       51. _That the catholic faith may be confirmed even by the\n                     dissensions of the heretics._\n\nBut the devil, seeing the temples of the demons deserted, and the\nhuman race running to the name of the liberating Mediator, has\nmoved the heretics under the Christian name to resist the Christian\ndoctrine, as if they could be kept in the city of God indifferently\nwithout any correction, just as the city of confusion indifferently\nheld the philosophers who were of diverse and adverse opinions.\nThose, therefore, in the Church of Christ who savour anything morbid\nand depraved, and, on being corrected that they may savour what is\nwholesome and right, contumaciously resist, and will not amend their\npestiferous and deadly dogmas, but persist in defending them, become\nheretics, and, going without, are to be reckoned as enemies who serve\nfor her discipline. For even thus they profit by their wickedness\nthose true catholic members of Christ, since God makes a good use\neven of the wicked, and all things work together for good to them\nthat love Him.[605] For all the enemies of the Church, whatever error\nblinds or malice depraves them, exercise her patience if they receive\nthe power to afflict her corporally; and if they only oppose her by\nwicked thought, they exercise her wisdom: but at the same time, if\nthese enemies are loved, they exercise her benevolence, or even her\nbeneficence, whether she deals with them by persuasive doctrine or by\nterrible discipline. And thus the devil, the prince of the impious\ncity, when he stirs up his own vessels against the city of God that\nsojourns in this world, is permitted to do her no harm. For without\ndoubt the divine providence procures for her both consolation through\nprosperity, that she may not be broken by adversity, and trial\nthrough adversity, that she may not be corrupted by prosperity; and\nthus each is tempered by the other, as we recognise in the Psalms\nthat voice which arises from no other cause, \"According to the\nmultitude of my griefs in my heart, Thy consolations have delighted\nmy soul.\"[606] Hence also is that saying of the apostle, \"Rejoicing\nin hope, patient in tribulation.\"[607]\n\nFor it is not to be thought that what the same teacher says can at\nany time fail, \"Whoever will live piously in Christ shall suffer\npersecution.\"[608] Because even when those who are without do not\nrage, and thus there seems to be, and really is, tranquillity, which\nbrings very much consolation, especially to the weak, yet there are\nnot wanting, yea, there are many within who by their abandoned\nmanners torment the hearts of those who live piously, since by them\nthe Christian and catholic name is blasphemed; and the dearer that\nname is to those who will live piously in Christ, the more do they\ngrieve that through the wicked, who have a place within, it comes to\nbe less loved than pious minds desire. The heretics themselves also,\nsince they are thought to have the Christian name and sacraments,\nScriptures, and profession, cause great grief in the hearts of the\npious, both because many who wish to be Christians are compelled by\ntheir dissensions to hesitate, and many evil-speakers also find in\nthem matter for blaspheming the Christian name, because they too\nare at any rate _called_ Christians. By these and similar depraved\nmanners and errors of men, those who will live piously in Christ\nsuffer persecution, even when no one molests or vexes their body;\nfor they suffer this persecution, not in their bodies, but in their\nhearts. Whence is that word, \"According to the multitude of my griefs\nin my heart;\" for he does not say, in my body. Yet, on the other\nhand, none of them can perish, because the immutable divine promises\nare thought of. And because the apostle says, \"The Lord knoweth them\nthat are His;[609] for whom He did foreknow, He also predestinated\n[to be] conformed to the image of His Son,\"[610] none of them can\nperish; therefore it follows in that psalm, \"Thy consolations have\ndelighted my soul.\"[611] But that grief which arises in the hearts\nof the pious, who are persecuted by the manners of bad or false\nChristians, is profitable to the sufferers, because it proceeds from\nthe charity in which they do not wish them either to perish or to\nhinder the salvation of others. Finally, great consolations grow\nout of their chastisement, which imbue the souls of the pious with\na fecundity as great as the pains with which they were troubled\nconcerning their own perdition. Thus in this world, in these evil\ndays, not only from the time of the bodily presence of Christ and His\napostles, but even from that of Abel, whom first his wicked brother\nslew because he was righteous,[612] and thenceforth even to the end\nof this world, the Church has gone forward on pilgrimage amid the\npersecutions of the world and the consolations of God.\n\n\n  52. _Whether we should believe what some think, that, as the ten\n      persecutions which are past have been fulfilled, there remains\n      no other beyond the eleventh, which must happen in the very\n      time of Antichrist._\n\nI do not think, indeed, that what some have thought or may think\nis rashly said or believed, that until the time of Antichrist the\nChurch of Christ is not to suffer any persecutions besides those\nshe has already suffered,--that is, _ten_,--and that the eleventh\nand last shall be inflicted by Antichrist. They reckon as the first\nthat made by Nero, the second by Domitian, the third by Trajan, the\nfourth by Antoninus, the fifth by Severus, the sixth by Maximin, the\nseventh by Decius, the eighth by Valerian, the ninth by Aurelian,\nthe tenth by Diocletian and Maximian. For as there were ten plagues\nin Egypt before the people of God could begin to go out, they think\nthis is to be referred to as showing that the last persecution by\nAntichrist must be like the eleventh plague, in which the Egyptians,\nwhile following the Hebrews with hostility, perished in the Red Sea\nwhen the people of God passed through on dry land. Yet I do not\nthink persecutions were prophetically signified by what was done in\nEgypt, however nicely and ingeniously those who think so may seem\nto have compared the two in detail, not by the prophetic Spirit,\nbut by the conjecture of the human mind, which sometimes hits the\ntruth, and sometimes is deceived. But what can those who think this\nsay of the persecution in which the Lord Himself was crucified? In\nwhich number will they put it? And if they think the reckoning is\nto be made exclusive of this one, as if those must be counted which\npertain to the body, and not that in which the Head Himself was set\nupon and slain, what can they make of that one which, after Christ\nascended into heaven, took place in Jerusalem, when the blessed\nStephen was stoned; when James the brother of John was slaughtered\nwith the sword; when the Apostle Peter was imprisoned to be killed,\nand was set free by the angel; when the brethren were driven away and\nscattered from Jerusalem; when Saul, who afterward became the Apostle\nPaul, wasted the Church; and when he himself, publishing the glad\ntidings of the faith he had persecuted, suffered such things as he\nhad inflicted, either from the Jews or from other nations, where he\nmost fervently preached Christ everywhere? Why, then, do they think\nfit to start with Nero, when the Church in her growth had reached\nthe times of Nero amid the most cruel persecutions, about which it\nwould be too long to say anything? But if they think that only the\npersecutions made by kings ought to be reckoned, it was king Herod\nwho also made a most grievous one after the ascension of the Lord.\nAnd what account do they give of Julian, whom they do not number in\nthe ten? Did not he persecute the Church, who forbade the Christians\nto teach or learn liberal letters? Under him, the elder Valentinian,\nwho was the third emperor after him, stood forth as a confessor of\nthe Christian faith, and was dismissed from his command in the army.\nI shall say nothing of what he did at Antioch, except to mention\nhis being struck with wonder at the freedom and cheerfulness of one\nmost faithful and stedfast young man, who, when many were seized\nto be tortured, was tortured during a whole day, and sang under\nthe instrument of torture, until the emperor feared lest he should\nsuccumb under the continued cruelties and put him to shame at last,\nwhich made him dread and fear that he would be yet more dishonourably\nput to the blush by the rest. Lastly, within our own recollection,\ndid not Valens the Arian, brother of the foresaid Valentinian, waste\nthe catholic Church by great persecution throughout the East? But how\nunreasonable it is not to consider that the Church, which bears fruit\nand grows through the whole world, may suffer persecution from kings\nin some nations even when she does not suffer it in others! Perhaps,\nhowever, it was not to be reckoned a persecution when the king of the\nGoths, in Gothia itself, persecuted the Christians with wonderful\ncruelty, when there were none but catholics there, of whom very many\nwere crowned with martyrdom, as we have heard from certain brethren\nwho had been there at that time as boys, and unhesitatingly called to\nmind that they had seen these things? And what took place in Persia\nof late? Was not persecution so hot against the Christians (if even\nyet it is allayed) that some of the fugitives from it came even to\nRoman towns? When I think of these and the like things, it does not\nseem to me that the number of persecutions with which the Church is\nto be tried can be definitely stated. But, on the other hand, it\nis no less rash to affirm that there will be some persecutions by\nkings besides that last one, about which no Christian is in doubt.\nTherefore we leave this undecided, supporting or refuting neither\nside of this question, but only restraining men from the audacious\npresumption of affirming either of them.\n\n\n          53. _Of the hidden time of the final persecution._\n\nTruly Jesus Himself shall extinguish by His presence that last\npersecution which is to be made by Antichrist. For so it is written,\nthat \"He shall slay him with the breath of His mouth, and empty him\nwith the brightness of His presence.\"[613] It is customary to ask,\nWhen shall that be? But this is quite unreasonable. For had it been\nprofitable for us to know this, by whom could it better have been told\nthan by God Himself, the Master, when the disciples questioned Him? For\nthey were not silent when with Him, but inquired of Him, saying, \"Lord,\nwilt Thou at this time present the kingdom to Israel, or when?\"[614]\nBut He said, \"It is not for you to know the times, which the Father\nhath put in His own power.\" When they got that answer, they had not at\nall questioned Him about the hour, or day, or year, but about the time.\nIn vain, then, do we attempt to compute definitely the years that may\nremain to this world, when we may hear from the mouth of the Truth that\nit is not for us to know this. Yet some have said that four hundred,\nsome five hundred, others a thousand years, may be completed from the\nascension of the Lord up to His final coming. But to point out how\neach of them supports his own opinion would take too long, and is not\nnecessary; for indeed they use human conjectures, and bring forward\nnothing certain from the authority of the canonical Scriptures. But on\nthis subject He puts aside the figures of the calculators, and orders\nsilence, who says, \"It is not for you to know the times, which the\nFather hath put in His own power.\"\n\nBut because this sentence is in the Gospel, it is no wonder that\nthe worshippers of the many and false gods have been none the less\nrestrained from feigning that by the responses of the demons, whom\nthey worship as gods, it has been fixed how long the Christian\nreligion is to last. For when they saw that it could not be consumed\nby so many and great persecutions, but rather drew from them\nwonderful enlargements, they invented I know not what Greek verses,\nas if poured forth by a divine oracle to some one consulting it,\nin which, indeed, they make Christ innocent of this, as it were,\nsacrilegious crime, but add that Peter by enchantments brought it\nabout that the name of Christ should be worshipped for three hundred\nand sixty-five years, and, after the completion of that number of\nyears, should at once take end. Oh the hearts of learned men! Oh,\nlearned wits, meet to believe such things _about_ Christ as you are\nnot willing to believe _in_ Christ, that His disciple Peter did not\nlearn magic arts from Him, yet that, although He was innocent, His\ndisciple was an enchanter, and chose that His name rather than his\nown should be worshipped through his magic arts, his great labours\nand perils, and at last even the shedding of his blood! If Peter the\nenchanter made the world so love Christ, what did Christ the innocent\ndo to make Peter so love Him? Let them answer themselves then, and,\nif they can, let them understand that the world, for the sake of\neternal life, was made to love Christ by that same supernal grace\nwhich made Peter also love Christ for the sake of the eternal life\nto be received from Him, and that even to the extent of suffering\ntemporal death for Him. And then, what kind of gods are these who\nare able to predict such things, yet are not able to avert them,\nsuccumbing in such a way to a single enchanter and wicked magician\n(who, as they say, having slain a yearling boy and torn him to\npieces, buried him with nefarious rites), that they permitted the\nsect hostile to themselves to gain strength for so great a time, and\nto surmount the horrid cruelties of so many great persecutions, not\nby resisting but by suffering, and to procure the overthrow of their\nown images, temples, rituals, and oracles? Finally, what god was\nit--not ours, certainly, but one of their own--who was either enticed\nor compelled by so great wickedness to perform these things? For\nthose verses say that Peter bound, not any demon, but a god to do\nthese things. Such a god have they who have not Christ.\n\n\n  54. _Of the very foolish lie of the pagans, in feigning that the\n      Christian religion was not to last beyond three hundred and\n      sixty-five years._\n\nI might collect these and many similar arguments, if that year had\nnot already passed by which lying divination has promised, and\ndeceived vanity has believed. But as a few years ago three hundred\nand sixty-five years were completed since the time when the worship\nof the name of Christ was established by His presence in the flesh,\nand by the apostles, what other proof need we seek to refute that\nfalsehood? For, not to place the beginning of this period at the\nnativity of Christ, because as an infant and boy He had no disciples,\nyet, when He began to have them, beyond doubt the Christian doctrine\nand religion then became known through His bodily presence, that is,\nafter He was baptized in the river Jordan by the ministry of John.\nFor on this account that prophecy went before concerning Him: \"He\nshall reign from sea even to sea, and from the river even to the ends\nof the earth.\"[615] But since, before He suffered and rose from the\ndead, the faith had not yet been defined to all, but was defined in\nthe resurrection of Christ (for so the Apostle Paul speaks to the\nAthenians, saying, \"But now He announces to men that all everywhere\nshould repent, because He hath appointed a day in which to judge the\nworld in equity, by the Man in whom He hath defined the faith to all\nmen, raising Him from the dead\"[616]), it is better that, in settling\nthis question, we should start from that point, especially because\nthe Holy Spirit was then given, just as He behoved to be given after\nthe resurrection of Christ in that city from which the second law,\nthat is, the new testament, ought to begin. For the first, which is\ncalled the old testament, was given from Mount Sinai through Moses.\nBut concerning this which was to be given by Christ it was predicted,\n\"Out of Sion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord out\nof Jerusalem;\"[617] whence He Himself said, that repentance in His\nname behoved to be preached among all nations, but yet beginning\nat Jerusalem.[618] There, therefore, the worship of this name\ntook its rise, that Jesus should be believed in, who died and rose\nagain. There this faith blazed up with such noble beginnings, that\nseveral thousand men, being converted to the name of Christ with\nwonderful alacrity, sold their goods for distribution among the\nneedy, thus, by a holy resolution and most ardent charity, coming\nto voluntary poverty, and prepared themselves, amid the Jews who\nraged and thirsted for their blood, to contend for the truth even to\ndeath, not with armed power, but with more powerful patience. If this\nwas accomplished by no magic arts, why do they hesitate to believe\nthat the other could be done throughout the whole world by the same\ndivine power by which this was done? But supposing Peter wrought that\nenchantment so that so great a multitude of men at Jerusalem was\nthus kindled to worship the name of Christ, who had either seized\nand fastened Him to the cross, or reviled Him when fastened there,\nwe must still inquire when the three hundred and sixty-five years\nmust be completed, counting from that year. Now Christ died when the\nGemini were consuls, on the eighth day before the kalends of April.\nHe rose the third day, as the apostles have proved by the evidence of\ntheir own senses. Then forty days after, He ascended into heaven. Ten\ndays after, that is, on the fiftieth after His resurrection, He sent\nthe Holy Spirit; then three thousand men believed when the apostles\npreached Him. Then, therefore, arose the worship of that name, as\nwe believe, and according to the real truth, by the efficacy of the\nHoly Spirit, but, as impious vanity has feigned or thought, by the\nmagic arts of Peter. A little afterward, too, on a wonderful sign\nbeing wrought, when at Peter's own word a certain beggar, so lame\nfrom his mother's womb that he was carried by others and laid down at\nthe gate of the temple, where he begged alms, was made whole in the\nname of Jesus Christ, and leaped up, five thousand men believed, and\nthenceforth the Church grew by sundry accessions of believers. Thus\nwe gather the very day with which that year began, namely, that on\nwhich the Holy Spirit was sent, that is, during the ides of May. And,\non counting the consuls, the three hundred and sixty-five years are\nfound completed on the same ides in the consulate of Honorius and\nEutychianus. Now, in the following year, in the consulate of Mallius\nTheodorus, when, according to that oracle of the demons or figment\nof men, there ought already to have been no Christian religion,\nit was not necessary to inquire what perchance was done in other\nparts of the earth. But, as we know, in the most noted and eminent\ncity Carthage, in Africa, Gaudentius and Jovius, officers of the\nEmperor Honorius, on the fourteenth day before the kalends of April,\noverthrew the temples and broke the images of the false gods. And\nfrom that time to the present, during almost thirty years, who does\nnot see how much the worship of the name of Christ has increased,\nespecially after many of those became Christians who had been kept\nback from the faith by thinking that divination true, but saw when\nthat same number of years was completed that it was empty and\nridiculous? We, therefore, who are called and _are_ Christians, do\nnot believe in Peter, but in Him whom Peter believed,--being edified\nby Peter's sermons about Christ, not poisoned by his incantations;\nand not deceived by his enchantments, but aided by his good deeds.\nChrist Himself, who was Peter's Master in the doctrine which leads to\neternal life, is our Master too.\n\nBut let us now at last finish this book, after thus far treating of,\nand showing as far as seemed sufficient, what is the mortal course\nof the two cities, the heavenly and the earthly, which are mingled\ntogether from the beginning down to the end. Of these, the earthly one\nhas made to herself of whom she would, either from any other quarter,\nor even from among men, false gods whom she might serve by sacrifice;\nbut she which is heavenly, and is a pilgrim on the earth, does not make\nfalse gods, but is herself made by the true God, of whom she herself\nmust be the true sacrifice. Yet both alike either enjoy temporal good\nthings, or are afflicted with temporal evils, but with diverse faith,\ndiverse hope, and diverse love, until they must be separated by the\nlast judgment, and each must receive her own end, of which there is no\nend. About these ends of both we must next treat.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[497] Sallust, _Bell. Cat._ c. 8.\n\n[498] In the Hebrew text, Gen. xxv. 7, a hundred and seventy-five\nyears.\n\n[499] Gen. xlix. 10.\n\n[500] \u1f0c\u03c1\u03b7\u03c2 and \u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n[501] 1 Cor. xv. 46, 47.\n\n[502] The priests who officiated at the Lupercalia.\n\n[503] _\u00c6neid_, viii. 321.\n\n[504] Isa. xlviii. 20.\n\n[505] Virgil, _Eclogue_, viii. 70.\n\n[506] Virgil, _Eclogue_, v. 11.\n\n[507] Varro, _De Lingua Latina_, v. 43.\n\n[508] _\u00c6neid_, vi. 767.\n\n[509] Hos. i. 1.\n\n[510] Amos i. 1.\n\n[511] Isa. i. 1. Isaiah's father was Amoz, a different name.\n\n[512] Mic. i. 1.\n\n[513] The chronicles of Eusebius and Jerome.\n\n[514] Hos. i. 10.\n\n[515] Hos. i. 11.\n\n[516] Gal. ii. 14-20.\n\n[517] Hos. iii. 4.\n\n[518] Hos. iii. 5.\n\n[519] Rom. i. 3.\n\n[520] Hos. vi. 2.\n\n[521] Col. iii. 1.\n\n[522] Amos iv. 12, 13.\n\n[523] Amos ix. 11, 12; Acts xv. 15-17.\n\n[524] Isa. lii. 13-liii. 13. Augustine quotes these passages in full.\n\n[525] Isa. liv. 1-5.\n\n[526] Mic. iv. 1-3.\n\n[527] Mic. v. 2-4.\n\n[528] Joel ii. 28, 29.\n\n[529] Obad. 17.\n\n[530] Obad. 21.\n\n[531] Col. i. 13.\n\n[532] Nah. i. 14-ii. 1.\n\n[533] Hab. ii. 2, 3.\n\n[534] Hab. iii. 2.\n\n[535] Luke xxiii. 34.\n\n[536] Hab. iii. 3.\n\n[537] Ps. lvii. 5, 11.\n\n[538] Hab. iii. 4.\n\n[539] John iii. 17.\n\n[540] Joel ii. 13.\n\n[541] Matt. v. 4.\n\n[542] Matt. x. 27.\n\n[543] Ps. cxvi. 16.\n\n[544] Rom. xii. 12.\n\n[545] Heb. xi. 13, 16.\n\n[546] Rom. x. 3.\n\n[547] Ps. xl. 2, 3.\n\n[548] Jer. ix. 23, 24, as in 1 Cor. i. 31.\n\n[549] Lam. iv. 20.\n\n[550] Bar. iii. 35-37.\n\n[551] Jer. xxiii. 5, 6.\n\n[552] Jer. xvi. 19.\n\n[553] Jer. xvii. 9.\n\n[554] Jer. xxxi. 31; see Bk. xvii. 3.\n\n[555] Zeph. iii. 8.\n\n[556] Zeph. ii. 11.\n\n[557] Zeph. iii. 9-12.\n\n[558] Isa. x. 22; Rom. ix. 27.\n\n[559] Dan. vii. 13, 14.\n\n[560] Ezek. xxxiv. 23.\n\n[561] Ezek. xxxvii. 22-24.\n\n[562] Hag. ii. 6.\n\n[563] Zech. ix. 9, 10.\n\n[564] Zech. ix. 11.\n\n[565] Ps. xl. 2.\n\n[566] Mal. i. 10, 11.\n\n[567] Mal. ii. 5-7.\n\n[568] Mal. iii. 1, 2.\n\n[569] John ii. 19.\n\n[570] Mal. iii. 13-16.\n\n[571] Mal. iii. 17-iv. 3.\n\n[572] Esdras iii. and iv.\n\n[573] Acts vii. 22.\n\n[574] Heb. xi. 7; 1 Pet. iii. 20, 21.\n\n[575] Jude 14.\n\n[576] Ex. xx. 12.\n\n[577] Ex. xx. 13-15, the order as in Mark x. 19.\n\n[578] Var. reading, \"both in Greek and Latin.\"\n\n[579] Jon. iii. 4.\n\n[580] Hag. ii. 9.\n\n[581] Hag. ii. 7.\n\n[582] Matt. xxii. 14.\n\n[583] Gen. xlix. 10.\n\n[584] Isa. vii. 14, as in Matt. i. 23.\n\n[585] Isa. x. 22, as in Rom. ix. 27, 28.\n\n[586] Ps. lxix. 22, 23; Rom. xi. 9, 10.\n\n[587] Ps. lxix. 10, 11.\n\n[588] Rom. xi. 11.\n\n[589] 1 Tim. ii. 5.\n\n[590] Hag. ii. 9.\n\n[591] Hag. ii. 9.\n\n[592] 1 Cor. x. 4; Ex. xvii. 6.\n\n[593] Hag. ii. 7.\n\n[594] Eph. i. 4.\n\n[595] Matt. xxii. 11-14.\n\n[596] Matt. xiii. 47-50.\n\n[597] Ps. xl. 5.\n\n[598] Matt. iii 2, iv. 17.\n\n[599] Luke vi. 13.\n\n[600] Isa. ii. 3.\n\n[601] Luke xxiv. 45-47.\n\n[602] Acts i. 7, 8.\n\n[603] Matt. x. 28.\n\n[604] Heb. ii. 4.\n\n[605] Rom. viii. 28.\n\n[606] Ps. xciv. 19.\n\n[607] Rom. xii. 12.\n\n[608] 2 Tim. iii. 12.\n\n[609] 2 Tim. ii. 19.\n\n[610] Rom. viii. 29.\n\n[611] Ps. xciv. 19.\n\n[612] 1 John iii. 12.\n\n[613] Isa. xi. 4; 2 Thess. i. 9.\n\n[614] Acts i. 6, 7.\n\n[615] Ps. lxxii. 8.\n\n[616] Acts xvii. 30, 31.\n\n[617] Isa. ii. 3.\n\n[618] Luke xxiv. 47.\n\n\n\n\n                           BOOK NINETEENTH.\n\n                               ARGUMENT.\n\n  IN THIS BOOK THE END OF THE TWO CITIES, THE EARTHLY AND THE\n      HEAVENLY, IS DISCUSSED. AUGUSTINE REVIEWS THE OPINIONS OF THE\n      PHILOSOPHERS REGARDING THE SUPREME GOOD, AND THEIR VAIN EFFORTS\n      TO MAKE FOR THEMSELVES A HAPPINESS IN THIS LIFE; AND, WHILE HE\n      REFUTES THESE, HE TAKES OCCASION TO SHOW WHAT THE PEACE AND\n      HAPPINESS BELONGING TO THE HEAVENLY CITY, OR THE PEOPLE OF\n      CHRIST, ARE BOTH NOW AND HEREAFTER.\n\n\n  1. _That Varro has made out that two hundred and eighty-eight\n      different sects of philosophy might be formed by the various\n      opinions regarding the supreme good._\n\nAs I see that I have still to discuss the fit destinies of the two\ncities, the earthly and the heavenly, I must first explain, so far as\nthe limits of this work allow me, the reasonings by which men have\nattempted to make for themselves a happiness in this unhappy life,\nin order that it may be evident, not only from divine authority, but\nalso from such reasons as can be adduced to unbelievers, how the\nempty dreams of the philosophers differ from the hope which God gives\nto us, and from the substantial fulfilment of it which He will give\nus as our blessedness. Philosophers have expressed a great variety of\ndiverse opinions regarding the ends of goods and of evils, and this\nquestion they have eagerly canvassed, that they might, if possible,\ndiscover what makes a man happy. For the end of our good is that for\nthe sake of which other things are to be desired, while it is to be\ndesired for its own sake; and the end of evil is that on account of\nwhich other things are to be shunned, while it is avoided on its own\naccount. Thus, by the _end of good_, we at present mean, not that by\nwhich good is destroyed, so that it no longer exists, but that by\nwhich it is finished, so that it becomes complete; and by the _end of\nevil_ we mean, not that which abolishes it, but that which completes\nits development. These two ends, therefore, are the supreme good\nand the supreme evil; and, as I have said, those who have in this\nvain life professed the study of wisdom have been at great pains to\ndiscover these ends, and to obtain the supreme good and avoid the\nsupreme evil in this life. And although they erred in a variety of\nways, yet natural insight has prevented them from wandering from the\ntruth so far that they have not placed the supreme good and evil,\nsome in the soul, some in the body, and some in both. From this\ntripartite distribution of the sects of philosophy, Marcus Varro,\nin his book _De Philosophia_,[619] has drawn so large a variety of\nopinions, that, by a subtle and minute analysis of distinctions, he\nnumbers without difficulty as many as 288 sects,--not that these have\nactually existed, but sects which are possible.\n\nTo illustrate briefly what he means, I must begin with his own\nintroductory statement in the above-mentioned book, that there\nare four things which men desire, as it were by nature without a\nmaster, without the help of any instruction, without industry or\nthe art of living which is called virtue, and which is certainly\nlearned:[620] either pleasure, which is an agreeable stirring of the\nbodily sense; or repose, which excludes every bodily inconvenience;\nor both these, which Epicurus calls by the one name, pleasure; or\nthe primary objects of nature,[621] which comprehend the things\nalready named and other things, either bodily, such as health, and\nsafety, and integrity of the members, or spiritual, such as the\ngreater and less mental gifts that are found in men. Now these four\nthings--pleasure, repose, the two combined, and the primary objects\nof nature--exist in us in such sort that we must either desire virtue\non their account, or them for the sake of virtue, or both for their\nown sake; and consequently there arise from this distinction twelve\nsects, for each is by this consideration tripled. I will illustrate\nthis in one instance, and, having done so, it will not be difficult\nto understand the others. According, then, as bodily pleasure is\nsubjected, preferred, or united to virtue, there are three sects. It\nis subjected to virtue when it is chosen as subservient to virtue.\nThus it is a duty of virtue to live for one's country, and for its\nsake to beget children, neither of which can be done without bodily\npleasure. For there is pleasure in eating and drinking, pleasure also\nin sexual intercourse. But when it is preferred to virtue, it is\ndesired for its own sake, and virtue is chosen only for its sake, and\nto effect nothing else than the attainment or preservation of bodily\npleasure. And this, indeed, is to make life hideous; for where virtue\nis the slave of pleasure it no longer deserves the name of virtue.\nYet even this disgraceful distortion has found some philosophers\nto patronize and defend it. Then virtue is united to pleasure when\nneither is desired for the other's sake, but both for their own. And\ntherefore, as pleasure, according as it is subjected, preferred, or\nunited to virtue, makes three sects, so also do repose, pleasure and\nrepose combined, and the prime natural blessings, make their three\nsects each. For as men's opinions vary, and these four things are\nsometimes subjected, sometimes preferred, and sometimes united to\nvirtue, there are produced twelve sects. But this number again is\ndoubled by the addition of one difference, viz. the social life;\nfor whoever attaches himself to any of these sects does so either\nfor his own sake alone, or for the sake of a companion, for whom he\nought to wish what he desires for himself. And thus there will be\ntwelve of those who think some one of these opinions should be held\nfor their own sakes, and other twelve who decide that they ought to\nfollow this or that philosophy not for their own sakes only, but also\nfor the sake of others whose good they desire as their own. These\ntwenty-four sects again are doubled, and become forty-eight by adding\na difference taken from the New Academy. For each of these four and\ntwenty sects can hold and defend their opinion as certain, as the\nStoics defended the position that the supreme good of man consisted\nsolely in virtue; or they can be held as probable, but not certain,\nas the New Academics did. There are, therefore, twenty-four who hold\ntheir philosophy as certainly true, other twenty-four who hold their\nopinions as probable, but not certain. Again, as each person who\nattaches himself to any of these sects may adopt the mode of life\neither of the Cynics or of the other philosophers, this distinction\nwill double the number, and so make ninety-six sects. Then, lastly,\nas each of these sects may be adhered to either by men who love a\nlife of ease, as those who have through choice or necessity addicted\nthemselves to study, or by men who love a busy life, as those who,\nwhile philosophizing, have been much occupied with state affairs and\npublic business, or by men who choose a mixed life, in imitation of\nthose who have apportioned their time partly to erudite leisure,\npartly to necessary business: by these differences the number of the\nsects is tripled, and becomes 288.\n\nI have thus, as briefly and lucidly as I could, given in my own words\nthe opinions which Varro expresses in his book. But how he refutes all\nthe rest of these sects, and chooses one, the Old Academy, instituted\nby Plato, and continuing to Polemo, the fourth teacher of that school\nof philosophy which held that their system was certain; and how on this\nground he distinguishes it from the New Academy,[622] which began with\nPolemo's successor Arcesilaus, and held that all things are uncertain;\nand how he seeks to establish that the Old Academy was as free from\nerror as from doubt,--all this, I say, were too long to enter upon in\ndetail, and yet I must not altogether pass it by in silence. Varro then\nrejects, as a first step, all those differences which have multiplied\nthe number of sects; and the ground on which he does so is that they\nare not differences about the supreme good. He maintains that in\nphilosophy a sect is created only by its having an opinion of its own\ndifferent from other schools on the point of the ends-in-chief. For\nman has no other reason for philosophizing than that he may be happy;\nbut that which makes him happy is itself the supreme good. In other\nwords, the supreme good is the reason of philosophizing; and therefore\nthat cannot be called a sect of philosophy which pursues no way of its\nown towards the supreme good. Thus, when it is asked whether a wise\nman will adopt the social life, and desire and be interested in the\nsupreme good of his friend as in his own, or will, on the contrary, do\nall that he does merely for his own sake, there is no question here\nabout the supreme good, but only about the propriety of associating or\nnot associating a friend in its participation: whether the wise man\nwill do this not for his own sake, but for the sake of his friend in\nwhose good he delights as in his own. So, too, when it is asked whether\nall things about which philosophy is concerned are to be considered\nuncertain, as by the New Academy, or certain, as the other philosophers\nmaintain, the question here is not what end should be pursued, but\nwhether or not we are to believe in the substantial existence of that\nend; or, to put it more plainly, whether he who pursues the supreme\ngood must maintain that it is a true good, or only that it appears to\nhim to be true, though possibly it may be delusive,--both pursuing\none and the same good. The distinction, too, which is founded on the\ndress and manners of the Cynics, does not touch the question of the\nchief good, but only the question whether he who pursues that good\nwhich seems to himself true should live as do the Cynics. There were,\nin fact, men who, though they pursued different things as the supreme\ngood, some choosing pleasure, others virtue, yet adopted that mode\nof life which gave the Cynics their name. Thus, whatever it is which\ndistinguishes the Cynics from other philosophers, this has no bearing\non the choice and pursuit of that good which constitutes happiness.\nFor if it had any such bearing, then the same habits of life would\nnecessitate the pursuit of the same chief good, and diverse habits\nwould necessitate the pursuit of different ends.\n\n\n  2. _How Varro, by removing all the differences which do not form\n      sects, but are merely secondary questions, reaches three\n      definitions of the chief good, of which we must choose one._\n\nThe same may be said of those three kinds of life, the life of studious\nleisure and search after truth, the life of easy engagement in affairs,\nand the life in which both these are mingled. When it is asked, which\nof these should be adopted, this involves no controversy about the\nend of good, but inquires which of these three puts a man in the best\nposition for finding and retaining the supreme good. For this good,\nas soon as a man finds it, makes him happy; but lettered leisure,\nor public business, or the alternation of these, do not necessarily\nconstitute happiness. Many, in fact, find it possible to adopt one or\nother of these modes of life, and yet to miss what makes a man happy.\nThe question, therefore, regarding the supreme good and the supreme\nevil, and which distinguishes sects of philosophy, is one; and these\nquestions concerning the social life, the doubt of the Academy, the\ndress and food of the Cynics, the three modes of life--the active,\nthe contemplative, and the mixed--these are different questions, into\nnone of which the question of the chief good enters. And therefore, as\nMarcus Varro multiplied the sects to the number of 288 (or whatever\nlarger number he chose) by introducing these four differences derived\nfrom the social life, the New Academy, the Cynics, and the threefold\nform of life, so, by removing these differences as having no bearing on\nthe supreme good, and as therefore not constituting what can properly\nbe called sects, he returns to those twelve schools which concern\nthemselves with inquiring what that good is which makes man happy, and\nhe shows that one of these is true, the rest false. In other words,\nhe dismisses the distinction founded on the threefold mode of life,\nand so decreases the whole number by two-thirds, reducing the sects to\nninety-six. Then, putting aside the Cynic peculiarities, the number\ndecreases by a half, to forty-eight. Taking away next the distinction\noccasioned by the hesitancy of the New Academy, the number is again\nhalved, and reduced to twenty-four. Treating in a similar way the\ndiversity introduced by the consideration of the social life, there\nare left but twelve, which this difference had doubled to twenty-four.\nRegarding these twelve, no reason can be assigned why they should\nnot be called sects. For in them the sole inquiry is regarding the\nsupreme good and the ultimate evil,--that is to say, regarding the\nsupreme good, for this being found, the opposite evil is thereby\nfound. Now, to make these twelve sects, he multiplies by three these\nfour things--pleasure, repose, pleasure and repose combined, and the\nprimary objects of nature which Varro calls _primigenia_. For as these\nfour things are sometimes subordinated to virtue, so that they seem to\nbe desired not for their own sake, but for virtue's sake; sometimes\npreferred to it, so that virtue seems to be necessary not on its own\naccount, but in order to attain these things; sometimes joined with\nit, so that both they and virtue are desired for their own sakes,--we\nmust multiply the four by three, and thus we get twelve sects. But\nfrom those four things Varro eliminates three--pleasure, repose,\npleasure and repose combined--not because he thinks these are not\nworthy of the place assigned them, but because they are included in\nthe primary objects of nature. And what need is there, at any rate, to\nmake a threefold division out of these two ends, pleasure and repose,\ntaking them first severally and then conjunctly, since both they, and\nmany other things besides, are comprehended in the primary objects of\nnature? Which of the three remaining sects must be chosen? This is the\nquestion that Varro dwells upon. For whether one of these three or\nsome other be chosen, reason forbids that more than one be true. This\nwe shall afterwards see; but meanwhile let us explain as briefly and\ndistinctly as we can how Varro makes his selection from these three,\nthat is, from the sects which severally hold that the primary objects\nof nature are to be desired for virtue's sake, that virtue is to be\ndesired for their sake, and that virtue and these objects are to be\ndesired each for their own sake.\n\n\n  3. _Which of the three leading opinions regarding the chief good\n      should be preferred, according to Varro, who follows Antiochus\n      and the Old Academy._\n\nWhich of these three is true and to be adopted he attempts to show in\nthe following manner. As it is the supreme good, not of a tree, or\nof a beast, or of a god, but of man, that philosophy is in quest of,\nhe thinks that, first of all, we must define man. He is of opinion\nthat there are two parts in human nature, body and soul, and makes\nno doubt that of these two the soul is the better and by far the\nmore worthy part. But whether the soul alone is the man, so that\nthe body holds the same relation to it as a horse to the horseman,\nthis he thinks has to be ascertained. The horseman is not a horse\nand a man, but only a man, yet he is called a horseman, because he\nis in some relation to the horse. Again, is the body alone the man,\nhaving a relation to the soul such as the cup has to the drink? For\nit is not the cup and the drink it contains which are called the\ncup, but the cup alone; yet it is so called because it is made to\nhold the drink. Or, lastly, is it neither the soul alone nor the\nbody alone, but both together, which are man, the body and the soul\nbeing each a part, but the whole man being both together, as we\ncall two horses yoked together a pair, of which pair the near and\nthe off horse is each a part, but we do not call either of them, no\nmatter how connected with the other, a pair, but only both together?\nOf these three alternatives, then, Varro chooses the third, that man\nis neither the body alone, nor the soul alone, but both together.\nAnd therefore the highest good, in which lies the happiness of man,\nis composed of goods of both kinds, both bodily and spiritual. And\nconsequently he thinks that the primary objects of nature are to\nbe sought for their own sake, and that virtue, which is the art of\nliving, and can be communicated by instruction, is the most excellent\nof spiritual goods. This virtue, then, or art of regulating life,\nwhen it has received these primary objects of nature which existed\nindependently of it, and prior to any instruction, seeks them all,\nand itself also, for its own sake; and it uses them, as it also\nuses itself, that from them all it may derive profit and enjoyment,\ngreater or less, according as they are themselves greater or less;\nand while it takes pleasure in all of them, it despises the less\nthat it may obtain or retain the greater when occasion demands. Now,\nof all goods, spiritual or bodily, there is none at all to compare\nwith virtue. For virtue makes a good use both of itself and of all\nother goods in which lies man's happiness; and where it is absent,\nno matter how many good things a man has, they are not for his good,\nand consequently should not be called good things while they belong\nto one who makes them useless by using them badly. The life of man,\nthen, is called happy when it enjoys virtue and these other spiritual\nand bodily good things without which virtue is impossible. It is\ncalled happier if it enjoys some or many other good things which\nare not essential to virtue; and happiest of all, if it lacks not\none of the good things which pertain to the body and the soul. For\nlife is not the same thing as virtue, since not every life, but a\nwisely regulated life, is virtue; and yet, while there can be life\nof some kind without virtue, there cannot be virtue without life.\nThis I might apply to memory and reason, and such mental faculties;\nfor these exist prior to instruction, and without them there cannot\nbe any instruction, and consequently no virtue, since virtue is\nlearned. But bodily advantages, such as swiftness of foot, beauty,\nor strength, are not essential to virtue, neither is virtue essential\nto them, and yet they are good things; and, according to our\nphilosophers, even these advantages are desired by virtue for its own\nsake, and are used and enjoyed by it in a becoming manner.\n\nThey say that this happy life is also social, and loves the advantages\nof its friends as its own, and for their sake wishes for them what it\ndesires for itself, whether these friends live in the same family,\nas a wife, children, domestics; or in the locality where one's home\nis, as the citizens of the same town; or in the world at large, as\nthe nations bound in common human brotherhood; or in the universe\nitself, comprehended in the heavens and the earth, as those whom they\ncall gods, and provide as friends for the wise man, and whom we more\nfamiliarly call angels. Moreover, they say that, regarding the supreme\ngood and evil, there is no room for doubt, and that they therefore\ndiffer from the New Academy in this respect, and they are not concerned\nwhether a philosopher pursues those ends which they think true in\nthe Cynic dress and manner of life or in some other. And, lastly, in\nregard to the three modes of life, the contemplative, the active, and\nthe composite, they declare in favour of the third. That these were\nthe opinions and doctrines of the Old Academy, Varro asserts on the\nauthority of Antiochus, Cicero's master and his own, though Cicero\nmakes him out to have been more frequently in accordance with the\nStoics than with the Old Academy. But of what importance is this to\nus, who ought to judge the matter on its own merits, rather than to\nunderstand accurately what different men have thought about it?\n\n\n  4. _What the Christians believe regarding the supreme good and\n      evil, in opposition to the philosophers, who have maintained\n      that the supreme good is in themselves._\n\nIf, then, we be asked what the city of God has to say upon these\npoints, and, in the first place, what its opinion regarding the\nsupreme good and evil is, it will reply that life eternal is the\nsupreme good, death eternal the supreme evil, and that to obtain\nthe one and escape the other we must live rightly. And thus it is\nwritten, \"The just lives by faith,\"[623] for we do not as yet see\nour good, and must therefore live by faith; neither have we in\nourselves power to live rightly, but can do so only if He who has\ngiven us faith to believe in His help do help us when we believe and\npray. As for those who have supposed that the sovereign good and\nevil are to be found in this life, and have placed it either in the\nsoul or the body, or in both, or, to speak more explicitly, either\nin pleasure or in virtue, or in both; in repose or in virtue, or in\nboth; in pleasure and repose, or in virtue, or in all combined; in\nthe primary objects of nature, or in virtue, or in both,--all these\nhave, with a marvellous shallowness, sought to find their blessedness\nin this life and in themselves. Contempt has been poured upon such\nideas by the Truth, saying by the prophet, \"The Lord knoweth the\nthoughts of men\" (or, as the Apostle Paul cites the passage, \"The\nLord knoweth the thoughts of the _wise_\") \"that they are vain.\"[624]\n\nFor what flood of eloquence can suffice to detail the miseries of\nthis life? Cicero, in the _Consolation_ on the death of his daughter,\nhas spent all his ability in lamentation; but how inadequate was\neven his ability here? For when, where, how, in this life can these\nprimary objects of nature be possessed so that they may not be\nassailed by unforeseen accidents? Is the body of the wise man exempt\nfrom any pain which may dispel pleasure, from any disquietude which\nmay banish repose? The amputation or decay of the members of the body\nputs an end to its integrity, deformity blights its beauty, weakness\nits health, lassitude its vigour, sleepiness or sluggishness its\nactivity,--and which of these is it that may not assail the flesh\nof the wise man? Comely and fitting attitudes and movements of the\nbody are numbered among the prime natural blessings; but what if\nsome sickness makes the members tremble? what if a man suffers from\ncurvature of the spine to such an extent that his hands reach the\nground, and he goes upon all-fours like a quadruped? Does not this\ndestroy all beauty and grace in the body, whether at rest or in\nmotion? What shall I say of the fundamental blessings of the soul,\nsense and intellect, of which the one is given for the perception,\nand the other for the comprehension of truth? But what kind of\nsense is it that remains when a man becomes deaf and blind? where\nare reason and intellect when disease makes a man delirious? We\ncan scarcely, or not at all, refrain from tears, when we think of\nor see the actions and words of such frantic persons, and consider\nhow different from and even opposed to their own sober judgment and\nordinary conduct their present demeanour is. And what shall I say\nof those who suffer from demoniacal possession? Where is their own\nintelligence hidden and buried while the malignant spirit is using\ntheir body and soul according to his own will? And who is quite sure\nthat no such thing can happen to the wise man in this life? Then,\nas to the perception of truth, what can we hope for even in this\nway while in the body, as we read in the true book of Wisdom, \"The\ncorruptible body weigheth down the soul, and the earthly tabernacle\npresseth down the mind that museth upon many things?\"[625] And\neagerness, or desire of action, if this is the right meaning to put\nupon the Greek \u1f41\u03c1\u03bc\u03ae, is also reckoned among the primary advantages\nof nature; and yet is it not this which produces those pitiable\nmovements of the insane, and those actions which we shudder to see,\nwhen sense is deceived and reason deranged?\n\nIn fine, virtue itself, which is not among the primary objects of\nnature, but succeeds to them as the result of learning, though\nit holds the highest place among human good things, what is its\noccupation save to wage perpetual war with vices,--not those that are\noutside of us, but within; not other men's, but our own,--a war which\nis waged especially by that virtue which the Greeks call \u03c3\u03c9\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7,\nand we temperance,[626] and which bridles carnal lusts, and prevents\nthem from winning the consent of the spirit to wicked deeds? For we\nmust not fancy that there is no vice in us, when, as the apostle\nsays, \"The flesh lusteth against the spirit;\"[627] for to this vice\nthere is a contrary virtue, when, as the same writer says, \"The\nspirit lusteth against the flesh.\" \"For these two,\" he says, \"are\ncontrary one to the other, so that you cannot do the things which\nyou would.\" But what is it we wish to do when we seek to attain the\nsupreme good, unless that the flesh should cease to lust against the\nspirit, and that there be no vice in us against which the spirit may\nlust? And as we cannot attain to this in the present life, however\nardently we desire it, let us by God's help accomplish at least\nthis, to preserve the soul from succumbing and yielding to the flesh\nthat lusts against it, and to refuse our consent to the perpetration\nof sin. Far be it from us, then, to fancy that while we are still\nengaged in this intestine war, we have already found the happiness\nwhich we seek to reach by victory. And who is there so wise that he\nhas no conflict at all to maintain against his vices?\n\nWhat shall I say of that virtue which is called prudence? Is not all\nits vigilance spent in the discernment of good from evil things,\nso that no mistake may be admitted about what we should desire and\nwhat avoid? And thus it is itself a proof that we are in the midst\nof evils, or that evils are in us; for it teaches us that it is an\nevil to consent to sin, and a good to refuse this consent. And yet\nthis evil, to which prudence teaches and temperance enables us not\nto consent, is removed from this life neither by prudence nor by\ntemperance. And justice, whose office it is to render to every man\nhis due, whereby there is in man himself a certain just order of\nnature, so that the soul is subjected to God, and the flesh to the\nsoul, and consequently both soul and flesh to God,--does not this\nvirtue demonstrate that it is as yet rather labouring towards its\nend than resting in its finished work? For the soul is so much the\nless subjected to God as it is less occupied with the thought of\nGod; and the flesh is so much the less subjected to the spirit as it\nlusts more vehemently against the spirit. So long, therefore, as we\nare beset by this weakness, this plague, this disease, how shall we\ndare to say that we are safe? and if not safe, then how can we be\nalready enjoying our final beatitude? Then that virtue which goes\nby the name of fortitude is the plainest proof of the ills of life,\nfor it is these ills which it is compelled to bear patiently. And\nthis holds good, no matter though the ripest wisdom co-exists with\nit. And I am at a loss to understand how the Stoic philosophers can\npresume to say that these are no ills, though at the same time they\nallow the wise man to commit suicide and pass out of this life if\nthey become so grievous that he cannot or ought not to endure them.\nBut such is the stupid pride of these men who fancy that the supreme\ngood can be found in this life, and that they can become happy by\ntheir own resources, that their wise man, or at least the man whom\nthey fancifully depict as such, is always happy, even though he\nbecome blind, deaf, dumb, mutilated, racked with pains, or suffer\nany conceivable calamity such as may compel him to make away with\nhimself; and they are not ashamed to call the life that is beset with\nthese evils happy. O happy life, which seeks the aid of death to end\nit! If it is happy, let the wise man remain in it; but if these ills\ndrive him out of it, in what sense is it happy? Or how can they say\nthat these are not evils which conquer the virtue of fortitude, and\nforce it not only to yield, but so to rave that it in one breath\ncalls life happy and recommends it to be given up? For who is so\nblind as not to see that if it were happy it would not be fled from?\nAnd if they say we should flee from it on account of the infirmities\nthat beset it, why then do they not lower their pride and acknowledge\nthat it is miserable? Was it, I would ask, fortitude or weakness\nwhich prompted Cato to kill himself? for he would not have done so\nhad he not been too weak to endure C\u00e6sar's victory. Where, then,\nis his fortitude? It has yielded, it has succumbed, it has been so\nthoroughly overcome as to abandon, forsake, flee this happy life. Or\nwas it no longer happy? Then it was miserable. How, then, were these\nnot evils which made life miserable, and a thing to be escaped from?\n\nAnd therefore those who admit that these are evils, as the\nPeripatetics do, and the Old Academy, the sect which Varro advocates,\nexpress a more intelligible doctrine; but theirs also is a surprising\nmistake, for they contend that this is a happy life which is beset\nby these evils, even though they be so great that he who endures\nthem should commit suicide to escape them. \"Pains and anguish of\nbody,\" says Varro, \"are evils, and so much the worse in proportion\nto their severity; and to escape them you must quit this life.\"\nWhat life, I pray? This life, he says, which is oppressed by such\nevils. Then it is happy in the midst of these very evils on account\nof which you say we must quit it? Or do you call it happy because\nyou are at liberty to escape these evils by death? What, then, if\nby some secret judgment of God you were held fast and not permitted\nto die, nor suffered to live without these evils? In that case, at\nleast, you would say that such a life was miserable. It is soon\nrelinquished, no doubt, but this does not make it not miserable;\nfor were it eternal, you yourself would pronounce it miserable. Its\nbrevity, therefore, does not clear it of misery; neither ought it to\nbe called happiness because it is a brief misery. Certainly there\nis a mighty force in these evils which compel a man--according to\nthem, even a wise man--to cease to be a man that he may escape them,\nthough they say, and say truly, that it is as it were the first and\nstrongest demand of nature that a man cherish himself, and naturally\ntherefore avoid death, and should so stand his own friend as to wish\nand vehemently aim at continuing to exist as a living creature, and\nsubsisting in this union of soul and body. There is a mighty force in\nthese evils to overcome this natural instinct by which death is by\nevery means and with all a man's efforts avoided, and to overcome it\nso completely that what was avoided is desired, sought after, and if\nit cannot in any other way be obtained, is inflicted by the man on\nhimself. There is a mighty force in these evils which make fortitude\na homicide,--if, indeed, that is to be called fortitude which is so\nthoroughly overcome by these evils, that it not only cannot preserve\nby patience the man whom it undertook to govern and defend, but is\nitself obliged to kill him. The wise man, I admit, ought to bear\ndeath with patience, but when it is inflicted by another. If, then,\nas these men maintain, he is obliged to inflict it on himself,\ncertainly it must be owned that the ills which compel him to this\nare not only evils, but intolerable evils. The life, then, which is\neither subject to accidents, or environed with evils so considerable\nand grievous, could never have been called happy, if the men who\ngive it this name had condescended to yield to the truth, and to be\nconquered by valid arguments, when they inquired after the happy\nlife, as they yield to unhappiness, and are overcome by overwhelming\nevils, when they put themselves to death, and if they had not fancied\nthat the supreme good was to be found in this mortal life; for the\nvery virtues of this life, which are certainly its best and most\nuseful possessions, are all the more telling proofs of its miseries\nin proportion as they are helpful against the violence of its\ndangers, toils, and woes. For if these are true virtues,--and such\ncannot exist save in those who have true piety,--they do not profess\nto be able to deliver the men who possess them from all miseries; for\ntrue virtues tell no such lies, but they profess that by the hope\nof the future world this life, which is miserably involved in the\nmany and great evils of this world, is happy as it is also safe. For\nif not yet safe, how could it be happy? And therefore the Apostle\nPaul, speaking not of men without prudence, temperance, fortitude,\nand justice, but of those whose lives were regulated by true piety,\nand whose virtues were therefore true, says, \"For we are saved by\nhope: now hope which is seen is not hope; for what a man seeth, why\ndoth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we\nwith patience wait for it.\"[628] As, therefore, we are saved, so we\nare made happy by hope. And as we do not as yet possess a present,\nbut look for a future salvation, so is it with our happiness, and\nthis \"with patience;\" for we are encompassed with evils, which we\nought patiently to endure, until we come to the ineffable enjoyment\nof unmixed good; for there shall be no longer anything to endure.\nSalvation, such as it shall be in the world to come, shall itself be\nour final happiness. And this happiness these philosophers refuse to\nbelieve in, because they do not see it, and attempt to fabricate for\nthemselves a happiness in this life, based upon a virtue which is as\ndeceitful as it is proud.\n\n\n       5. _Of the social life, which, though most desirable, is\n               frequently disturbed by many distresses._\n\nWe give a much more unlimited approval to their idea that the life of\nthe wise man must be social. For how could the city of God (concerning\nwhich we are already writing no less than the nineteenth book of this\nwork) either take a beginning or be developed, or attain its proper\ndestiny, if the life of the saints were not a social life? But who can\nenumerate all the great grievances with which human society abounds\nin the misery of this mortal state? Who can weigh them? Hear how one\nof their comic writers makes one of his characters express the common\nfeelings of all men in this matter: \"I am married; this is one misery.\nChildren are born to me; they are additional cares.\"[629] What shall\nI say of the miseries of love which Terence also recounts--\"slights,\nsuspicions, quarrels, war to-day, peace to-morrow?\"[630] Is not human\nlife full of such things? Do they not often occur even in honourable\nfriendships? On all hands we experience these slights, suspicions,\nquarrels, war, all of which are undoubted evils; while, on the other\nhand, peace is a doubtful good, because we do not know the heart of our\nfriend, and though we did know it to-day, we should be as ignorant of\nwhat it might be to-morrow. Who ought to be, or who are more friendly\nthan those who live in the same family? And yet who can rely even upon\nthis friendship, seeing that secret treachery has often broken it up,\nand produced enmity as bitter as the amity was sweet, or seemed sweet\nby the most perfect dissimulation? It is on this account that the\nwords of Cicero so move the heart of every one, and provoke a sigh:\n\"There are no snares more dangerous than those which lurk under the\nguise of duty or the name of relationship. For the man who is your\ndeclared foe you can easily baffle by precaution; but this hidden,\nintestine, and domestic danger not merely exists, but overwhelms you\nbefore you can foresee and examine it.\"[631] It is also to this that\nallusion is made by the divine saying, \"A man's foes are those of his\nown household,\"[632]--words which one cannot hear without pain; for\nthough a man have sufficient fortitude to endure it with equanimity,\nand sufficient sagacity to baffle the malice of a pretended friend,\nyet if he himself is a good man, he cannot but be greatly pained at\nthe discovery of the perfidy of wicked men, whether they have always\nbeen wicked and merely feigned goodness, or have fallen from a better\nto a malicious disposition. If, then, home, the natural refuge from\nthe ills of life, is itself not safe, what shall we say of the city,\nwhich, as it is larger, is so much the more filled with lawsuits civil\nand criminal, and is never free from the fear, if sometimes from the\nactual outbreak, of disturbing and bloody insurrections and civil wars?\n\n\n    6. _Of the error of human judgments when the truth is hidden._\n\nWhat shall I say of these judgments which men pronounce on men, and\nwhich are necessary in communities, whatever outward peace they\nenjoy? Melancholy and lamentable judgments they are, since the judges\nare men who cannot discern the consciences of those at their bar,\nand are therefore frequently compelled to put innocent witnesses to\nthe torture to ascertain the truth regarding the crimes of other\nmen. What shall I say of torture applied to the accused himself?\nHe is tortured to discover whether he is guilty, so that, though\ninnocent, he suffers most undoubted punishment for crime that is\nstill doubtful, not because it is proved that he committed it, but\nbecause it is not ascertained that he did not commit it. Thus the\nignorance of the judge frequently involves an innocent person in\nsuffering. And what is still more unendurable--a thing, indeed, to\nbe bewailed, and, if that were possible, watered with fountains of\ntears--is this, that when the judge puts the accused to the question,\nthat he may not unwittingly put an innocent man to death, the result\nof this lamentable ignorance is that this very person, whom he\ntortured that he might not condemn him if innocent, is condemned to\ndeath both tortured and innocent. For if he has chosen, in obedience\nto the philosophical instructions to the wise man, to quit this life\nrather than endure any longer such tortures, he declares that he has\ncommitted the crime which in fact he has not committed. And when he\nhas been condemned and put to death, the judge is still in ignorance\nwhether he has put to death an innocent or a guilty person, though he\nput the accused to the torture for the very purpose of saving himself\nfrom condemning the innocent; and consequently he has both tortured\nan innocent man to discover his innocence, and has put him to death\nwithout discovering it. If such darkness shrouds social life, will\na wise judge take his seat on the bench or no? Beyond question he\nwill. For human society, which he thinks it a wickedness to abandon,\nconstrains him and compels him to this duty. And he thinks it no\nwickedness that innocent witnesses are tortured regarding the crimes\nof which other men are accused; or that the accused are put to the\ntorture, so that they are often overcome with anguish, and, though\ninnocent, make false confessions regarding themselves, and are\npunished; or that, though they be not condemned to die, they often\ndie during, or in consequence of, the torture; or that sometimes\nthe accusers, who perhaps have been prompted by a desire to benefit\nsociety by bringing criminals to justice, are themselves condemned\nthrough the ignorance of the judge, because they are unable to prove\nthe truth of their accusations though they are true, and because the\nwitnesses lie, and the accused endures the torture without being\nmoved to confession. These numerous and important evils he does not\nconsider sins; for the wise judge does these things, not with any\nintention of doing harm, but because his ignorance compels him, and\nbecause human society claims him as a judge. But though we therefore\nacquit the judge of malice, we must none the less condemn human\nlife as miserable. And if he is compelled to torture and punish the\ninnocent because his office and his ignorance constrain him, is he\na happy as well as a guiltless man? Surely it were proof of more\nprofound considerateness and finer feeling were he to recognise the\nmisery of these necessities, and shrink from his own implication in\nthat misery; and had he any piety about him, he would cry to God,\n\"From my necessities deliver Thou me.\"[633]\n\n\n  7. _Of the diversity of languages, by which the intercourse of men\n      is prevented; and of the misery of wars, even of those called\n      just._\n\nAfter the state or city comes the world, the third circle of human\nsociety,--the first being the house, and the second the city. And the\nworld, as it is larger, so it is fuller of dangers, as the greater\nsea is the more dangerous. And here, in the first place, man is\nseparated from man by the difference of languages. For if two men,\neach ignorant of the other's language, meet, and are not compelled\nto pass, but, on the contrary, to remain in company, dumb animals,\nthough of different species, would more easily hold intercourse\nthan they, human beings though they be. For their common nature\nis no help to friendliness when they are prevented by diversity of\nlanguage from conveying their sentiments to one another; so that a\nman would more readily hold intercourse with his dog than with a\nforeigner. But the imperial city has endeavoured to impose on subject\nnations not only her yoke, but her language, as a bond of peace, so\nthat interpreters, far from being scarce, are numberless. This is\ntrue; but how many great wars, how much slaughter and bloodshed,\nhave provided this unity! And though these are past, the end of\nthese miseries has not yet come. For though there have never been\nwanting, nor are yet wanting, hostile nations beyond the empire,\nagainst whom wars have been and are waged, yet, supposing there were\nno such nations, the very extent of the empire itself has produced\nwars of a more obnoxious description--social and civil wars--and\nwith these the whole race has been agitated, either by the actual\nconflict or the fear of a renewed outbreak. If I attempted to give\nan adequate description of these manifold disasters, these stern and\nlasting necessities, though I am quite unequal to the task, what\nlimit could I set? But, say they, the wise man will wage just wars.\nAs if he would not all the rather lament the necessity of just wars,\nif he remembers that he is a man; for if they were not just he would\nnot wage them, and would therefore be delivered from all wars. For\nit is the wrong-doing of the opposing party which compels the wise\nman to wage just wars; and this wrong-doing, even though it gave\nrise to no war, would still be matter of grief to man because it is\nman's wrong-doing. Let every one, then, who thinks with pain on all\nthese great evils, so horrible, so ruthless, acknowledge that this\nis misery. And if any one either endures or thinks of them without\nmental pain, this is a more miserable plight still, for he thinks\nhimself happy because he has lost human feeling.\n\n\n  8. _That the friendship of good men cannot be securely rested in,\n      so long as the dangers of this life force us to be anxious._\n\nIn our present wretched condition we frequently mistake a friend for\nan enemy, and an enemy for a friend. And if we escape this pitiable\nblindness, is not the unfeigned confidence and mutual love of true and\ngood friends our one solace in human society, filled as it is with\nmisunderstandings and calamities? And yet the more friends we have, and\nthe more widely they are scattered, the more numerous are our fears\nthat some portion of the vast masses of the disasters of life may light\nupon them. For we are not only anxious lest they suffer from famine,\nwar, disease, captivity, or the inconceivable horrors of slavery,\nbut we are also affected with the much more painful dread that their\nfriendship may be changed into perfidy, malice, and injustice. And when\nthese contingencies actually occur,--as they do the more frequently\nthe more friends we have, and the more widely they are scattered,--and\nwhen they come to our knowledge, who but the man who has experienced\nit can tell with what pangs the heart is torn? We would, in fact,\nprefer to hear that they were dead, although we could not without\nanguish hear of even this. For if their life has solaced us with the\ncharms of friendship, can it be that their death should affect us with\nno sadness? He who will have none of this sadness must, if possible,\nhave no friendly intercourse. Let him interdict or extinguish friendly\naffection; let him burst with ruthless insensibility the bonds of\nevery human relationship; or let him contrive so to use them that\nno sweetness shall distil into his spirit. But if this is utterly\nimpossible, how shall we contrive to feel no bitterness in the death\nof those whose life has been sweet to us? Hence arises that grief\nwhich affects the tender heart like a wound or a bruise, and which is\nhealed by the application of kindly consolation. For though the cure is\naffected all the more easily and rapidly the better condition the soul\nis in, we must not on this account suppose that there is nothing at\nall to heal. Although, then, our present life is afflicted, sometimes\nin a milder, sometimes in a more painful degree, by the death of those\nvery dear to us, and especially of useful public men, yet we would\nprefer to hear that such men were dead rather than to hear or perceive\nthat they had fallen from the faith, or from virtue,--in other words,\nthat they were spiritually dead. Of this vast material for misery the\nearth is full, and therefore it is written, \"Is not human life upon\nearth a trial?\"[634] And with the same reference the Lord says, \"Woe\nto the world because of offences!\"[635] and again, \"Because iniquity\nabounded, the love of many shall wax cold.\"[636] And hence we enjoy\nsome gratification when our good friends die; for though their death\nleaves us in sorrow, we have the consolatory assurance that they are\nbeyond the ills by which in this life even the best of men are broken\ndown or corrupted, or are in danger of both results.\n\n\n  9. _Of the friendship of the holy angels, which men cannot be sure\n      of in this life, owing to the deceit of the demons who hold in\n      bondage the worshippers of a plurality of gods._\n\nThe philosophers who wished us to have the gods for our friends rank\nthe friendship of the holy angels in the fourth circle of society,\nadvancing now from the three circles of society on earth to the\nuniverse, and embracing heaven itself. And in this friendship we\nhave indeed no fear that the angels will grieve us by their death or\ndeterioration. But as we cannot mingle with them as familiarly as\nwith men (which itself is one of the grievances of this life), and as\nSatan, as we read,[637] sometimes transforms himself into an angel\nof light, to tempt those whom it is necessary to discipline, or just\nto deceive, there is great need of God's mercy to preserve us from\nmaking friends of demons in disguise, while we fancy we have good\nangels for our friends; for the astuteness and deceitfulness of these\nwicked spirits is equalled by their hurtfulness. And is this not a\ngreat misery of human life, that we are involved in such ignorance\nas, but for God's mercy, makes us a prey to these demons? And it is\nvery certain that the philosophers of the godless city, who have\nmaintained that the gods were their friends, had fallen a prey to the\nmalignant demons who rule that city, and whose eternal punishment is\nto be shared by it. For the nature of these beings is sufficiently\nevinced by the sacred or rather sacrilegious observances which form\ntheir worship, and by the filthy games in which their crimes are\ncelebrated, and which they themselves originated and exacted from\ntheir worshippers as a fit propitiation.\n\n\n  10. _The reward prepared for the saints after they have endured the\n                         trial of this life._\n\nBut not even the saints and faithful worshippers of the one true and\nmost high God are safe from the manifold temptations and deceits\nof the demons. For in this abode of weakness, and in these wicked\ndays, this state of anxiety has also its use, stimulating us to\nseek with keener longing for that security where peace is complete\nand unassailable. There we shall enjoy the gifts of nature, that\nis to say, all that God the Creator of all natures has bestowed\nupon ours,--gifts not only good, but eternal,--not only of the\nspirit, healed now by wisdom, but also of the body renewed by the\nresurrection. There the virtues shall no longer be struggling\nagainst any vice or evil, but shall enjoy the reward of victory, the\neternal peace which no adversary shall disturb. This is the final\nblessedness, this the ultimate consummation, the unending end. Here,\nindeed, we are said to be blessed when we have such peace as can be\nenjoyed in a good life; but such blessedness is mere misery compared\nto that final felicity. When we mortals possess such peace as this\nmortal life can afford, virtue, if we are living rightly, makes a\nright use of the advantages of this peaceful condition; and when we\nhave it not, virtue makes a good use even of the evils a man suffers.\nBut this is true virtue, when it refers all the advantages it makes a\ngood use of, and all that it does in making good use of good and evil\nthings, and itself also, to that end in which we shall enjoy the best\nand greatest peace possible.\n\n\n   11. _Of the happiness of the eternal peace, which constitutes the\n                end or true perfection of the saints._\n\nAnd thus we may say of peace, as we have said of eternal life, that\nit is the end of our good; and the rather because the Psalmist says\nof the city of God, the subject of this laborious work, \"Praise the\nLord, O Jerusalem; praise thy God, O Zion: for He hath strengthened\nthe bars of thy gates; He hath blessed thy children within thee;\nwho hath made thy borders peace.\"[638] For when the bars of her\ngates shall be strengthened, none shall go in or come out from her;\nconsequently we ought to understand the peace of her borders as that\nfinal peace we are wishing to declare. For even the mystical name of\nthe city itself, that is, _Jerusalem_, means, as I have already said,\n\"Vision of Peace.\" But as the word peace is employed in connection\nwith things in this world in which certainly life eternal has no\nplace, we have preferred to call the end or supreme good of this city\nlife eternal rather than peace. Of this end the apostle says, \"But\nnow, being freed from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your\nfruit unto holiness, and the end life eternal.\"[639] But, on the\nother hand, as those who are not familiar with Scripture may suppose\nthat the life of the wicked is eternal life, either because of the\nimmortality of the soul, which some of the philosophers even have\nrecognised, or because of the endless punishment of the wicked, which\nforms a part of our faith, and which seems impossible unless the\nwicked live for ever, it may therefore be advisable, in order that\nevery one may readily understand what we mean, to say that the end or\nsupreme good of this city is either peace in eternal life, or eternal\nlife in peace. For peace is a good so great, that even in this\nearthly and mortal life there is no word we hear with such pleasure,\nnothing we desire with such zest, or find to be more thoroughly\ngratifying. So that if we dwell for a little longer on this subject,\nwe shall not, in my opinion, be wearisome to our readers, who will\nattend both for the sake of understanding what is the end of this\ncity of which we speak, and for the sake of the sweetness of peace\nwhich is dear to all.\n\n\n  12. _That even the fierceness of war and all the disquietude of men\n      make towards this one end of peace, which every nature desires._\n\nWhoever gives even moderate attention to human affairs and to\nour common nature, will recognise that if there is no man who\ndoes not wish to be joyful, neither is there any one who does not\nwish to have peace. For even they who make war desire nothing but\nvictory,--desire, that is to say, to attain to peace with glory. For\nwhat else is victory than the conquest of those who resist us? and\nwhen this is done there is peace. It is therefore with the desire\nfor peace that wars are waged, even by those who take pleasure in\nexercising their warlike nature in command and battle. And hence it\nis obvious that peace is the end sought for by war. For every man\nseeks peace by waging war, but no man seeks war by making peace.\nFor even they who intentionally interrupt the peace in which they\nare living have no hatred of peace, but only wish it changed into a\npeace that suits them better. They do not, therefore, wish to have no\npeace, but only one more to their mind. And in the case of sedition,\nwhen men have separated themselves from the community, they yet do\nnot effect what they wish, unless they maintain some kind of peace\nwith their fellow-conspirators. And therefore even robbers take care\nto maintain peace with their comrades, that they may with greater\neffect and greater safety invade the peace of other men. And if an\nindividual happen to be of such unrivalled strength, and to be so\njealous of partnership, that he trusts himself with no comrades,\nbut makes his own plots, and commits depredations and murders on\nhis own account, yet he maintains some shadow of peace with such\npersons as he is unable to kill, and from whom he wishes to conceal\nhis deeds. In his own home, too, he makes it his aim to be at peace\nwith his wife and children, and any other members of his household;\nfor unquestionably their prompt obedience to his every look is a\nsource of pleasure to him. And if this be not rendered, he is angry,\nhe chides and punishes; and even by this storm he secures the calm\npeace of his own home, as occasion demands. For he sees that peace\ncannot be maintained unless all the members of the same domestic\ncircle be subject to one head, such as he himself is in his own\nhouse. And therefore if a city or nation offered to submit itself\nto him, to serve him in the same style as he had made his household\nserve him, he would no longer lurk in a brigand's hiding-places, but\nlift his head in open day as a king, though the same covetousness\nand wickedness should remain in him. And thus all men desire to\nhave peace with their own circle whom they wish to govern as suits\nthemselves. For even those whom they make war against they wish to\nmake their own, and impose on them the laws of their own peace.\n\nBut let us suppose a man such as poetry and mythology speak of,--a\nman so insociable and savage as to be called rather a semi-man than\na man.[640] Although, then, his kingdom was the solitude of a dreary\ncave, and he himself was so singularly bad-hearted that he was named\n\u039a\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2, which is the Greek word for _bad_; though he had no wife to\nsoothe him with endearing talk, no children to play with, no sons\nto do his bidding, no friend to enliven him with intercourse, not\neven his father Vulcan (though in one respect he was happier than\nhis father, not having begotten a monster like himself); although\nhe gave to no man, but took as he wished whatever he could, from\nwhomsoever he could, when he could; yet in that solitary den, the\nfloor of which, as Virgil[641] says, was always reeking with recent\nslaughter, there was nothing else than peace sought, a peace in which\nno one should molest him, or disquiet him with any assault or alarm.\nWith his own body he desired to be at peace; and he was satisfied\nonly in proportion as he had this peace. For he ruled his members,\nand they obeyed him; and for the sake of pacifying his mortal nature,\nwhich rebelled when it needed anything, and of allaying the sedition\nof hunger which threatened to banish the soul from the body, he made\nforays, slew, and devoured, but used the ferocity and savageness\nhe displayed in these actions only for the preservation of his own\nlife's peace. So that, had he been willing to make with other men\nthe same peace which he made with himself in his own cave, he would\nneither have been called bad, nor a monster, nor a semi-man. Or if\nthe appearance of his body and his vomiting smoky fires frightened\nmen from having any dealings with him, perhaps his fierce ways arose\nnot from a desire to do mischief, but from the necessity of finding\na living. But he may have had no existence, or, at least, he was not\nsuch as the poets fancifully describe him, for they had to exalt\nHercules, and did so at the expense of Cacus. It is better, then, to\nbelieve that such a man or semi-man never existed, and that this, in\ncommon with many other fancies of the poets, is mere fiction. For the\nmost savage animals (and he is said to have been almost a wild beast)\nencompass their own species with a ring of protecting peace. They\ncohabit, beget, produce, suckle, and bring up their young, though\nvery many of them are not gregarious, but solitary,--not like sheep,\ndeer, pigeons, starlings, bees, but such as lions, foxes, eagles,\nbats. For what tigress does not gently purr over her cubs, and lay\naside her ferocity to fondle them? What kite, solitary as he is when\ncircling over his prey, does not seek a mate, build a nest, hatch\nthe eggs, bring up the young birds, and maintain with the mother of\nhis family as peaceful a domestic alliance as he can? How much more\npowerfully do the laws of man's nature move him to hold fellowship\nand maintain peace with all men so far as in him lies, since even\nwicked men wage war to maintain the peace of their own circle, and\nwish that, if possible, all men belonged to them, that all men and\nthings might serve but one head, and might, either through love or\nfear, yield themselves to peace with him! It is thus that pride in\nits perversity apes God. It abhors equality with other men under Him;\nbut, instead of His rule, it seeks to impose a rule of its own upon\nits equals. It abhors, that is to say, the just peace of God, and\nloves its own unjust peace; but it cannot help loving peace of one\nkind or other. For there is no vice so clean contrary to nature that\nit obliterates even the faintest traces of nature.\n\nHe, then, who prefers what is right to what is wrong, and what is\nwell-ordered to what is perverted, sees that the peace of unjust men\nis not worthy to be called peace in comparison with the peace of the\njust. And yet even what is perverted must of necessity be in harmony\nwith, and in dependence on, and in some part of the order of things,\nfor otherwise it would have no existence at all. Suppose a man hangs\nwith his head downwards, this is certainly a perverted attitude of\nbody and arrangement of its members; for that which nature requires\nto be above is beneath, and _vice vers\u00e2_. This perversity disturbs\nthe peace of the body, and is therefore painful. Nevertheless the\nspirit is at peace with its body, and labours for its preservation,\nand hence the suffering; but if it is banished from the body by its\npains, then, so long as the bodily framework holds together, there is\nin the remains a kind of peace among the members, and hence the body\nremains suspended. And inasmuch as the earthy body tends towards the\nearth, and rests on the bond by which it is suspended, it tends thus\nto its natural peace, and the voice of its own weight demands a place\nfor it to rest; and though now lifeless and without feeling, it does\nnot fall from the peace that is natural to its place in creation,\nwhether it already has it, or is tending towards it. For if you apply\nembalming preparations to prevent the bodily frame from mouldering\nand dissolving, a kind of peace still unites part to part, and keeps\nthe whole body in a suitable place on the earth,--in other words,\nin a place that is at peace with the body. If, on the other hand,\nthe body receive no such care, but be left to the natural course, it\nis disturbed by exhalations that do not harmonize with one another,\nand that offend our senses; for it is this which is perceived in\nputrefaction until it is assimilated to the elements of the world,\nand particle by particle enters into peace with them. Yet throughout\nthis process the laws of the most high Creator and Governor are\nstrictly observed, for it is by Him the peace of the universe is\nadministered. For although minute animals are produced from the\ncarcase of a larger animal, all these little atoms, by the law of the\nsame Creator, serve the animals they belong to in peace. And although\nthe flesh of dead animals be eaten by others, no matter where it be\ncarried, nor what it be brought into contact with, nor what it be\nconverted and changed into, it still is ruled by the same laws which\npervade all things for the conservation of every mortal race, and\nwhich bring things that fit one another into harmony.\n\n\n  13. _Of the universal peace which the law of nature preserves\n      through all disturbances, and by which every one reaches his\n      desert in a way regulated by the just Judge._\n\nThe peace of the body then consists in the duly proportioned\narrangement of its parts. The peace of the irrational soul is the\nharmonious repose of the appetites, and that of the rational soul the\nharmony of knowledge and action. The peace of body and soul is the\nwell-ordered and harmonious life and health of the living creature.\nPeace between man and God is the well-ordered obedience of faith\nto eternal law. Peace between man and man is well-ordered concord.\nDomestic peace is the well-ordered concord between those of the\nfamily who rule and those who obey. Civil peace is a similar concord\namong the citizens. The peace of the celestial city is the perfectly\nordered and harmonious enjoyment of God, and of one another in God.\nThe peace of all things is the tranquillity of order. Order is the\ndistribution which allots things equal and unequal, each to its own\nplace. And hence, though the miserable, in so far as they are such,\ndo certainly not enjoy peace, but are severed from that tranquillity\nof order in which there is no disturbance, nevertheless, inasmuch\nas they are deservedly and justly miserable, they are by their very\nmisery connected with order. They are not, indeed, conjoined with the\nblessed, but they are disjoined from them by the law of order. And\nthough they are disquieted, their circumstances are notwithstanding\nadjusted to them, and consequently they have some tranquillity of\norder, and therefore some peace. But they are wretched because,\nalthough not wholly miserable, they are not in that place where\nany mixture of misery is impossible. They would, however, be more\nwretched if they had not that peace which arises from being in\nharmony with the natural order of things. When they suffer, their\npeace is in so far disturbed; but their peace continues in so far as\nthey do not suffer, and in so far as their nature continues to exist.\nAs, then, there may be life without pain, while there cannot be pain\nwithout some kind of life, so there may be peace without war, but\nthere cannot be war without some kind of peace, because war supposes\nthe existence of some natures to wage it, and these natures cannot\nexist without peace of one kind or other.\n\nAnd therefore there is a nature in which evil does not or even cannot\nexist; but there cannot be a nature in which there is no good. Hence\nnot even the nature of the devil himself is evil, in so far as it is\nnature, but it was made evil by being perverted. Thus he did not abide\nin the truth,[642] but could not escape the judgment of the Truth;\nhe did not abide in the tranquillity of order, but did not therefore\nescape the power of the Ordainer. The good imparted by God to his\nnature did not screen him from the justice of God by which order was\npreserved in his punishment; neither did God punish the good which He\nhad created, but the evil which the devil had committed. God did not\ntake back all He had imparted to his nature, but something He took and\nsomething He left, that there might remain enough to be sensible of the\nloss of what was taken. And this very sensibility to pain is evidence\nof the good which has been taken away and the good which has been\nleft. For, were nothing good left, there could be no pain on account\nof the good which had been lost. For he who sins is still worse if he\nrejoices in his loss of righteousness. But he who is in pain, if he\nderives no benefit from it, mourns at least the loss of health. And as\nrighteousness and health are both good things, and as the loss of any\ngood thing is matter of grief, not of joy,--if, at least, there is no\ncompensation, as spiritual righteousness may compensate for the loss\nof bodily health,--certainly it is more suitable for a wicked man to\ngrieve in punishment than to rejoice in his fault. As, then, the joy\nof a sinner who has abandoned what is good is evidence of a bad will,\nso his grief for the good he has lost when he is punished is evidence\nof a good nature. For he who laments the peace his nature has lost is\nstirred to do so by some relics of peace which make his nature friendly\nto itself. And it is very just that in the final punishment the wicked\nand godless should in anguish bewail the loss of the natural advantages\nthey enjoyed, and should perceive that they were most justly taken from\nthem by that God whose benign liberality they had despised. God, then,\nthe most wise Creator and most just Ordainer of all natures, who placed\nthe human race upon earth as its greatest ornament, imparted to men\nsome good things adapted to this life, to wit, temporal peace, such as\nwe can enjoy in this life from health and safety and human fellowship,\nand all things needful for the preservation and recovery of this peace,\nsuch as the objects which are accommodated to our outward senses,\nlight, night, the air, and waters suitable for us, and everything the\nbody requires to sustain, shelter, heal, or beautify it: and all under\nthis most equitable condition, that every man who made a good use of\nthese advantages suited to the peace of this mortal condition, should\nreceive ampler and better blessings, namely, the peace of immortality,\naccompanied by glory and honour in an endless life made fit for the\nenjoyment of God and of one another in God; but that he who used the\npresent blessings badly should both lose them and should not receive\nthe others.\n\n\n  14. _Of the order and law which obtain in heaven and earth, whereby\n      it comes to pass that human society is served by those who rule\n      it._\n\nThe whole use, then, of things temporal has a reference to this\nresult of earthly peace in the earthly community, while in the city\nof God it is connected with eternal peace. And therefore, if we\nwere irrational animals, we should desire nothing beyond the proper\narrangement of the parts of the body and the satisfaction of the\nappetites,--nothing, therefore, but bodily comfort and abundance\nof pleasures, that the peace of the body might contribute to the\npeace of the soul. For if bodily peace be awanting, a bar is put\nto the peace even of the irrational soul, since it cannot obtain\nthe gratification of its appetites. And these two together help out\nthe mutual peace of soul and body, the peace of harmonious life and\nhealth. For as animals, by shunning pain, show that they love bodily\npeace, and, by pursuing pleasure to gratify their appetites, show\nthat they love peace of soul, so their shrinking from death is a\nsufficient indication of their intense love of that peace which binds\nsoul and body in close alliance. But, as man has a rational soul,\nhe subordinates all this which he has in common with the beasts to\nthe peace of his rational soul, that his intellect may have free\nplay and may regulate his actions, and that he may thus enjoy the\nwell-ordered harmony of knowledge and action which constitutes, as\nwe have said, the peace of the rational soul. And for this purpose\nhe must desire to be neither molested by pain, nor disturbed by\ndesire, nor extinguished by death, that he may arrive at some useful\nknowledge by which he may regulate his life and manners. But, owing\nto the liability of the human mind to fall into mistakes, this very\npursuit of knowledge may be a snare to him unless he has a divine\nMaster, whom he may obey without misgiving, and who may at the same\ntime give him such help as to preserve his own freedom. And because,\nso long as he is in this mortal body, he is a stranger to God, he\nwalks by faith, not by sight; and he therefore refers all peace,\nbodily or spiritual or both, to that peace which mortal man has with\nthe immortal God, so that he exhibits the well-ordered obedience\nof faith to eternal law. But as this divine Master inculcates two\nprecepts,--the love of God and the love of our neighbour,--and as\nin these precepts a man finds three things he has to love,--God,\nhimself, and his neighbour,--and that he who loves God loves himself\nthereby, it follows that he must endeavour to get his neighbour to\nlove God, since he is ordered to love his neighbour as himself. He\nought to make this endeavour in behalf of his wife, his children,\nhis household, all within his reach, even as he would wish his\nneighbour to do the same for him if he needed it; and consequently\nhe will be at peace, or in well-ordered concord, with all men, as\nfar as in him lies. And this is the order of this concord, that a\nman, in the first place, injure no one, and, in the second, do good\nto every one he can reach. Primarily, therefore, his own household\nare his care, for the law of nature and of society gives him readier\naccess to them and greater opportunity of serving them. And hence the\napostle says, \"Now, if any provide not for his own, and specially\nfor those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse\nthan an infidel.\"[643] This is the origin of domestic peace, or the\nwell-ordered concord of those in the family who rule and those who\nobey. For they who care for the rest rule,--the husband the wife,\nthe parents the children, the masters the servants; and they who\nare cared for obey,--the women their husbands, the children their\nparents, the servants their masters. But in the family of the just\nman who lives by faith and is as yet a pilgrim journeying on to the\ncelestial city, even those who rule serve those whom they seem to\ncommand; for they rule not from a love of power, but from a sense of\nthe duty they owe to others--not because they are proud of authority,\nbut because they love mercy.\n\n\n  15. _Of the liberty proper to man's nature, and the servitude\n      introduced by sin,--a servitude in which the man whose will is\n      wicked is the slave of his own lust, though he is free so far\n      as regards other men._\n\nThis is prescribed by the order of nature: it is thus that God has\ncreated man. For \"let them,\" He says, \"have dominion over the fish\nof the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every creeping\nthing which creepeth on the earth.\"[644] He did not intend that His\nrational creature, who was made in His image, should have dominion\nover anything but the irrational creation,--not man over man, but\nman over the beasts. And hence the righteous men in primitive times\nwere made shepherds of cattle rather than kings of men, God intending\nthus to teach us what the relative position of the creatures is, and\nwhat the desert of sin; for it is with justice, we believe, that the\ncondition of slavery is the result of sin. And this is why we do not\nfind the word \"slave\" in any part of Scripture until righteous Noah\nbranded the sin of his son with this name. It is a name, therefore,\nintroduced by sin and not by nature. The origin of the Latin word for\nslave is supposed to be found in the circumstance that those who by the\nlaw of war were liable to be killed were sometimes preserved by their\nvictors, and were hence called servants.[645] And these circumstances\ncould never have arisen save through sin. For even when we wage a\njust war, our adversaries must be sinning; and every victory, even\nthough gained by wicked men, is a result of the first judgment of\nGod, who humbles the vanquished either for the sake of removing or of\npunishing their sins. Witness that man of God, Daniel, who, when he\nwas in captivity, confessed to God his own sins and the sins of his\npeople, and declares with pious grief that these were the cause of the\ncaptivity.[646] The prime cause, then, of slavery is sin, which brings\nman under the dominion of his fellow,--that which does not happen\nsave by the judgment of God, with whom is no unrighteousness, and who\nknows how to award fit punishments to every variety of offence. But\nour Master in heaven says, \"Every one who doeth sin is the servant of\nsin.\"[647] And thus there are many wicked masters who have religious\nmen as their slaves, and who are yet themselves in bondage; \"for of\nwhom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.\"[648] And\nbeyond question it is a happier thing to be the slave of a man than\nof a lust; for even this very lust of ruling, to mention no others,\nlays waste men's hearts with the most ruthless dominion. Moreover,\nwhen men are subjected to one another in a peaceful order, the lowly\nposition does as much good to the servant as the proud position does\nharm to the master. But by nature, as God first created us, no one\nis the slave either of man or of sin. This servitude is, however,\npenal, and is appointed by that law which enjoins the preservation\nof the natural order and forbids its disturbance; for if nothing had\nbeen done in violation of that law, there would have been nothing to\nrestrain by penal servitude. And therefore the apostle admonishes\nslaves to be subject to their masters, and to serve them heartily and\nwith good-will, so that, if they cannot be freed by their masters, they\nmay themselves make their slavery in some sort free, by serving not in\ncrafty fear, but in faithful love, until all unrighteousness pass away,\nand all principality and every human power be brought to nothing, and\nGod be all in all.\n\n\n                       16. _Of equitable rule._\n\nAnd therefore, although our righteous fathers[649] had slaves, and\nadministered their domestic affairs so as to distinguish between\nthe condition of slaves and the heirship of sons in regard to the\nblessings of this life, yet in regard to the worship of God, in\nwhom we hope for eternal blessings, they took an equally loving\noversight of all the members of their household. And this is so much\nin accordance with the natural order, that the head of the household\nwas called _paterfamilias_; and this name has been so generally\naccepted, that even those whose rule is unrighteous are glad to apply\nit to themselves. But those who are true fathers of their households\ndesire and endeavour that all the members of their household, equally\nwith their own children, should worship and win God, and should come\nto that heavenly home in which the duty of ruling men is no longer\nnecessary, because the duty of caring for their everlasting happiness\nhas also ceased; but, until they reach that home, masters ought to\nfeel their position of authority a greater burden than servants their\nservice. And if any member of the family interrupts the domestic\npeace by disobedience, he is corrected either by word or blow, or\nsome kind of just and legitimate punishment, such as society permits,\nthat he may himself be the better for it, and be readjusted to the\nfamily harmony from which he had dislocated himself. For as it is\nnot benevolent to give a man help at the expense of some greater\nbenefit he might receive, so it is not innocent to spare a man at\nthe risk of his falling into graver sin. To be innocent, we must not\nonly do harm to no man, but also restrain him from sin or punish his\nsin, so that either the man himself who is punished may profit by\nhis experience, or others be warned by his example. Since, then, the\nhouse ought to be the beginning or element of the city, and every\nbeginning bears reference to some end of its own kind, and every\nelement to the integrity of the whole of which it is an element, it\nfollows plainly enough that domestic peace has a relation to civic\npeace,--in other words, that the well-ordered concord of domestic\nobedience and domestic rule has a relation to the well-ordered\nconcord of civic obedience and civic rule. And therefore it follows,\nfurther, that the father of the family ought to frame his domestic\nrule in accordance with the law of the city, so that the household\nmay be in harmony with the civic order.\n\n\n   17. _What produces peace, and what discord, between the heavenly\n                         and earthly cities._\n\nBut the families which do not live by faith seek their peace in the\nearthly advantages of this life; while the families which live by\nfaith look for those eternal blessings which are promised, and use\nas pilgrims such advantages of time and of earth as do not fascinate\nand divert them from God, but rather aid them to endure with greater\nease, and to keep down the number of those burdens of the corruptible\nbody which weigh upon the soul. Thus the things necessary for this\nmortal life are used by both kinds of men and families alike, but\neach has its own peculiar and widely different aim in using them.\nThe earthly city, which does not live by faith, seeks an earthly\npeace, and the end it proposes, in the well-ordered concord of civic\nobedience and rule, is the combination of men's wills to attain\nthe things which are helpful to this life. The heavenly city, or\nrather the part of it which sojourns on earth and lives by faith,\nmakes use of this peace only because it must, until this mortal\ncondition which necessitates it shall pass away. Consequently, so\nlong as it lives like a captive and a stranger in the earthly city,\nthough it has already received the promise of redemption, and the\ngift of the Spirit as the earnest of it, it makes no scruple to\nobey the laws of the earthly city, whereby the things necessary for\nthe maintenance of this mortal life are administered; and thus, as\nthis life is common to both cities, so there is a harmony between\nthem in regard to what belongs to it. But, as the earthly city has\nhad some philosophers whose doctrine is condemned by the divine\nteaching, and who, being deceived either by their own conjectures\nor by demons, supposed that many gods must be invited to take an\ninterest in human affairs, and assigned to each a separate function\nand a separate department,--to one the body, to another the soul;\nand in the body itself, to one the head, to another the neck, and\neach of the other members to one of the gods; and in like manner, in\nthe soul, to one god the natural capacity was assigned, to another\neducation, to another anger, to another lust; and so the various\naffairs of life were assigned,--cattle to one, corn to another, wine\nto another, oil to another, the woods to another, money to another,\nnavigation to another, wars and victories to another, marriages to\nanother, births and fecundity to another, and other things to other\ngods: and as the celestial city, on the other hand, knew that one\nGod only was to be worshipped, and that to Him alone was due that\nservice which the Greeks call \u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1, and which can be given only to\na god, it has come to pass that the two cities could not have common\nlaws of religion, and that the heavenly city has been compelled in\nthis matter to dissent, and to become obnoxious to those who think\ndifferently, and to stand the brunt of their anger and hatred and\npersecutions, except in so far as the minds of their enemies have\nbeen alarmed by the multitude of the Christians and quelled by the\nmanifest protection of God accorded to them. This heavenly city,\nthen, while it sojourns on earth, calls citizens out of all nations,\nand gathers together a society of pilgrims of all languages, not\nscrupling about diversities in the manners, laws, and institutions\nwhereby earthly peace is secured and maintained, but recognising\nthat, however various these are, they all tend to one and the same\nend of earthly peace. It therefore is so far from rescinding and\nabolishing these diversities, that it even preserves and adopts\nthem, so long only as no hindrance to the worship of the one supreme\nand true God is thus introduced. Even the heavenly city, therefore,\nwhile in its state of pilgrimage, avails itself of the peace of\nearth, and, so far as it can without injuring faith and godliness,\ndesires and maintains a common agreement among men regarding the\nacquisition of the necessaries of life, and makes this earthly peace\nbear upon the peace of heaven; for this alone can be truly called\nand esteemed the peace of the reasonable creatures, consisting as it\ndoes in the perfectly ordered and harmonious enjoyment of God and\nof one another in God. When we shall have reached that peace, this\nmortal life shall give place to one that is eternal, and our body\nshall be no more this animal body which by its corruption weighs\ndown the soul, but a spiritual body feeling no want, and in all its\nmembers subjected to the will. In its pilgrim state the heavenly city\npossesses this peace by faith; and by this faith it lives righteously\nwhen it refers to the attainment of that peace every good action\ntowards God and man; for the life of the city is a social life.\n\n\n     18. _How different the uncertainty of the New Academy is from\n                the certainty of the Christian faith._\n\nAs regards the uncertainty about everything which Varro alleges to be\nthe differentiating characteristic of the New Academy, the city of\nGod thoroughly detests such doubt as madness. Regarding matters which\nit apprehends by the mind and reason it has most absolute certainty,\nalthough its knowledge is limited because of the corruptible body\npressing down the mind, for, as the apostle says, \"We know in\npart.\"[650] It believes also the evidence of the senses which the\nmind uses by aid of the body; for [if one who trusts his senses is\nsometimes deceived], he is more wretchedly deceived who fancies he\nshould never trust them. It believes also the Holy Scriptures, old\nand new, which we call canonical, and which are the source of the\nfaith by which the just lives,[651] and by which we walk without\ndoubting whilst we are absent from the Lord.[652] So long as this\nfaith remains inviolate and firm, we may without blame entertain\ndoubts regarding some things which we have neither perceived by\nsense nor by reason, and which have not been revealed to us by the\ncanonical Scriptures, nor come to our knowledge through witnesses\nwhom it is absurd to disbelieve.\n\n\n        19. _Of the dress and habits of the Christian people._\n\nIt is a matter of no moment in the city of God whether he who adopts\nthe faith that brings men to God adopts it in one dress and manner\nof life or another, so long only as he lives in conformity with the\ncommandments of God. And hence, when philosophers themselves become\nChristians, they are compelled, indeed, to abandon their erroneous\ndoctrines, but not their dress and mode of living, which are no\nobstacle to religion. So that we make no account of that distinction\nof sects which Varro adduced in connection with the Cynic school,\nprovided always nothing indecent or self-indulgent is retained. As\nto these three modes of life, the contemplative, the active, and the\ncomposite, although, so long as a man's faith is preserved, he may\nchoose any of them without detriment to his eternal interests, yet\nhe must never overlook the claims of truth and duty. No man has a\nright to lead such a life of contemplation as to forget in his own\nease the service due to his neighbour; nor has any man a right to\nbe so immersed in active life as to neglect the contemplation of\nGod. The charm of leisure must not be indolent vacancy of mind, but\nthe investigation or discovery of truth, that thus every man may\nmake solid attainments without grudging that others do the same.\nAnd, in active life, it is not the honours or power of this life\nwe should covet, since all things under the sun are vanity, but we\nshould aim at using our position and influence, if these have been\nhonourably attained, for the welfare of those who are under us, in\nthe way we have already explained.[653] It is to this the apostle\nrefers when he says, \"He that desireth the episcopate desireth a\ngood work.\"[654] He wished to show that the episcopate is the title\nof a work, not of an honour. It is a Greek word, and signifies that\nhe who governs, superintends or takes care of those whom he governs:\nfor \u1f10\u03c0\u03af means _over_, and \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, _to see_; therefore \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\nmeans \"to oversee.\"[655] So that he who loves to govern rather than\nto do good is no bishop. Accordingly no one is prohibited from the\nsearch after truth, for in this leisure may most laudably be spent;\nbut it is unseemly to covet the high position requisite for governing\nthe people, even though that position be held and that government\nbe administered in a seemly manner. And therefore holy leisure is\nlonged for by the love of truth; but it is the necessity of love to\nundertake requisite business. If no one imposes this burden upon us,\nwe are free to sift and contemplate truth; but if it be laid upon\nus, we are necessitated for love's sake to undertake it. And yet not\neven in this case are we obliged wholly to relinquish the sweets of\ncontemplation; for were these to be withdrawn, the burden might prove\nmore than we could bear.\n\n\n        20. _That the saints are in this life blessed in hope._\n\nSince, then, the supreme good of the city of God is perfect and\neternal peace, not such as mortals pass into and out of by birth and\ndeath, but the peace of freedom from all evil, in which the immortals\never abide, who can deny that that future life is most blessed, or\nthat, in comparison with it, this life which now we live is most\nwretched, be it filled with all blessings of body and soul and\nexternal things? And yet, if any man uses this life with a reference\nto that other which he ardently loves and confidently hopes for,\nhe may well be called even now blessed, though not in reality so\nmuch as in hope. But the actual possession of the happiness of this\nlife, without the hope of what is beyond, is but a false happiness\nand profound misery. For the true blessings of the soul are not now\nenjoyed; for that is no true wisdom which does not direct all its\nprudent observations, manly actions, virtuous self-restraint, and\njust arrangements, to that end in which God shall be all and all in a\nsecure eternity and perfect peace.\n\n\n     21. _Whether there ever was a Roman republic answering to the\n             definitions of Scipio in Cicero's dialogue._\n\nThis, then, is the place where I should fulfil the promise I gave\nin the second book of this work,[656] and explain, as briefly and\nclearly as possible, that if we are to accept the definitions laid\ndown by Scipio in Cicero's _De Republica_, there never was a Roman\nrepublic; for he briefly defines a republic as the weal of the\npeople. And if this definition be true, there never was a Roman\nrepublic, for the people's weal was never attained among the Romans.\nFor the people, according to his definition, is an assemblage\nassociated by a common acknowledgment of right and by a community of\ninterests. And what he means by a common acknowledgment of right he\nexplains at large, showing that a republic cannot be administered\nwithout justice. Where, therefore, there is no true justice there can\nbe no right. For that which is done by right is justly done, and what\nis unjustly done cannot be done by right. For the unjust inventions\nof men are neither to be considered nor spoken of as rights; for even\nthey themselves say that right is that which flows from the fountain\nof justice, and deny the definition which is commonly given by those\nwho misconceive the matter, that right is that which is useful to the\nstronger party. Thus, where there is not true justice there can be\nno assemblage of men associated by a common acknowledgment of right,\nand therefore there can be no people, as defined by Scipio or Cicero;\nand if no people, then no weal of the people, but only of some\npromiscuous multitude unworthy of the name of people. Consequently,\nif the republic is the weal of the people, and there is no people\nif it be not associated by a common acknowledgment of right, and if\nthere is no right where there is no justice, then most certainly it\nfollows that there is no republic where there is no justice. Further,\njustice is that virtue which gives every one his due. Where, then, is\nthe justice of man, when he deserts the true God and yields himself\nto impure demons? Is this to give every one his due? Or is he who\nkeeps back a piece of ground from the purchaser, and gives it to a\nman who has no right to it, unjust, while he who keeps back himself\nfrom the God who made him, and serves wicked spirits, is just?\n\nThis same book, _De Republica_, advocates the cause of justice\nagainst injustice with great force and keenness. The pleading for\ninjustice against justice was first heard, and it was asserted that\nwithout injustice a republic could neither increase nor even subsist,\nfor it was laid down as an absolutely unassailable position that\nit is unjust for some men to rule and some to serve; and yet the\nimperial city to which the republic belongs cannot rule her provinces\nwithout having recourse to this injustice. It was replied in behalf\nof justice, that this ruling of the provinces is just, because\nservitude may be advantageous to the provincials, and is so when\nrightly administered,--that is to say, when lawless men are prevented\nfrom doing harm. And further, as they became worse and worse so long\nas they were free, they will improve by subjection. To confirm this\nreasoning, there is added an eminent example drawn from nature: for\n\"why,\" it is asked, \"does God rule man, the soul the body, the reason\nthe passions and other vicious parts of the soul?\" This example leaves\nno doubt that, to some, servitude is useful; and, indeed, to serve God\nis useful to all. And it is when the soul serves God that it exercises\na right control over the body; and in the soul itself the reason must\nbe subject to God if it is to govern as it ought the passions and\nother vices. Hence, when a man does not serve God, what justice can\nwe ascribe to him, since in this case his soul cannot exercise a just\ncontrol over the body, nor his reason over his vices? And if there\nis no justice in such an individual, certainly there can be none in\na community composed of such persons. Here, therefore, there is not\nthat common acknowledgment of right which makes an assemblage of men a\npeople whose affairs we call a republic. And why need I speak of the\nadvantageousness, the common participation in which, according to the\ndefinition, makes a people? For although, if you choose to regard the\nmatter attentively, you will see that there is nothing advantageous to\nthose who live godlessly, as every one lives who does not serve God but\ndemons, whose wickedness you may measure by their desire to receive the\nworship of men though they are most impure spirits, yet what I have\nsaid of the common acknowledgment of right is enough to demonstrate\nthat, according to the above definition, there can be no people, and\ntherefore no republic, where there is no justice. For if they assert\nthat in their republic the Romans did not serve unclean spirits, but\ngood and holy gods, must we therefore again reply to this evasion,\nthough already we have said enough, and more than enough, to expose it?\nHe must be an uncommonly stupid, or a shamelessly contentious person,\nwho has read through the foregoing books to this point, and can yet\nquestion whether the Romans served wicked and impure demons. But, not\nto speak of their character, it is written in the law of the true God,\n\"He that sacrificeth unto any god save unto the Lord only, he shall\nbe utterly destroyed.\"[657] He, therefore, who uttered so menacing a\ncommandment decreed that no worship should be given either to good or\nbad gods.\n\n\n   22. _Whether the God whom the Christians serve is the true God to\n                whom alone sacrifice ought to be paid._\n\nBut it may be replied, Who is this God, or what proof is there that\nHe alone is worthy to receive sacrifice from the Romans? One must be\nvery blind to be still asking who this God is. He is the God whose\nprophets predicted the things we see accomplished. He is the God from\nwhom Abraham received the assurance, \"In thy seed shall all nations\nbe blessed.\"[658] That this was fulfilled in Christ, who according\nto the flesh sprang from that seed, is recognised, whether they\nwill or no, even by those who have continued to be the enemies of\nthis name. He is the God whose divine Spirit spake by the men whose\npredictions I cited in the preceding books, and which are fulfilled\nin the Church which has extended over all the world. This is the God\nwhom Varro, the most learned of the Romans, supposed to be Jupiter,\nthough he knows not what he says; yet I think it right to note the\ncircumstance that a man of such learning was unable to suppose that\nthis God had no existence or was contemptible, but believed Him to be\nthe same as the supreme God. In fine, He is the God whom Porphyry,\nthe most learned of the philosophers, though the bitterest enemy of\nthe Christians, confesses to be a great God, even according to the\noracles of those whom he esteems gods.\n\n\n   23. _Porphyry's account of the responses given by the oracles of\n                     the gods concerning Christ._\n\nFor in his book called \u1f10\u03ba \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, in which he collects and\ncomments upon the responses which he pretends were uttered by the\ngods concerning divine things, he says--I give his own words as they\nhave been translated from the Greek: \"To one who inquired what god\nhe should propitiate in order to recall his wife from Christianity,\nApollo replied in the following verses.\" Then the following words are\ngiven as those of Apollo: \"You will probably find it easier to write\nlasting characters on the water, or lightly fly like a bird through\nthe air, than to restore right feeling in your impious wife once she\nhas polluted herself. Let her remain as she pleases in her foolish\ndeception, and sing false laments to her dead God, who was condemned\nby right-minded judges, and perished ignominiously by a violent\ndeath.\" Then after these verses of Apollo (which we have given in a\nLatin version that does not preserve the metrical form), he goes on\nto say: \"In these verses Apollo exposed the incurable corruption of\nthe Christians, saying that the Jews, rather than the Christians,\nrecognised God.\" See how he misrepresents Christ, giving the Jews the\npreference to the Christians in the recognition of God. This was his\nexplanation of Apollo's verses, in which he says that Christ was put\nto death by right-minded or just judges,--in other words, that He\ndeserved to die. I leave the responsibility of this oracle regarding\nChrist on the lying interpreter of Apollo, or on this philosopher who\nbelieved it or possibly himself invented it; as to its agreement with\nPorphyry's opinions or with other oracles, we shall in a little have\nsomething to say. In this passage, however, he says that the Jews,\nas the interpreters of God, judged justly in pronouncing Christ to\nbe worthy of the most shameful death. He should have listened, then,\nto this God of the Jews to whom he bears this testimony, when that\nGod says, \"He that sacrificeth to any other god save to the Lord\nalone shall be utterly destroyed.\" But let us come to still plainer\nexpressions, and hear how great a God Porphyry thinks the God of the\nJews is. Apollo, he says, when asked whether word, _i.e._ reason,\nor law is the better thing, replied in the following verses. Then\nhe gives the verses of Apollo, from which I select the following as\nsufficient: \"God, the Generator, and the King prior to all things,\nbefore whom heaven and earth, and the sea, and the hidden places of\nhell tremble, and the deities themselves are afraid, for their law\nis the Father whom the holy Hebrews honour.\" In this oracle of his\ngod Apollo, Porphyry avowed that the God of the Hebrews is so great\nthat the deities themselves are afraid before Him. I am surprised,\ntherefore, that when God said, He that sacrificeth to other gods\nshall be utterly destroyed, Porphyry himself was not afraid lest he\nshould be destroyed for sacrificing to other gods.\n\nThis philosopher, however, has also some good to say of Christ,\noblivious, as it were, of that contumely of his of which we have just\nbeen speaking; or as if his gods spoke evil of Christ only while\nasleep, and recognised Him to be good, and gave Him His deserved\npraise, when they awoke. For, as if he were about to proclaim some\nmarvellous thing passing belief, he says, \"What we are going to say\nwill certainly take some by surprise. For the gods have declared that\nChrist was very pious, and has become immortal, and that they cherish\nhis memory: that the Christians, however, are polluted, contaminated,\nand involved in error. And many other such things,\" he says, \"do the\ngods say against the Christians.\" Then he gives specimens of the\naccusations made, as he says, by the gods against them, and then goes\non: \"But to some who asked Hecate whether Christ were a God, she\nreplied, You know the condition of the disembodied immortal soul, and\nthat if it has been severed from wisdom it always errs. The soul you\nrefer to is that of a man foremost in piety: they worship it because\nthey mistake the truth.\" To this so-called oracular response he adds\nthe following words of his own: \"Of this very pious man, then, Hecate\nsaid that the soul, like the souls of other good men, was after death\ndowered with immortality, and that the Christians through ignorance\nworship it. And to those who ask why he was condemned to die, the\noracle of the goddess replied, The body, indeed, is always exposed to\ntorments, but the souls of the pious abide in heaven. And the soul you\ninquire about has been the fatal cause of error to other souls which\nwere not fated to receive the gifts of the gods, and to have the\nknowledge of immortal Jove. Such souls are therefore hated by the gods;\nfor they who were fated not to receive the gifts of the gods, and not\nto know God, were fated to be involved in error by means of him you\nspeak of. He himself, however, was good, and heaven has been opened to\nhim as to other good men. You are not, then, to speak evil of him, but\nto pity the folly of men: and through him men's danger is imminent.\"\n\nWho is so foolish as not to see that these oracles were either\ncomposed by a clever man with a strong animus against the Christians,\nor were uttered as responses by impure demons with a similar\ndesign,--that is to say, in order that their praise of Christ may\nwin credence for their vituperation of Christians; and that thus\nthey may, if possible, close the way of eternal salvation, which is\nidentical with Christianity? For they believe that they are by no\nmeans counterworking their own hurtful craft by promoting belief in\nChrist, so long as their calumniation of Christians is also accepted;\nfor they thus secure that even the man who thinks well of Christ\ndeclines to become a Christian, and is therefore not delivered from\ntheir own rule by the Christ he praises. Besides, their praise\nof Christ is so contrived that whosoever believes in Him as thus\nrepresented will not be a true Christian but a Photinian heretic,\nrecognising only the humanity, and not also the divinity of Christ,\nand will thus be precluded from salvation and from deliverance\nout of the meshes of these devilish lies. For our part, we are no\nbetter pleased with Hecate's praises of Christ than with Apollo's\ncalumniation of Him. Apollo says that Christ was put to death by\nright-minded judges, implying that He was unrighteous. Hecate says\nthat He was a most pious man, but no more. The intention of both is\nthe same, to prevent men from becoming Christians, because if this\nbe secured, men shall never be rescued from their power. But it is\nincumbent on our philosopher, or rather on those who believe in these\npretended oracles against the Christians, first of all, if they can,\nto bring Apollo and Hecate to the same mind regarding Christ, so\nthat either both may condemn or both praise Him. And even if they\nsucceeded in this, we for our part would notwithstanding repudiate\nthe testimony of demons, whether favourable or adverse to Christ. But\nwhen our adversaries find a god and goddess of their own at variance\nabout Christ, the one praising, the other vituperating Him, they can\ncertainly give no credence, if they have any judgment, to mere men\nwho blaspheme the Christians.\n\nWhen Porphyry or Hecate praises Christ, and adds that He gave Himself\nto the Christians as a fatal gift, that they might be involved in\nerror, he exposes, as he thinks, the causes of this error. But before\nI cite his words to that purpose, I would ask, If Christ did thus\ngive Himself to the Christians to involve them in error, did He do so\nwillingly, or against His will? If willingly, how is He righteous? If\nagainst His will, how is He blessed? However, let us hear the causes\nof this error. \"There are,\" he says, \"in a certain place very small\nearthly spirits, subject to the power of evil demons. The wise men\nof the Hebrews, among whom was this Jesus, as you have heard from\nthe oracles of Apollo cited above, turned religious persons from\nthese very wicked demons and minor spirits, and taught them rather to\nworship the celestial gods, and especially to adore God the Father.\nThis,\" he said, \"the gods enjoin; and we have already shown how they\nadmonish the soul to turn to God, and command it to worship Him. But\nthe ignorant and the ungodly, who are not destined to receive favours\nfrom the gods, nor to know the immortal Jupiter, not listening to the\ngods and their messages, have turned away from all gods, and have\nnot only refused to hate, but have venerated the prohibited demons.\nProfessing to worship God, they refuse to do those things by which\nalone God is worshipped. For God, indeed, being the Father of all, is\nin need of nothing; but for us it is good to adore Him by means of\njustice, chastity, and other virtues, and thus to make life itself\na prayer to Him, by inquiring into and imitating His nature. For\ninquiry,\" says he, \"purifies and imitation deifies us, by moving us\nnearer to Him.\" He is right in so far as he proclaims God the Father,\nand the conduct by which we should worship Him. Of such precepts the\nprophetic books of the Hebrews are full, when they praise or blame\nthe life of the saints. But in speaking of the Christians he is in\nerror, and calumniates them as much as is desired by the demons whom\nhe takes for gods, as if it were difficult for any man to recollect\nthe disgraceful and shameful actions which used to be done in the\ntheatres and temples to please the gods, and to compare with these\nthings what is heard in our churches, and what is offered to the\ntrue God, and from this comparison to conclude where character is\nedified, and where it is ruined. But who but a diabolical spirit has\ntold or suggested to this man so manifest and vain a lie, as that the\nChristians reverenced rather than hated the demons, whose worship the\nHebrews prohibited? But that God, whom the Hebrew sages worshipped,\nforbids sacrifice to be offered even to the holy angels of heaven and\ndivine powers, whom we, in this our pilgrimage, venerate and love as\nour most blessed fellow-citizens. For in the law which God gave to\nHis Hebrew people He utters this menace, as in a voice of thunder:\n\"He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall\nbe utterly destroyed.\"[659] And that no one might suppose that this\nprohibition extends only to the very wicked demons and earthly\nspirits, whom this philosopher calls very small and inferior,--for\neven these are in the Scripture called gods, not of the Hebrews,\nbut of the nations, as the Septuagint translators have shown in\nthe psalm where it is said, \"For all the gods of the nations are\ndemons,\"[660]--that no one might suppose, I say, that sacrifice to\nthese demons was prohibited, but that sacrifice might be offered to\nall or some of the celestials, it was immediately added, \"save unto\nthe Lord alone.\"[661] The God of the Hebrews, then, to whom this\nrenowned philosopher bears this signal testimony, gave to His Hebrew\npeople a law, composed in the Hebrew language, and not obscure and\nunknown, but published now in every nation, and in this law it is\nwritten, \"He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord alone,\nhe shall be utterly destroyed.\" What need is there to seek further\nproofs in the law or the prophets of this same thing? _Seek_, we need\nnot say, for the passages are neither few nor difficult to find; but\nwhat need to collect and apply to my argument the proofs which are\nthickly sown and obvious, and by which it appears clear as day that\nsacrifice may be paid to none but the supreme and true God? Here is\none brief but decided, even menacing, and certainly true utterance\nof that God whom the wisest of our adversaries so highly extol.\nLet this be listened to, feared, fulfilled, that there may be no\ndisobedient soul cut off. \"He that sacrifices,\" He says, not because\nHe needs anything, but because it behoves us to be His possession.\nHence the Psalmist in the Hebrew Scriptures sings, \"I have said to\nthe Lord, Thou art my God, for Thou needest not my good.\"[662] For\nwe ourselves, who are His own city, are His most noble and worthy\nsacrifice, and it is this mystery we celebrate in our sacrifices,\nwhich are well known to the faithful, as we have explained in the\npreceding books. For through the prophets the oracles of God declared\nthat the sacrifices which the Jews offered as a shadow of that which\nwas to be would cease, and that the nations, from the rising to the\nsetting of the sun, would offer one sacrifice. From these oracles,\nwhich we now see accomplished, we have made such selections as seemed\nsuitable to our purpose in this work. And therefore, where there is\nnot this righteousness whereby the one supreme God rules the obedient\ncity according to His grace, so that it sacrifices to none but Him,\nand whereby, in all the citizens of this obedient city, the soul\nconsequently rules the body and reason the vices in the rightful\norder, so that, as the individual just man, so also the community and\npeople of the just, live by faith, which works by love, that love\nwhereby man loves God as He ought to be loved, and his neighbour as\nhimself,--there, I say, there is not an assemblage associated by a\ncommon acknowledgment of right, and by a community of interests.\nBut if there is not this, there is not a people, if our definition\nbe true, and therefore there is no republic; for where there is no\npeople there can be no republic.\n\n\n  24. _The definition which must be given of a people and a republic,\n      in order to vindicate the assumption of these titles by the\n      Romans and by other kingdoms._\n\nBut if we discard this definition of a people, and, assuming another,\nsay that a people is an assemblage of reasonable beings bound\ntogether by a common agreement as to the objects of their love,\nthen, in order to discover the character of any people, we have only\nto observe what they love. Yet whatever it loves, if only it is an\nassemblage of reasonable beings and not of beasts, and is bound\ntogether by an agreement as to the objects of love, it is reasonably\ncalled a people; and it will be a superior people in proportion as\nit is bound together by higher interests, inferior in proportion\nas it is bound together by lower. According to this definition of\nours, the Roman people is a people, and its weal is without doubt\na commonwealth or republic. But what its tastes were in its early\nand subsequent days, and how it declined into sanguinary seditions\nand then to social and civil wars, and so burst asunder or rotted\noff the bond of concord in which the health of a people consists,\nhistory shows, and in the preceding books I have related at large.\nAnd yet I would not on this account say either that it was not a\npeople, or that its administration was not a republic, so long as\nthere remains an assemblage of reasonable beings bound together by a\ncommon agreement as to the objects of love. But what I say of this\npeople and of this republic I must be understood to think and say\nof the Athenians or any Greek state, of the Egyptians, of the early\nAssyrian Babylon, and of every other nation, great or small, which\nhad a public government. For, in general, the city of the ungodly,\nwhich did not obey the command of God that it should offer no\nsacrifice save to Him alone, and which, therefore, could not give to\nthe soul its proper command over the body, nor to the reason its just\nauthority over the vices, is void of true justice.\n\n\n      25. _That where there is no true religion there are no true\n                               virtues._\n\nFor though the soul may seem to rule the body admirably, and the\nreason the vices, if the soul and reason do not themselves obey God,\nas God has commanded them to serve Him, they have no proper authority\nover the body and the vices. For what kind of mistress of the body\nand the vices can that mind be which is ignorant of the true God, and\nwhich, instead of being subject to His authority, is prostituted to\nthe corrupting influences of the most vicious demons? It is for this\nreason that the virtues which it seems to itself to possess, and\nby which it restrains the body and the vices that it may obtain and\nkeep what it desires, are rather vices than virtues so long as there\nis no reference to God in the matter. For although some suppose that\nvirtues which have a reference only to themselves, and are desired\nonly on their own account, are yet true and genuine virtues, the fact\nis that even then they are inflated with pride, and are therefore\nto be reckoned vices rather than virtues. For as that which gives\nlife to the flesh is not derived from flesh, but is above it, so\nthat which gives blessed life to man is not derived from man, but is\nsomething above him; and what I say of man is true of every celestial\npower and virtue whatsoever.\n\n\n  26. _Of the peace which is enjoyed by the people that are alienated\n      from God, and the use made of it by the people of God in the\n      time of its pilgrimage._\n\nWherefore, as the life of the flesh is the soul, so the blessed life of\nman is God, of whom the sacred writings of the Hebrews say, \"Blessed is\nthe people whose God is the Lord.\"[663] Miserable, therefore, is the\npeople which is alienated from God. Yet even this people has a peace of\nits own which is not to be lightly esteemed, though, indeed, it shall\nnot in the end enjoy it, because it makes no good use of it before\nthe end. But it is our interest that it enjoy this peace meanwhile in\nthis life; for as long as the two cities are commingled, we also enjoy\nthe peace of Babylon. For from Babylon the people of God is so freed\nthat it meanwhile sojourns in its company. And therefore the apostle\nalso admonished the Church to pray for kings and those in authority,\nassigning as the reason, \"that we may live a quiet and tranquil life in\nall godliness and love.\"[664] And the prophet Jeremiah, when predicting\nthe captivity that was to befall the ancient people of God, and giving\nthem the divine command to go obediently to Babylonia, and thus serve\ntheir God, counselled them also to pray for Babylonia, saying, \"In the\npeace thereof shall ye have peace,\"[665]--the temporal peace which the\ngood and the wicked together enjoy.\n\n\n   27. _That the peace of those who serve God cannot in this mortal\n                life be apprehended in its perfection._\n\nBut the peace which is peculiar to ourselves we enjoy now with God by\nfaith, and shall hereafter enjoy eternally with Him by sight. But the\npeace which we enjoy in this life, whether common to all or peculiar\nto ourselves, is rather the solace of our misery than the positive\nenjoyment of felicity. Our very righteousness, too, though true in so\nfar as it has respect to the true good, is yet in this life of such\na kind that it consists rather in the remission of sins than in the\nperfecting of virtues. Witness the prayer of the whole city of God\nin its pilgrim state, for it cries to God by the mouth of all its\nmembers, \"Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.\"[666] And\nthis prayer is efficacious not for those whose faith is \"without works\nand dead,\"[667] but for those whose faith \"worketh by love.\"[668]\nFor as reason, though subjected to God, is yet \"pressed down by the\ncorruptible body,\"[669] so long as it is in this mortal condition,\nit has not perfect authority over vice, and therefore this prayer is\nneeded by the righteous. For though it exercises authority, the vices\ndo not submit without a struggle. For however well one maintains the\nconflict, and however thoroughly he has subdued these enemies, there\nsteals in some evil thing, which, if it do not find ready expression\nin act, slips out by the lips, or insinuates itself into the thought;\nand therefore his peace is not full so long as he is at war with his\nvices. For it is a doubtful conflict he wages with those that resist,\nand his victory over those that are defeated is not secure, but full\nof anxiety and effort. Amidst these temptations, therefore, of all\nwhich it has been summarily said in the divine oracles, \"Is not human\nlife upon earth a temptation?\"[670] who but a proud man can presume\nthat he so lives that he has no need to say to God, \"Forgive us our\ndebts?\" And such a man is not great, but swollen and puffed up with\nvanity, and is justly resisted by Him who abundantly gives grace to\nthe humble. Whence it is said, \"God resisteth the proud, but giveth\ngrace to the humble.\"[671] In this, then, consists the righteousness\nof a man, that he submit himself to God, his body to his soul, and\nhis vices, even when they rebel, to his reason, which either defeats\nor at least resists them; and also that he beg from God grace to do\nhis duty,[672] and the pardon of his sins, and that he render to God\nthanks for all the blessings he receives. But, in that final peace to\nwhich all our righteousness has reference, and for the sake of which\nit is maintained, as our nature shall enjoy a sound immortality and\nincorruption, and shall have no more vices, and as we shall experience\nno resistance either from ourselves or from others, it will not be\nnecessary that reason should rule vices which no longer exist, but God\nshall rule the man, and the soul shall rule the body, with a sweetness\nand facility suitable to the felicity of a life which is done with\nbondage. And this condition shall there be eternal, and we shall be\nassured of its eternity; and thus the peace of this blessedness and the\nblessedness of this peace shall be the supreme good.\n\n\n                     28. _The end of the wicked._\n\nBut, on the other hand, they who do not belong to this city of God\nshall inherit eternal misery, which is also called the second death,\nbecause the soul shall then be separated from God its life, and\ntherefore cannot be said to live, and the body shall be subjected to\neternal pains. And consequently this second death shall be the more\nsevere, because no death shall terminate it. But war being contrary\nto peace, as misery to happiness, and life to death, it is not\nwithout reason asked what kind of war can be found in the end of the\nwicked answering to the peace which is declared to be the end of the\nrighteous? The person who puts this question has only to observe what\nit is in war that is hurtful and destructive, and he shall see that\nit is nothing else than the mutual opposition and conflict of things.\nAnd can he conceive a more grievous and bitter war than that in which\nthe will is so opposed to passion, and passion to the will, that their\nhostility can never be terminated by the victory of either, and in\nwhich the violence of pain so conflicts with the nature of the body,\nthat neither yields to the other? For in this life, when this conflict\nhas arisen, either pain conquers and death expels the feeling of it, or\nnature conquers and health expels the pain. But in the world to come\nthe pain continues that it may torment, and the nature endures that\nit may be sensible of it; and neither ceases to exist, lest punishment\nalso should cease. Now, as it is through the last judgment that men\npass to these ends, the good to the supreme good, the evil to the\nsupreme evil, I will treat of this judgment in the following book.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[619] Not extant.\n\n[620] Alluding to the vexed question whether virtue could be taught.\n\n[621] The _prima natur\u00e6_, or \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd of the Stoics.\n\n[622] Frequently called the Middle Academy; the New beginning with\nCarneades.\n\n[623] Hab. ii. 4.\n\n[624] Ps. xciv. 11, and 1 Cor. iii. 20.\n\n[625] Wisdom ix. 15.\n\n[626] Cicero, _Tusc. Qu\u00e6st._ iii. 8.\n\n[627] Gal. v. 17.\n\n[628] Rom. viii. 24.\n\n[629] Terent. _Adelph._ v. 4.\n\n[630] _Eunuch._ i. 1.\n\n[631] _In Verrem_, ii. 1. 15.\n\n[632] Matt. x. 36.\n\n[633] Ps. xxv. 17.\n\n[634] Job vii. 1.\n\n[635] Matt. xvii. 7.\n\n[636] Matt. xxiv. 12.\n\n[637] 2 Cor. xi. 14.\n\n[638] Ps. cxlvii. 12-14.\n\n[639] Rom. vi. 22.\n\n[640] He refers to the giant Cacus.\n\n[641] _\u00c6neid_, viii. 195.\n\n[642] John viii. 44.\n\n[643] 1 Tim. v. 8.\n\n[644] Gen. i. 26.\n\n[645] _Servus_, \"a slave,\" from _servare_, \"to preserve.\"\n\n[646] Dan. ix.\n\n[647] John viii. 34.\n\n[648] 2 Pet. ii. 19.\n\n[649] The patriarchs.\n\n[650] 1 Cor. xiii. 9.\n\n[651] Hab. ii. 4.\n\n[652] 2 Cor. v. 6.\n\n[653] Ch. 6.\n\n[654] 1 Tim. iii. 1.\n\n[655] Augustine's words are: \"\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9, quippe 'super;' \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2, vero,\n'intentio' est: \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, si velimus, latine 'superintendere'\npossumus dicere.\"\n\n[656] Ch. 21.\n\n[657] Ex. xxii. 20.\n\n[658] Gen. xxii. 18.\n\n[659] Ex. xxii. 20.\n\n[660] Ps. xcvi. 5.\n\n[661] Augustine here warns his readers against a possible\nmisunderstanding of the Latin word for \"alone\" (_soli_), which might\nbe rendered \"the sun.\"\n\n[662] Ps. xvi. 2.\n\n[663] Ps. cxliv. 15.\n\n[664] 1 Tim. ii. 2; var. reading, \"purity.\"\n\n[665] Jer. xxix. 7.\n\n[666] Matt. vi. 12.\n\n[667] Jas. ii. 17.\n\n[668] Gal. v. 6.\n\n[669] Wisdom ix. 15.\n\n[670] Job vii. 1.\n\n[671] Jas. iv. 6; 1 Pet. v. 5.\n\n[672] Gratia meritorum.\n\n\n\n\n                            BOOK TWENTIETH.\n\n                               ARGUMENT.\n\n  CONCERNING THE LAST JUDGMENT, AND THE DECLARATIONS REGARDING IT IN\n                      THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS.\n\n\n  1. _That although God is always judging, it is nevertheless\n      reasonable to confine our attention in this book to His last\n      judgment._\n\nIntending to speak, in dependence on God's grace, of the day of His\nfinal judgment, and to affirm it against the ungodly and incredulous,\nwe must first of all lay, as it were, in the foundation of the\nedifice the divine declarations. Those persons who do not believe\nsuch declarations do their best to oppose to them false and illusive\nsophisms of their own, either contending that what is adduced from\nScripture has another meaning, or altogether denying that it is\nan utterance of God's. For I suppose no man who understands what\nis written, and believes it to be communicated by the supreme and\ntrue God through holy men, refuses to yield and consent to these\ndeclarations, whether he orally confesses his consent, or is from\nsome evil influence ashamed or afraid to do so; or even, with an\nopinionativeness closely resembling madness, makes strenuous efforts\nto defend what he knows and believes to be false against what he\nknows and believes to be true.\n\nThat, therefore, which the whole Church of the true God holds and\nprofesses as its creed, that Christ shall come from heaven to judge\nquick and dead, this we call the last day, or last time, of the\ndivine judgment. For we do not know how many days this judgment may\noccupy; but no one who reads the Scriptures, however negligently,\nneed be told that in them \"day\" is customarily used for \"time.\" And\nwhen we speak of the day of God's judgment, we add the word last or\nfinal for this reason, because even now God judges, and has judged\nfrom the beginning of human history, banishing from paradise, and\nexcluding from the tree of life, those first men who perpetrated so\ngreat a sin. Yea, He was certainly exercising judgment also when\nHe did not spare the angels who sinned, whose prince, overcome by\nenvy, seduced men after being himself seduced. Neither is it without\nGod's profound and just judgment that the life of demons and men,\nthe one in the air, the other on earth, is filled with misery,\ncalamities, and mistakes. And even though no one had sinned, it could\nonly have been by the good and right judgment of God that the whole\nrational creation could have been maintained in eternal blessedness\nby a persevering adherence to its Lord. He judges, too, not only\nin the mass, condemning the race of devils and the race of men to\nbe miserable on account of the original sin of these races, but He\nalso judges the voluntary and personal acts of individuals. For even\nthe devils pray that they may not be tormented,[673] which proves\nthat without injustice they might either be spared or tormented\naccording to their deserts. And men are punished by God for their\nsins often visibly, always secretly, either in this life or after\ndeath, although no man acts rightly save by the assistance of divine\naid; and no man or devil acts unrighteously save by the permission\nof the divine and most just judgment. For, as the apostle says,\n\"There is no unrighteousness with God;\"[674] and as he elsewhere\nsays, \"His judgments are inscrutable, and His ways past finding\nout.\"[675] In this book, then, I shall speak, as God permits, not of\nthose first judgments, nor of these intervening judgments of God, but\nof the last judgment, when Christ is to come from heaven to judge\nthe quick and the dead. For that day is properly called the day of\njudgment, because in it there shall be no room left for the ignorant\nquestioning why this wicked person is happy and that righteous man\nunhappy. In that day true and full happiness shall be the lot of none\nbut the good, while deserved and supreme misery shall be the portion\nof the wicked, and of them only.\n\n\n    2. _That in the mingled web of human affairs God's judgment is\n               present, though it cannot be discerned._\n\nIn this present time we learn to bear with equanimity the ills to\nwhich even good men are subject, and to hold cheap the blessings\nwhich even the wicked enjoy. And consequently, even in those\nconditions of life in which the justice of God is not apparent, His\nteaching is salutary. For we do not know by what judgment of God this\ngood man is poor and that bad man rich; why he who, in our opinion,\nought to suffer acutely for his abandoned life enjoys himself, while\nsorrow pursues him whose praiseworthy life leads us to suppose he\nshould be happy; why the innocent man is dismissed from the bar not\nonly unavenged, but even condemned, being either wronged by the\niniquity of the judge, or overwhelmed by false evidence, while his\nguilty adversary, on the other hand, is not only discharged with\nimpunity, but even has his claims admitted; why the ungodly enjoys\ngood health, while the godly pines in sickness; why ruffians are of\nthe soundest constitution, while they who could not hurt any one even\nwith a word are from infancy afflicted with complicated disorders;\nwhy he who is useful to society is cut off by premature death, while\nthose who, as it might seem, ought never to have been so much as born\nhave lives of unusual length; why he who is full of crimes is crowned\nwith honours, while the blameless man is buried in the darkness of\nneglect. But who can collect or enumerate all the contrasts of this\nkind? But if this anomalous state of things were uniform in this\nlife, in which, as the sacred Psalmist says, \"Man is like to vanity,\nhis days as a shadow that passeth away,\"[676]--so uniform that none\nbut wicked men won the transitory prosperity of earth, while only\nthe good suffered its ills,--this could be referred to the just and\neven benign judgment of God. We might suppose that they who were not\ndestined to obtain those everlasting benefits which constitute human\nblessedness were either deluded by transitory blessings as the just\nreward of their wickedness, or were, in God's mercy, consoled by\nthem, and that they who were not destined to suffer eternal torments\nwere afflicted with temporal chastisement for their sins, or were\nstimulated to greater attainment in virtue. But now, as it is, since\nwe not only see good men involved in the ills of life, and bad men\nenjoying the good of it, which seems unjust, but also that evil\noften overtakes evil men, and good surprises the good, the rather on\nthis account are God's judgments unsearchable, and His ways past\nfinding out. Although, therefore, we do not know by what judgment\nthese things are done or permitted to be done by God, with whom is\nthe highest virtue, the highest wisdom, the highest justice, no\ninfirmity, no rashness, no unrighteousness, yet it is salutary for us\nto learn to hold cheap such things, be they good or evil, as attach\nindifferently to good men and bad, and to covet those good things\nwhich belong only to good men, and flee those evils which belong only\nto evil men. But when we shall have come to that judgment, the date\nof which is called peculiarly the day of judgment, and sometimes the\nday of the Lord, we shall then recognise the justice of all God's\njudgments, not only of such as shall then be pronounced, but of all\nwhich take effect from the beginning, or may take effect before that\ntime. And in that day we shall also recognise with what justice so\nmany, or almost all, the just judgments of God in the present life\ndefy the scrutiny of human sense or insight, though in this matter it\nis not concealed from pious minds that what is concealed is just.\n\n\n     3. _What Solomon, in the book of Ecclesiastes, says regarding\n        the things which happen alike to good and wicked men._\n\nSolomon, the wisest king of Israel, who reigned in Jerusalem, thus\ncommences the book called Ecclesiastes, which the Jews number among\ntheir canonical Scriptures: \"Vanity of vanities, said Ecclesiastes,\nvanity of vanities; all is vanity. What profit hath a man of all his\nlabour which he hath taken under the sun?\"[677] And after going on\nto enumerate, with this as his text, the calamities and delusions\nof this life, and the shifting nature of the present time, in which\nthere is nothing substantial, nothing lasting, he bewails, among\nthe other vanities that are under the sun, this also, that though\nwisdom excelleth folly as light excelleth darkness, and though the\neyes of the wise man are in his head, while the fool walketh in\ndarkness,[678] yet one event happeneth to them all, that is to say,\nin this life under the sun, unquestionably alluding to those evils\nwhich we see befall good and bad men alike. He says, further, that\nthe good suffer the ills of life as if they were evil-doers, and\nthe bad enjoy the good of life as if they were good. \"There is a\nvanity which is done upon the earth; that there be just men unto\nwhom it happeneth according to the work of the wicked: again, there\nbe wicked men, to whom it happeneth according to the work of the\nrighteous. I said, that this also is vanity.\"[679] This wisest man\ndevoted this whole book to a full exposure of this vanity, evidently\nwith no other object than that we might long for that life in which\nthere is no vanity under the sun, but verity under Him who made the\nsun. In this vanity, then, was it not by the just and righteous\njudgment of God that man, made like to vanity, was destined to pass\naway? But in these days of vanity it makes an important difference\nwhether he resists or yields to the truth, and whether he is\ndestitute of true piety or a partaker of it,--important not so far\nas regards the acquirement of the blessings or the evasion of the\ncalamities of this transitory and vain life, but in connection with\nthe future judgment which shall make over to good men good things,\nand to bad men bad things, in permanent, inalienable possession.\nIn fine, this wise man concludes this book of his by saying, \"Fear\nGod, and keep His commandments: for this is every man. For God shall\nbring every work into judgment, with every despised person, whether\nit be good, or whether it be evil.\"[680] What truer, terser, more\nsalutary enouncement could be made? \"Fear God,\" he says, \"and keep\nHis commandments: for this is every man.\" For whosoever has real\nexistence, is this, is a keeper of God's commandments; and he who is\nnot this, is nothing. For so long as he remains in the likeness of\nvanity, he is not renewed in the image of the truth. \"For God shall\nbring into judgment every work,\"--that is, whatever man does in this\nlife,--\"whether it be good or whether it be evil, with every despised\nperson,\"--that is, with every man who here seems despicable, and is\ntherefore not considered; for God sees even him, and does not despise\nhim nor pass him over in His judgment.\n\n\n   4. _That proofs of the last judgment will be adduced, first from\n              the New Testament, and then from the Old._\n\nThe proofs, then, of this last judgment of God which I propose to\nadduce shall be drawn first from the New Testament, and then from\nthe Old. For although the Old Testament is prior in point of time,\nthe New has the precedence in intrinsic value; for the Old acts the\npart of herald to the New. We shall therefore first cite passages\nfrom the New Testament, and confirm them by quotations from the Old\nTestament. The Old contains the law and the prophets, the New the\ngospel and the apostolic epistles. Now the apostle says, \"By the law\nis the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God without\nthe law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;\nnow the righteousness of God is by faith of Jesus Christ upon all\nthem that believe.\"[681] This righteousness of God belongs to the\nNew Testament, and evidence for it exists in the old books, that is\nto say, in the law and the prophets. I shall first, then, state the\ncase, and then call the witnesses. This order Jesus Christ Himself\ndirects us to observe, saying, \"The scribe instructed in the kingdom\nof God is like a good householder, bringing out of his treasure\nthings new and old.\"[682] He did not say \"old and new,\" which He\ncertainly would have said had He not wished to follow the order of\nmerit rather than that of time.\n\n\n    5. _The passages in which the Saviour declares that there shall\n            be a divine judgment in the end of the world._\n\nThe Saviour Himself, while reproving the cities in which He had done\ngreat works, but which had not believed, and while setting them in\nunfavourable comparison with foreign cities, says, \"But I say unto\nyou, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of\njudgment than for you.\"[683] And a little after He says, \"Verily, I\nsay unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the\nday of judgment than for thee.\"[684] Here He most plainly predicts\nthat a day of judgment is to come. And in another place He says,\n\"The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation,\nand shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of\nJonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. The queen of the\nsouth shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall\ncondemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to\nhear the words of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is\nhere.\"[685] Two things we learn from this passage, that a judgment\nis to take place, and that it is to take place at the resurrection\nof the dead. For when He spoke of the Ninevites and the queen of the\nsouth, He certainly spoke of dead persons, and yet He said that they\nshould rise up in the day of judgment. He did not say, \"They shall\ncondemn,\" as if they themselves were to be the judges, but because,\nin comparison with them, the others shall be justly condemned.\n\nAgain, in another passage, in which He was speaking of the present\nintermingling and future separation of the good and bad,--the\nseparation which shall be made in the day of judgment,--He adduced a\ncomparison drawn from the sown wheat and the tares sown among them,\nand gave this explanation of it to His disciples: \"He that soweth\nthe good seed is the Son of man,\"[686] etc. Here, indeed, He did not\nname the judgment or the day of judgment, but indicated it much more\nclearly by describing the circumstances, and foretold that it should\ntake place in the end of the world.\n\nIn like manner He says to His disciples, \"Verily I say unto you, That\nye which have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of man\nshall sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve\nthrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.\"[687] Here we learn\nthat Jesus shall judge with His disciples. And therefore He said\nelsewhere to the Jews, \"If I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do\nyour sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges.\"[688]\nNeither ought we to suppose that only twelve men shall judge along\nwith Him, though He says that they shall sit upon twelve thrones,\nfor by the number twelve is signified the completeness of the\nmultitude of those who shall judge. For the two parts of the number\nseven (which commonly symbolizes totality), that is to say, four\nand three, multiplied into one another, give twelve. For four times\nthree, or three times four, are twelve. There are other meanings,\ntoo, in this number twelve. Were not this the right interpretation of\nthe twelve thrones, then since we read that Matthias was ordained\nan apostle in the room of Judas the traitor, the Apostle Paul,\nthough he laboured more than them all,[689] should have no throne of\njudgment; but he unmistakeably considers himself to be included in\nthe number of the judges when he says, \"Know ye not that we shall\njudge angels?\"[690] The same rule is to be observed in applying the\nnumber twelve to those who are to be judged. For though it was said,\n\"judging the twelve tribes of Israel,\" the tribe of Levi, which is\nthe thirteenth, shall not on this account be exempt from judgment,\nneither shall judgment be passed only on Israel and not on the other\nnations. And by the words \"in the regeneration\" He certainly meant\nthe resurrection of the dead to be understood; for our flesh shall be\nregenerated by incorruption, as our soul is regenerated by faith.\n\nMany passages I omit, because, though they seem to refer to the\nlast judgment, yet on a closer examination they are found to be\nambiguous, or to allude rather to some other event,--whether to that\ncoming of the Saviour which continually occurs in His Church, that\nis, in His members, in which He comes little by little, and piece\nby piece, since the whole Church is His body, or to the destruction\nof the earthly Jerusalem. For when He speaks even of this, He often\nuses language which is applicable to the end of the world and that\nlast and great day of judgment, so that these two events cannot\nbe distinguished unless all the corresponding passages bearing on\nthe subject in the three evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, are\ncompared with one another,--for some things are put more obscurely\nby one evangelist and more plainly by another,--so that it becomes\napparent what things are meant to be referred to one event. It is\nthis which I have been at pains to do in a letter which I wrote to\nHesychius of blessed memory, bishop of Salon, and entitled, \"Of the\nEnd of the World.\"[691]\n\nI shall now cite from the Gospel according to Matthew the passage\nwhich speaks of the separation of the good from the wicked by the\nmost efficacious and final judgment of Christ: \"When the Son of man,\"\nhe says, \"shall come in His glory, ... then shall He say also unto\nthem on His left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting\nfire, prepared for the devil and his angels.\"[692] Then He in like\nmanner recounts to the wicked the things they had not done, but which\nHe had said those on the right hand had done. And when they ask when\nthey had seen Him in need of these things, He replies that, inasmuch\nas they had not done it to the least of His brethren, they had not\ndone it unto Him, and concludes His address in the words, \"And these\nshall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into\nlife eternal.\" Moreover, the evangelist John most distinctly states\nthat He had predicted that the judgment should be at the resurrection\nof the dead. For after saying, \"The Father judgeth no man, but hath\ncommitted all judgment unto the Son; that all men should honour\nthe Son, even as they honour the Father: he that honoureth not the\nSon, honoureth not the Father which hath sent Him;\" He immediately\nadds, \"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word and\nbelieveth on Him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not\ncome into judgment; but is passed from death to life.\"[693] Here\nHe said that believers on Him should not come into judgment. How,\nthen, shall they be separated from the wicked by judgment, and be\nset at His right hand, unless judgment be in this passage used for\ncondemnation? For into judgment, in this sense, they shall not come\nwho hear His word, and believe on Him that sent Him.\n\n\n       6. _What is the first resurrection, and what the second._\n\nAfter that He adds the words, \"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The\nhour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of\nthe Son of God; and they that hear shall live. For as the Father\nhath life in Himself; so hath He given to the Son to have life in\nHimself.\"[694] As yet He does not speak of the second resurrection,\nthat is, the resurrection of the body, which shall be in the end,\nbut of the first, which now is. It is for the sake of making this\ndistinction that He says, \"The hour is coming, and now is.\" Now this\nresurrection regards not the body, but the soul. For souls, too,\nhave a death of their own in wickedness and sins, whereby they are\nthe dead of whom the same lips say, \"Suffer the dead to bury their\ndead,\"[695]--that is, let those who are dead in soul bury them that\nare dead in body. It is of these dead, then--the dead in ungodliness\nand wickedness--that He says, \"The hour is coming, and now is, when\nthe dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear\nshall live.\" \"They that hear,\" that is, they who obey, believe, and\npersevere to the end. Here no difference is made between the good\nand the bad. For it is good for all men to hear His voice and live,\nby passing to the life of godliness from the death of ungodliness.\nOf this death the Apostle Paul says, \"Therefore all are dead, and He\ndied for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto\nthemselves, but unto Him which died for them and rose again.\"[696]\nThus all, without one exception, were dead in sins, whether original\nor voluntary sins, sins of ignorance, or sins committed against\nknowledge; and for all the dead there died the one only person who\nlived, that is, who had no sin whatever, in order that they who\nlive by the remission of their sins should live, not to themselves,\nbut to Him who died for all, for our sins, and rose again for our\njustification, that we, believing in Him who justifies the ungodly,\nand being justified from ungodliness or quickened from death, may be\nable to attain to the first resurrection which now is. For in this\nfirst resurrection none have a part save those who shall be eternally\nblessed; but in the second, of which He goes on to speak, all, as we\nshall learn, have a part, both the blessed and the wretched. The one\nis the resurrection of mercy, the other of judgment. And therefore it\nis written in the psalm, \"I will sing of mercy and of judgment: unto\nThee, O Lord, will I sing.\"[697]\n\nAnd of this judgment He went on to say, \"And hath given Him authority\nto execute judgment also, because He is the Son of man.\" Here He\nshows that He will come to judge in that flesh in which He had come\nto be judged. For it is to show this He says, \"because He is the\nSon of man.\" And then follow the words for our purpose: \"Marvel not\nat this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the\ngraves shall hear His voice, and shall come forth; they that have\ndone good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done\nevil, unto the resurrection of judgment.\"[698] This judgment He uses\nhere in the same sense as a little before, when He says, \"He that\nheareth my word, and believeth on Him that sent me, hath everlasting\nlife, and shall not come into _judgment_, but is passed from death\nto life;\" _i.e._, by having a part in the first resurrection, by\nwhich a transition from death to life is made in this present time,\nhe shall not come into damnation, which He mentions by the name of\njudgment, as also in the place where He says, \"but they that have\ndone evil unto the resurrection of judgment,\" _i.e._ of damnation.\nHe, therefore, who would not be damned in the second resurrection,\nlet him rise in the first. For \"the hour is coming, and now is, when\nthe dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear\nshall live,\" _i.e._ shall not come into damnation, which is called\nthe second death; into which death, after the second or bodily\nresurrection, they shall be hurled who do not rise in the first or\nspiritual resurrection. For \"the hour is coming\" (but here He does\nnot say, \"and now is,\" because it shall come in the end of the world\nin the last and greatest judgment of God) \"when all that are in\nthe graves shall hear His voice and shall come forth.\" He does not\nsay, as in the first resurrection, \"And they that hear shall live.\"\nFor all shall not live, at least with such life as ought alone to\nbe called life because it alone is blessed. For some kind of life\nthey must have in order to hear, and come forth from the graves in\ntheir rising bodies. And why all shall not live He teaches in the\nwords that follow: \"They that have done good, to the resurrection of\nlife,\"--these are they who shall live; \"but they that have done evil,\nto the resurrection of judgment,\"--these are they who shall not live,\nfor they shall die in the second death. They have done evil because\ntheir life has been evil; and their life has been evil because it has\nnot been renewed in the first or spiritual resurrection which now is,\nor because they have not persevered to the end in their renewed life.\nAs, then, there are two regenerations, of which I have already made\nmention,--the one according to faith, and which takes place in the\npresent life by means of baptism; the other according to the flesh,\nand which shall be accomplished in its incorruption and immortality\nby means of the great and final judgment,--so are there also two\nresurrections,--the one the first and spiritual resurrection, which\nhas place in this life, and preserves us from coming into the second\ndeath; the other the second, which does not occur now, but in the end\nof the world, and which is of the body, not of the soul, and which by\nthe last judgment shall dismiss some into the second death, others\ninto that life which has no death.\n\n\n  7. _What is written in the Revelation of John regarding the two\n      resurrections, and the thousand years, and what may reasonably\n      be held on these points._\n\nThe evangelist John has spoken of these two resurrections in the\nbook which is called the Apocalypse, but in such a way that some\nChristians do not understand the first of the two, and so construe\nthe passage into ridiculous fancies. For the Apostle John says in\nthe foresaid book, \"And I saw an angel come down from heaven....\nBlessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on\nsuch the second death hath no power; but they shall be priests of\nGod and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.\"[699]\nThose who, on the strength of this passage, have suspected that the\nfirst resurrection is future and bodily, have been moved, among other\nthings, specially by the number of a thousand years, as if it were a\nfit thing that the saints should thus enjoy a kind of Sabbath-rest\nduring that period, a holy leisure after the labours of the six\nthousand years since man was created, and was on account of his great\nsin dismissed from the blessedness of paradise into the woes of this\nmortal life, so that thus, as it is written, \"One day is with the\nLord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day,\"[700]\nthere should follow on the completion of six thousand years, as of\nsix days, a kind of seventh-day Sabbath in the succeeding thousand\nyears; and that it is for this purpose the saints rise, viz. to\ncelebrate this Sabbath. And this opinion would not be objectionable,\nif it were believed that the joys of the saints in that Sabbath\nshall be spiritual, and consequent on the presence of God; for I\nmyself, too, once held this opinion.[701] But, as they assert that\nthose who then rise again shall enjoy the leisure of immoderate\ncarnal banquets, furnished with an amount of meat and drink such as\nnot only to shock the feeling of the temperate, but even to surpass\nthe measure of credulity itself, such assertions can be believed\nonly by the carnal. They who do believe them are called by the\nspiritual Chiliasts, which we may literally reproduce by the name\nMillenarians.[702] It were a tedious process to refute these opinions\npoint by point: we prefer proceeding to show how that passage of\nScripture should be understood.\n\nThe Lord Jesus Christ Himself says, \"No man can enter into a strong\nman's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong\nman,\"[703]--meaning by the strong man the devil, because he had power\nto take captive the human race; and meaning by his goods which he\nwas to take, those who had been held by the devil in divers sins\nand iniquities, but were to become believers in Himself. It was\nthen for the binding of this strong one that the apostle saw in the\nApocalypse \"an angel coming down from heaven, having the key of the\nabyss, and a chain in his hand. And he laid hold,\" he says, \"on the\ndragon, that old serpent, which is called the devil and Satan, and\nbound him a thousand years,\"--that is, bridled and restrained his\npower so that he could not seduce and gain possession of those who\nwere to be freed. Now the thousand years may be understood in two\nways, so far as occurs to me: either because these things happen in\nthe sixth thousand of years or sixth millennium (the latter part of\nwhich is now passing), as if during the sixth day, which is to be\nfollowed by a Sabbath which has no evening, the endless rest of the\nsaints, so that, speaking of a part under the name of the whole, he\ncalls the last part of the millennium--the part, that is, which had\nyet to expire before the end of the world--a thousand years; or he\nused the thousand years as an equivalent for the whole duration of\nthis world, employing the number of perfection to mark the fulness\nof time. For a thousand is the cube of ten. For ten times ten makes\na hundred, that is, the square on a plane superficies. But to give\nthis superficies height, and make it a cube, the hundred is again\nmultiplied by ten, which gives a thousand. Besides, if a hundred is\nsometimes used for totality, as when the Lord said by way of promise\nto him that left all and followed Him, \"He shall receive in this\nworld an hundredfold;\"[704] of which the apostle gives, as it were,\nan explanation when he says, \"As having nothing, yet possessing all\nthings,\"[705]--for even of old it had been said, The whole world is\nthe wealth of a believer,--with how much greater reason is a thousand\nput for totality since it is the cube, while the other is only the\nsquare? And for the same reason we cannot better interpret the words\nof the psalm, \"He hath been mindful of His covenant for ever, the\nword which He commanded to a thousand generations,\"[706] than by\nunderstanding it to mean \"to all generations.\"\n\n\"And he cast him into the abyss,\"--_i.e._ cast the devil into the\nabyss. By the _abyss_ is meant the countless multitude of the wicked\nwhose hearts are unfathomably deep in malignity against the Church of\nGod; not that the devil was not there before, but he is said to be\ncast in thither, because, when prevented from harming believers, he\ntakes more complete possession of the ungodly. For that man is more\nabundantly possessed by the devil who is not only alienated from God,\nbut also gratuitously hates those who serve God. \"And shut him up,\nand set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more\ntill the thousand years should be fulfilled.\" \"Shut him up,\"--_i.e._\nprohibited him from going out, from doing what was forbidden. And the\naddition of \"set a seal upon him\" seems to me to mean that it was\ndesigned to keep it a secret who belonged to the devil's party and\nwho did not. For in this world this is a secret, for we cannot tell\nwhether even the man who seems to stand shall fall, or whether he who\nseems to lie shall rise again. But by the chain and prisonhouse of\nthis interdict the devil is prohibited and restrained from seducing\nthose nations which belong to Christ, but which he formerly seduced\nor held in subjection. For before the foundation of the world God\nchose to rescue these from the power of darkness, and to translate\nthem into the kingdom of the Son of His love, as the apostle\nsays.[707] For what Christian is not aware that he seduces nations\neven now, and draws them with himself to eternal punishment, but not\nthose predestined to eternal life? And let no one be dismayed by the\ncircumstance that the devil often seduces even those who have been\nregenerated in Christ, and begun to walk in God's way. For \"the Lord\nknoweth them that are His,\"[708] and of these the devil seduces none\nto eternal damnation. For it is as God, from whom nothing is hid even\nof things future, that the Lord knows them; not as a man, who sees a\nman at the present time (if he can be said to see one whose heart he\ndoes not see), but does not see even himself so far as to be able to\nknow what kind of person he is to be. The devil, then, is bound and\nshut up in the abyss that he may not seduce the nations from which\nthe Church is gathered, and which he formerly seduced before the\nChurch existed. For it is not said \"that he should not seduce any\nman,\" but \"that he should not seduce the nations\"--meaning, no doubt,\nthose among which the Church exists--\"till the thousand years should\nbe fulfilled,\"--_i.e._ either what remains of the sixth day which\nconsists of a thousand years, or all the years which are to elapse\ntill the end of the world.\n\nThe words, \"that he should not seduce the nations till the thousand\nyears should be fulfilled,\" are not to be understood as indicating\nthat afterwards he is to seduce only those nations from which\nthe predestined Church is composed, and from seducing whom he is\nrestrained by that chain and imprisonment; but they are used in\nconformity with that usage frequently employed in Scripture and\nexemplified in the psalm, \"So our eyes wait upon the Lord our God,\nuntil He have mercy upon us,\"[709]--not as if the eyes of His\nservants would no longer wait upon the Lord their God when He had\nmercy upon them. Or the order of the words is unquestionably this,\n\"And he shut him up and set a seal upon him, till the thousand\nyears should be fulfilled;\" and the interposed clause, \"that he\nshould seduce the nations no more,\" is not to be understood in the\nconnection in which it stands, but separately, and as if added\nafterwards, so that the whole sentence might be read, \"And He shut\nhim up and set a seal upon him till the thousand years should be\nfulfilled, that he should seduce the nations no more,\"--_i.e._ he is\nshut up till the thousand years be fulfilled, on this account, that\nhe may no more deceive the nations.\n\n\n             8. _Of the binding and loosing of the devil._\n\n\"After that,\" says John, \"he must be loosed a little season.\" If the\nbinding and shutting up of the devil means his being made unable to\nseduce the Church, must his loosing be the recovery of this ability? By\nno means. For the Church predestined and elected before the foundation\nof the world, the Church of which it is said, \"The Lord knoweth them\nthat are His,\" shall never be seduced by him. And yet there shall be\na Church in this world even when the devil shall be loosed, as there\nhas been since the beginning, and shall be always, the places of the\ndying being filled by new believers. For a little after John says that\nthe devil, being loosed, shall draw the nations whom he has seduced in\nthe whole world to make war against the Church, and that the number of\nthese enemies shall be as the sand of the sea. \"And they went up on\nthe breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about,\nand the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven and\ndevoured them. And the devil who seduced them was cast into the lake\nof fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and\nshall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.\"[710] This relates\nto the last judgment, but I have thought fit to mention it now, lest\nany one might suppose that in that short time during which the devil\nshall be loose there shall be no Church upon earth, whether because\nthe devil finds no Church, or destroys it by manifold persecutions.\nThe devil, then, is not bound during the whole time which this book\nembraces,--that is, from the first coming of Christ to the end of the\nworld, when He shall come the second time,--not bound in this sense,\nthat during this interval, which goes by the name of a thousand years,\nhe shall not seduce the Church, for not even when loosed shall he\nseduce it. For certainly if his being bound means that he is not able\nor not permitted to seduce the Church, what can the loosing of him\nmean but his being able or permitted to do so? But God forbid that\nsuch should be the case! But the binding of the devil is his being\nprevented from the exercise of his whole power to seduce men, either\nby violently forcing or fraudulently deceiving them into taking part\nwith him. If he were during so long a period permitted to assail the\nweakness of men, very many persons, such as God would not wish to\nexpose to such temptation, would have their faith overthrown, or would\nbe prevented from believing; and that this might not happen, he is\nbound.\n\nBut when the short time comes he shall be loosed. For he shall rage\nwith the whole force of himself and his angels for three years and\nsix months; and those with whom he makes war shall have power to\nwithstand all his violence and stratagems. And if he were never\nloosed, his malicious power would be less patent, and less proof\nwould be given of the stedfast fortitude of the holy city: it would,\nin short, be less manifest what good use the Almighty makes of his\ngreat evil. For the Almighty does not absolutely seclude the saints\nfrom his temptation, but shelters only their inner man, where faith\nresides, that by outward temptation they may grow in grace. And He\nbinds him that he may not, in the free and eager exercise of his\nmalice, hinder or destroy the faith of those countless weak persons,\nalready believing or yet to believe, from whom the Church must be\nincreased and completed; and he will in the end loose him, that the\ncity of God may see how mighty an adversary it has conquered, to\nthe great glory of its Redeemer, Helper, Deliverer. And what are we\nin comparison with those believers and saints who shall then exist,\nseeing that they shall be tested by the loosing of an enemy with whom\nwe make war at the greatest peril even when he is bound? Although it\nis also certain that even in this intervening period there have been\nand are some soldiers of Christ so wise and strong, that if they were\nto be alive in this mortal condition at the time of his loosing, they\nwould both most wisely guard against, and most patiently endure, all\nhis snares and assaults.\n\nNow the devil was thus bound not only when the Church began to be\nmore and more widely extended among the nations beyond Judea, but is\nnow and shall be bound till the end of the world, when he is to be\nloosed. Because even now men are, and doubtless to the end of the\nworld shall be, converted to the faith from the unbelief in which he\nheld them. And this strong one is bound in each instance in which he\nis spoiled of one of his goods; and the abyss in which he is shut up\nis not at an end when those die who were alive when first he was shut\nup in it, but these have been succeeded, and shall to the end of the\nworld be succeeded, by others born after them with a like hate of the\nChristians, and in the depth of whose blind hearts he is continually\nshut up as in an abyss. But it is a question whether, during these\nthree years and six months when he shall be loose, and raging with\nall his force, any one who has not previously believed shall attach\nhimself to the faith. For how in that case would the words hold good,\n\"Who entereth into the house of a strong one to spoil his goods,\nunless first he shall have bound the strong one?\" Consequently this\nverse seems to compel us to believe that during that time, short as\nit is, no one will be added to the Christian community, but that the\ndevil will make war with those who have previously become Christians,\nand that, though some of these may be conquered and desert to the\ndevil, these do not belong to the predestinated number of the sons\nof God: For it is not without reason that John, the same apostle as\nwrote this Apocalypse, says in his epistle regarding certain persons,\n\"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been\nof us, they would no doubt have remained with us.\"[711] But what\nshall become of the little ones? For it is beyond all belief that in\nthese days there shall not be found some Christian children born, but\nnot yet baptized, and that there shall not also be some born during\nthat very period; and if there be such, we cannot believe that their\nparents shall not find some way of bringing them to the laver of\nregeneration. But if this shall be the case, how shall these goods\nbe snatched from the devil when he is loose, since into his house no\nman enters to spoil his goods unless he has first bound him? On the\ncontrary, we are rather to believe that in these days there shall be\nno lack either of those who fall away from, or of those who attach\nthemselves to the Church; but there shall be such resoluteness, both\nin parents to seek baptism for their little ones, and in those who\nshall then first believe, that they shall conquer that strong one,\neven though unbound,--that is, shall both vigilantly comprehend,\nand patiently bear up against him, though employing such wiles and\nputting forth such force as he never before used; and thus they\nshall be snatched from him even though unbound. And yet the verse of\nthe Gospel will not be untrue, \"Who entereth into the house of the\nstrong one to spoil his goods, unless he shall first have bound the\nstrong one?\" For in accordance with this true saying that order is\nobserved--the strong one first bound, and then his goods spoiled; for\nthe Church is so increased by the weak and strong from all nations\nfar and near, that by its most robust faith in things divinely\npredicted and accomplished, it shall be able to spoil the goods of\neven the unbound devil. For as we must own that, \"when iniquity\nabounds, the love of many waxes cold,\"[712] and that those who have\nnot been written in the book of life shall in large numbers yield\nto the severe and unprecedented persecutions and stratagems of the\ndevil now loosed, so we cannot but think that not only those whom\nthat time shall find sound in the faith, but also some who till then\nshall be without, shall become firm in the faith they have hitherto\nrejected, and mighty to conquer the devil even though unbound, God's\ngrace aiding them to understand the Scriptures, in which, among other\nthings, there is foretold that very end which they themselves see to\nbe arriving. And if this shall be so, his binding is to be spoken of\nas preceding, that there might follow a spoiling of him both bound\nand loosed; for it is of this it is said, \"Who shall enter into the\nhouse of the strong one to spoil his goods, unless he shall first\nhave bound the strong one?\"\n\n\n   9. _What the reign of the saints with Christ for a thousand years\n           is, and how it differs from the eternal kingdom._\n\nBut while the devil is bound, the saints reign with Christ during the\nsame thousand years, understood in the same way, that is, of the time\nof His first coming.[713] For, leaving out of account that kingdom\nconcerning which He shall say in the end, \"Come, ye blessed of my\nFather, take possession of the kingdom prepared for you,\"[714] the\nChurch could not now be called His kingdom or the kingdom of heaven\nunless His saints were even now reigning with Him, though in another\nand far different way; for to His saints He says, \"Lo, I am with you\nalways, even to the end of the world.\"[715] Certainly it is in this\npresent time that the scribe well instructed in the kingdom of God, and\nof whom we have already spoken, brings forth from his treasure things\nnew and old. And from the Church those reapers shall gather out the\ntares which He suffered to grow with the wheat till the harvest, as He\nexplains in the words, \"The harvest is the end of the world; and the\nreapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered together\nand burned with fire, so shall it be in the end of the world. The Son\nof man shall send His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom\nall offences.\"[716] Can He mean out of that kingdom in which are no\noffences? Then it must be out of His present kingdom, the Church, that\nthey are gathered. So He says, \"He that breaketh one of the least of\nthese commandments, and teacheth men so, shall be called least in\nthe kingdom of heaven: but he that doeth and teacheth thus shall be\ncalled great in the kingdom of heaven.\"[717] He speaks of both as\nbeing in the kingdom of heaven, both the man who does not perform the\ncommandments which He teaches,--for \"to break\" means not to keep, not\nto perform,--and the man who does and teaches as He did; but the one\nHe calls least, the other great. And He immediately adds, \"For I say\nunto you, that except your righteousness exceed that of the scribes and\nPharisees,\"--that is, the righteousness of those who break what they\nteach; for of the scribes and Pharisees He elsewhere says, \"For they\nsay and do not;\"[718]--unless, therefore, your righteousness exceed\ntheirs, that is, so that you do not break but rather do what you teach,\n\"ye shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.\"[719] We must understand in\none sense the kingdom of heaven in which exist together both he who\nbreaks what he teaches and he who does it, the one being least, the\nother great, and in another sense the kingdom of heaven into which only\nhe who does what he teaches shall enter. Consequently, where both\nclasses exist, it is the Church as it now is, but where only the one\nshall exist, it is the Church as it is destined to be when no wicked\nperson shall be in her. Therefore the Church even now is the kingdom\nof Christ, and the kingdom of heaven. Accordingly, even now His saints\nreign with Him, though otherwise than as they shall reign hereafter;\nand yet, though the tares grow in the Church along with the wheat, they\ndo not reign with Him. For they reign with Him who do what the apostle\nsays, \"If ye be risen with Christ, mind the things which are above,\nwhere Christ sitteth at the right hand of God. Seek those things which\nare above, not the things which are on the earth.\"[720] Of such persons\nhe also says that their conversation is in heaven.[721] In fine, they\nreign with Him who are so in His kingdom that they themselves are His\nkingdom. But in what sense are those the kingdom of Christ who, to say\nno more, though they are in it until all offences are gathered out of\nit at the end of the world, yet seek their own things in it, and not\nthe things that are Christ's?[722]\n\nIt is then of this kingdom militant, in which conflict with the\nenemy is still maintained, and war carried on with warring lusts,\nor government laid upon them as they yield, until we come to that\nmost peaceful kingdom in which we shall reign without an enemy,\nand it is of this first resurrection in the present life, that the\nApocalypse speaks in the words just quoted. For, after saying that\nthe devil is bound a thousand years and is afterwards loosed for a\nshort season, it goes on to give a sketch of what the Church does\nor of what is done in the Church in those days, in the words, \"And\nI saw seats and them that sat upon them, and judgment was given.\"\nIt is not to be supposed that this refers to the last judgment, but\nto the seats of the rulers and to the rulers themselves by whom the\nChurch is now governed. And no better interpretation of judgment\nbeing given can be produced than that which we have in the words,\n\"What ye bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and what ye loose\non earth shall be loosed in heaven.\"[723] Whence the apostle says,\n\"What have I to do with judging them that are without? do not ye\njudge them that are within?\"[724] \"And the souls,\" says John, \"of\nthose who were slain for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of\nGod,\"--understanding what he afterwards says, \"reigned with Christ\na thousand years,\"[725]--that is, the souls of the martyrs not yet\nrestored to their bodies. For the souls of the pious dead are not\nseparated from the Church, which even now is the kingdom of Christ;\notherwise there would be no remembrance made of them at the altar\nof God in the partaking of the body of Christ, nor would it do any\ngood in danger to run to His baptism, that we might not pass from\nthis life without it; nor to reconciliation, if by penitence or a bad\nconscience any one may be severed from His body. For why are these\nthings practised, if not because the faithful, even though dead, are\nHis members? Therefore, while these thousand years run on, their\nsouls reign with Him, though not as yet in conjunction with their\nbodies. And therefore in another part of this same book we read,\n\"Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from henceforth: and now,\nsaith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; for their\nworks do follow them.\"[726] The Church, then, begins its reign with\nChrist now in the living and in the dead. For, as the apostle says,\n\"Christ died that He might be Lord both of the living and of the\ndead.\"[727] But he mentioned the souls of the martyrs only, because\nthey who have contended even to death for the truth, themselves\nprincipally reign after death; but, taking the part for the whole, we\nunderstand the words of all others who belong to the Church, which is\nthe kingdom of Christ.\n\nAs to the words following, \"And if any have not worshipped the beast\nnor his image, nor have received his inscription on their forehead,\nor on their hand,\" we must take them of both the living and the\ndead. And what this beast is, though it requires a more careful\ninvestigation, yet it is not inconsistent with the true faith to\nunderstand it of the ungodly city itself, and the community of\nunbelievers set in opposition to the faithful people and the city\nof God. \"His image\" seems to me to mean his simulation, to wit, in\nthose men who profess to believe, but live as unbelievers. For they\npretend to be what they are not, and are called Christians, not\nfrom a true likeness, but from a deceitful image. For to this beast\nbelong not only the avowed enemies of the name of Christ and His most\nglorious city, but also the tares which are to be gathered out of\nHis kingdom, the Church, in the end of the world. And who are they\nwho do not worship the beast and his image, if not those who do what\nthe apostle says, \"Be not yoked with unbelievers?\"[728] For such do\nnot worship, _i.e._ do not consent, are not subjected; neither do\nthey receive the inscription, the brand of crime, on their forehead\nby their profession, on their hand by their practice. They, then,\nwho are free from these pollutions, whether they still live in this\nmortal flesh, or are dead, reign with Christ even now, through this\nwhole interval which is indicated by the thousand years, in a fashion\nsuited to this time.\n\n\"The rest of them,\" he says, \"did not live.\" For now is the hour when\nthe dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear\nshall live; and the rest of them shall not live. The words added,\n\"until the thousand years are finished,\" mean that they did not live\nin the time in which they ought to have lived by passing from death\nto life. And therefore, when the day of the bodily resurrection\narrives, they shall come out of their graves, not to life, but to\njudgment, namely, to damnation, which is called the second death.\nFor whosoever has not lived until the thousand years be finished,\n_i.e._ during this whole time in which the first resurrection is\ngoing on,--whosoever has not heard the voice of the Son of God, and\npassed from death to life,--that man shall certainly in the second\nresurrection, the resurrection of the flesh, pass with his flesh\ninto the second death. For he goes on to say, \"This is the first\nresurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first\nresurrection,\" or who experiences it. Now he experiences it who not\nonly revives from the death of sin, but continues in this renewed\nlife. \"In these the second death hath no power.\" Therefore it has\npower in the rest, of whom he said above, \"The rest of them did not\nlive until the thousand years were finished;\" for in this whole\nintervening time, called a thousand years, however lustily they\nlived in the body, they were not quickened to life out of that death\nin which their wickedness held them, so that by this revived life\nthey should become partakers of the first resurrection, and so the\nsecond death should have no power over them.\n\n\n    10. _What is to be replied to those who think that resurrection\n              pertains only to bodies and not to souls._\n\nThere are some who suppose that resurrection can be predicated only\nof the body, and therefore they contend that this first resurrection\n(of the Apocalypse) is a bodily resurrection. For, say they, \"to\nrise again\" can only be said of things that fall. Now, bodies fall\nin death.[729] There cannot, therefore, be a resurrection of souls,\nbut of bodies. But what do they say to the apostle who speaks of a\nresurrection of souls? For certainly it was in the inner and not the\nouter man that those had risen again to whom he says, \"If ye have\nrisen with Christ, mind the things that are above.\"[730] The same\nsense he elsewhere conveyed in other words, saying, \"That as Christ\nhas risen from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also may\nwalk in newness of life.\"[731] So, too, \"Awake thou that sleepest,\nand arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.\"[732] As\nto what they say about nothing being able to rise again but what\nfalls, whence they conclude that resurrection pertains to bodies\nonly, and not to souls, because bodies fall, why do they make nothing\nof the words, \"Ye that fear the Lord, wait for His mercy; and go\nnot aside lest ye fall;\"[733] and \"To his own Master he stands or\nfalls;\"[734] and \"He that thinketh he standeth, let him take heed\nlest he fall?\"[735] For I fancy this fall that we are to take heed\nagainst is a fall of the soul, not of the body. If, then, rising\nagain belongs to things that fall, and souls fall, it must be owned\nthat souls also rise again. To the words, \"In them the second death\nhath no power,\" are added the words, \"but they shall be priests of\nGod and Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years;\" and\nthis refers not to the bishops alone, and presbyters, who are now\nspecially called priests in the Church; but as we call all believers\nChristians on account of the mystical chrism, so we call all priests\nbecause they are members of the one Priest. Of them the Apostle Peter\nsays, \"A holy people, a royal priesthood.\"[736] Certainly he implied,\nthough in a passing and incidental way, that Christ is God, saying\npriests of God and Christ, that is, of the Father and the Son, though\nit was in His servant-form and as Son of man that Christ was made\na Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. But this we have\nalready explained more than once.\n\n\n 11. _Of Gog and Magog, who are to be roused by the devil to persecute\n        the Church, when he is loosed in the end of the world._\n\n\"And when the thousand years are finished, Satan shall be loosed\nfrom his prison, and shall go out to seduce the nations which are in\nthe four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, and shall draw them\nto battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea.\" This, then, is\nhis purpose in seducing them, to draw them to this battle. For even\nbefore this he was wont to use as many and various seductions as\nhe could continue. And the words \"he shall go out\" mean, he shall\nburst forth from lurking hatred into open persecution. For this\npersecution, occurring while the final judgment is imminent, shall\nbe the last which shall be endured by the holy Church throughout\nthe world, the whole city of Christ being assailed by the whole\ncity of the devil, as each exists on earth. For these nations which\nhe names Gog and Magog are not to be understood of some barbarous\nnations in some part of the world, whether the Get\u00e6 and Massaget\u00e6,\nas some conclude from the initial letters, or some other foreign\nnations not under the Roman government. For John marks that they are\nspread over the whole earth, when he says, \"The nations which are\nin the four corners of the earth,\" and he added that these are Gog\nand Magog. The meaning of these names we find to be, Gog, \"a roof,\"\nMagog, \"from a roof,\"--a house, as it were, and he who comes out of\nthe house. They are therefore the nations in which we found that the\ndevil was shut up as in an abyss, and the devil himself coming out\nfrom them and going forth, so that they are the roof, he from the\nroof. Or if we refer both words to the nations, not one to them and\none to the devil, then they are both the roof, because in them the\nold enemy is at present shut up, and as it were roofed in; and they\nshall be from the roof when they break forth from concealed to open\nhatred. The words, \"And they went up on the breadth of the earth,\nand encompassed the camp of the saints and the beloved city,\" do not\nmean that they have come, or shall come, to one place, as if the camp\nof the saints and the beloved city should be in some one place; for\nthis camp is nothing else than the Church of Christ extending over\nthe whole world. And consequently wherever the Church shall be,--and\nit shall be in all nations, as is signified by \"the breadth of the\nearth,\"--there also shall be the camp of the saints and the beloved\ncity, and there it shall be encompassed by the savage persecution\nof all its enemies; for they too shall exist along with it in all\nnations,--that is, it shall be straitened, and hard pressed, and shut\nup in the straits of tribulation, but shall not desert its military\nduty, which is signified by the word \"camp.\"\n\n\n    12. _Whether the fire that came down out of heaven and devoured\n          them refers to the last punishment of the wicked._\n\nThe words, \"And fire came down out of heaven and devoured them,\" are\nnot to be understood of the final punishment which shall be inflicted\nwhen it is said, \"Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting\nfire;\"[737] for then they shall be cast into the fire, not fire come\ndown out of heaven upon them. In this place \"fire out of heaven\" is\nwell understood of the firmness of the saints, wherewith they refuse\nto yield obedience to those who rage against them. For the firmament\nis \"heaven,\" by whose firmness these assailants shall be pained with\nblazing zeal, for they shall be impotent to draw away the saints to\nthe party of Antichrist. This is the fire which shall devour them,\nand this is \"from God;\" for it is by God's grace the saints become\nunconquerable, and so torment their enemies. For as in a good sense\nit is said, \"The zeal of Thine house hath consumed me,\"[738] so\nin a bad sense it is said, \"Zeal hath possessed the uninstructed\npeople, and now fire shall consume the enemies.\"[739] \"And now,\"\nthat is to say, not the fire of the last judgment. Or if by this fire\ncoming down out of heaven and consuming them, John meant that blow\nwherewith Christ in His coming is to strike those persecutors of the\nChurch whom He shall then find alive upon earth, when He shall kill\nAntichrist with the breath of His mouth,[740] then even this is not\nthe last judgment of the wicked; but the last judgment is that which\nthey shall suffer when the bodily resurrection has taken place.\n\n\n     13. _Whether the time of the persecution of Antichrist should\n                  be reckoned in the thousand years._\n\nThis last persecution by Antichrist shall last for three years and\nsix months, as we have already said, and as is affirmed both in\nthe book of Revelation and by Daniel the prophet. Though this time\nis brief, yet not without reason is it questioned whether it is\ncomprehended in the thousand years in which the devil is bound and\nthe saints reign with Christ, or whether this little season should\nbe added over and above to these years. For if we say that they are\nincluded in the thousand years, then the saints reign with Christ\nduring a more protracted period than the devil is bound. For they\nshall reign with their King and Conqueror mightily even in that\ncrowning persecution when the devil shall now be unbound and shall\nrage against them with all his might. How then does Scripture define\nboth the binding of the devil and the reign of the saints by the same\nthousand years, if the binding of the devil ceases three years and\nsix months before this reign of the saints with Christ? On the other\nhand, if we say that the brief space of this persecution is not to be\nreckoned as a part of the thousand years, but rather as an additional\nperiod, we shall indeed be able to interpret the words, \"The priests\nof God and of Christ shall reign with Him a thousand years; and when\nthe thousand years shall be finished, Satan shall be loosed out of\nhis prison;\" for thus they signify that the reign of the saints and\nthe bondage of the devil shall cease simultaneously, so that the time\nof the persecution we speak of should be contemporaneous neither with\nthe reign of the saints nor with the imprisonment of Satan, but\nshould be reckoned over and above as a superadded portion of time.\nBut then in this case we are forced to admit that the saints shall\nnot reign with Christ during that persecution. But who can dare to\nsay that His members shall not reign with Him at that very juncture\nwhen they shall most of all, and with the greatest fortitude, cleave\nto Him, and when the glory of resistance and the crown of martyrdom\nshall be more conspicuous in proportion to the hotness of the battle?\nOr if it is suggested that they may be said not to reign, because of\nthe tribulations which they shall suffer, it will follow that all\nthe saints who have formerly, during the thousand years, suffered\ntribulation, shall not be said to have reigned with Christ during the\nperiod of their tribulation, and consequently even those whose souls\nthe author of this book says that he saw, and who were slain for the\ntestimony of Jesus and the word of God, did not reign with Christ\nwhen they were suffering persecution, and they were not themselves\nthe kingdom of Christ, though Christ was then pre-eminently\npossessing them. This is indeed perfectly absurd, and to be scouted.\nBut assuredly the victorious souls of the glorious martyrs, having\novercome and finished all griefs and toils, and having laid down\ntheir mortal members, have reigned, and do reign, with Christ till\nthe thousand years are finished, that they may afterwards reign with\nHim when they have received their immortal bodies. And therefore\nduring these three years and a half the souls of those who were slain\nfor His testimony, both those which formerly passed from the body and\nthose which shall pass in that last persecution, shall reign with\nHim till the mortal world come to an end, and pass into that kingdom\nin which there shall be no death. And thus the reign of the saints\nwith Christ shall last longer than the bonds and imprisonment of the\ndevil, because they shall reign with their King the Son of God for\nthese three years and a half during which the devil is no longer\nbound. It remains, therefore, that when we read that \"the priests of\nGod and of Christ shall reign with Him a thousand years; and when\nthe thousand years are finished, the devil shall be loosed from his\nimprisonment,\" that we understand either that the thousand years of\nthe reign of the saints does not terminate, though the imprisonment\nof the devil does,--so that both parties have their thousand years,\nthat is, their complete time, yet each with a different actual\nduration appropriate to itself, the kingdom of the saints being\nlonger, the imprisonment of the devil shorter,--or at least that, as\nthree years and six months is a very short time, it is not reckoned\nas either deducted from the whole time of Satan's imprisonment, or as\nadded to the whole duration of the reign of the saints, as we have\nshown above in the sixteenth book[741] regarding the round number\nof four hundred years, which were specified as four hundred, though\nactually somewhat more; and similar expressions are often found in\nthe sacred writings, if one will mark them.\n\n  14. _Of the damnation of the devil and his adherents; and a sketch\n      of the bodily resurrection of all the dead, and of the final\n      retributive judgment._\n\nAfter this mention of the closing persecution, he summarily indicates\nall that the devil, and the city of which he is the prince, shall\nsuffer in the last judgment. For he says, \"And the devil who seduced\nthem is cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, in which are the\nbeast and the false prophet, and they shall be tormented day and\nnight for ever and ever.\" We have already said that by the beast\nis well understood the wicked city. His false prophet is either\nAntichrist or that image or figment of which we have spoken in\nthe same place. After this he gives a brief narrative of the last\njudgment itself, which shall take place at the second or bodily\nresurrection of the dead, as it had been revealed to him: \"I saw a\nthrone great and white, and One sitting on it from whose face the\nheaven and the earth fled away, and their place was not found.\" He\ndoes not say, \"I saw a throne great and white, and One sitting on\nit, and from His face the heaven and the earth fled away,\" for it\nhad not happened then, _i.e._ before the living and the dead were\njudged; but he says that he saw Him sitting on the throne from\nwhose face heaven and earth fled away, but afterwards. For when the\njudgment is finished, this heaven and earth shall cease to be, and\nthere will be a new heaven and a new earth. For this world shall pass\naway by transmutation, not by absolute destruction. And therefore\nthe apostle says, \"For the figure of this world passeth away. I\nwould have you be without anxiety.\"[742] The figure, therefore,\npasses away, not the nature. After John had said that he had seen\nOne sitting on the throne from whose face heaven and earth fled,\nthough not till afterwards, he said, \"And I saw the dead, great and\nsmall: and the books were opened; and another book was opened, which\nis the book of the life of each man: and the dead were judged out\nof those things which were written in the books, according to their\ndeeds.\" He said that the books were opened, and a book; but he left\nus at a loss as to the nature of this book, \"which is,\" he says, \"the\nbook of the life of each man.\" By those books, then, which he first\nmentioned, we are to understand the sacred books old and new, that\nout of them it might be shown what commandments God had enjoined; and\nthat book of the life of each man is to show what commandments each\nman has done or omitted to do. If this book be materially considered,\nwho can reckon its size or length, or the time it would take to\nread a book in which the whole life of every man is recorded? Shall\nthere be present as many angels as men, and shall each man hear his\nlife recited by the angel assigned to him? In that case there will\nbe not one book containing all the lives, but a separate book for\nevery life. But our passage requires us to think of one only. \"And\nanother book was opened,\" it says. We must therefore understand it\nof a certain divine power, by which it shall be brought about that\nevery one shall recall to memory all his own works, whether good or\nevil, and shall mentally survey them with a marvellous rapidity, so\nthat this knowledge will either accuse or excuse conscience, and\nthus all and each shall be simultaneously judged. And this divine\npower is called a book, because in it we shall as it were read all\nthat it causes us to remember. That he may show who the dead, small\nand great, are who are to be judged, he recurs to this which he had\nomitted or rather deferred, and says, \"And the sea presented the dead\nwhich were in it; and death and hell gave up the dead which were in\nthem.\" This of course took place before the dead were judged, yet it\nis mentioned after. And so, I say, he returns again to what he had\nomitted. But now he preserves the order of events, and for the sake\nof exhibiting it repeats in its own proper place what he had already\nsaid regarding the dead who were judged. For after he had said, \"And\nthe sea presented the dead which were in it, and death and hell gave\nup the dead which were in them,\" he immediately subjoined what he\nhad already said, \"and they were judged every man according to their\nworks.\" For this is just what he had said before, \"And the dead were\njudged according to their works.\"\n\n\n    15. _Who the dead are who are given up to judgment by the sea,\n                        and by death and hell._\n\nBut who are the dead which were in the sea, and which the sea\npresented? For we cannot suppose that those who die in the sea are\nnot in hell, nor that their bodies are preserved in the sea; nor\nyet, which is still more absurd, that the sea retained the good,\nwhile hell received the bad. Who could believe this? But some very\nsensibly suppose that in this place the sea is put for this world.\nWhen John then wished to signify that those whom Christ should find\nstill alive in the body were to be judged along with those who should\nrise again, he called them dead, both the good to whom it is said,\n\"For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God,\"[743] and\nthe wicked of whom it is said, \"Let the dead bury their dead.\"[744]\nThey may also be called dead, because they wear mortal bodies, as\nthe apostle says, \"The body indeed is dead because of sin; but the\nspirit is life because of righteousness;\"[745] proving that in a\nliving man in the body there is both a body which is dead, and a\nspirit which is life. Yet he did not say that the body was mortal,\nbut dead, although immediately after he speaks in the more usual\nway of mortal bodies. These, then, are the dead which were in the\nsea, and which the sea presented, to wit, the men who were in this\nworld, because they had not yet died, and whom the world presented\nfor judgment. \"And death and hell,\" he says, \"gave up the dead which\nwere in them.\" The sea _presented_ them because they had merely to\nbe found in the place where they were; but death and hell _gave them\nup_ or _restored_ them, because they called them back to life, which\nthey had already quitted. And perhaps it was not without reason that\nneither _death_ nor _hell_ were judged sufficient alone, and both\nwere mentioned,--death to indicate the good, who have suffered only\ndeath and not hell; hell to indicate the wicked, who suffer also the\npunishment of hell. For if it does not seem absurd to believe that\nthe ancient saints who believed in Christ and His then future coming,\nwere kept in places far removed indeed from the torments of the\nwicked, but yet in hell,[746] until Christ's blood and His descent\ninto these places delivered them, certainly good Christians, redeemed\nby that precious price already paid, are quite unacquainted with hell\nwhile they wait for their restoration to the body, and the reception\nof their reward. After saying, \"They were judged every man according\nto their works,\" he briefly added what the judgment was: \"Death and\nhell were cast into the lake of fire;\" by these names designating\nthe devil and the whole company of his angels, for he is the author\nof death and the pains of hell. For this is what he had already, by\nanticipation, said in clearer language: \"The devil who seduced them\nwas cast into a lake of fire and brimstone.\" The obscure addition he\nhad made in the words, \"in which were also the beast and the false\nprophet,\" he here explains, \"They who were not found written in the\nbook of life were cast into the lake of fire.\" This book is not for\nreminding God, as if things might escape Him by forgetfulness, but it\nsymbolizes His predestination of those to whom eternal life shall be\ngiven. For it is not that God is ignorant, and reads in the book to\ninform Himself, but rather His infallible prescience is the book of\nlife in which they are written, that is to say, known beforehand.\n\n\n              16. _Of the new heaven and the new earth._\n\nHaving finished the prophecy of judgment, so far as the wicked are\nconcerned, it remains that he speak also of the good. Having briefly\nexplained the Lord's words, \"These will go away into everlasting\npunishment,\" it remains that he explain the connected words, \"but\nthe righteous into life eternal.\"[747] \"And I saw,\" he says, \"a new\nheaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth have\npassed away; and there is no more sea.\"[748] This will take place in\nthe order which he has by anticipation declared in the words, \"I saw\nOne sitting on the throne, from whose face heaven and earth fled.\"\nFor as soon as those who are not written in the book of life have\nbeen judged and cast into eternal fire,--the nature of which fire,\nor its position in the world or universe, I suppose is known to no\nman, unless perhaps the divine Spirit reveal it to some one,--then\nshall the figure of this world pass away in a conflagration of\nuniversal fire, as once before the world was flooded with a deluge of\nuniversal water. And by this universal conflagration the qualities of\nthe corruptible elements which suited our corruptible bodies shall\nutterly perish, and our substance shall receive such qualities as\nshall, by a wonderful transmutation, harmonize with our immortal\nbodies, so that, as the world itself is renewed to some better thing,\nit is fitly accommodated to men, themselves renewed in their flesh\nto some better thing. As for the statement, \"And there shall be no\nmore sea,\" I would not lightly say whether it is dried up with that\nexcessive heat, or is itself also turned into some better thing.\nFor we read that there shall be a new heaven and a new earth, but I\ndo not remember to have anywhere read anything of a new sea, unless\nwhat I find in this same book, \"As it were a sea of glass like\ncrystal.\"[749] But he was not then speaking of this end of the world,\nneither does he seem to speak of a literal sea, but \"as it were a\nsea.\" It is possible that, as prophetic diction delights in mingling\nfigurative and real language, and thus in some sort veiling the\nsense, so the words \"And there is no more sea\" may be taken in the\nsame sense as the previous phrase, \"And the sea presented the dead\nwhich were in it.\" For then there shall be no more of this world, no\nmore of the surgings and restlessness of human life, and it is this\nwhich is symbolized by the _sea_.\n\n\n               17. _Of the endless glory of the Church._\n\n\"And I saw,\" he says, \"a great city, new Jerusalem, coming down from\nGod out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And\nI heard a great voice from the throne, saying, Behold, the tabernacle\nof God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be\nHis people, and God Himself shall be with them. And God shall wipe\naway all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death,\nneither sorrow, nor crying, but neither shall there be any more\npain: because the former things have passed away. And He that sat\nupon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new.\"[750] This city\nis said to come down out of heaven, because the grace with which\nGod formed it is of heaven. Wherefore He says to it by Isaiah, \"I\nam the Lord that formed thee.\"[751] It is indeed descended from\nheaven from its commencement, since its citizens during the course\nof this world grow by the grace of God, which cometh down from above\nthrough the laver of regeneration in the Holy Ghost sent down from\nheaven. But by God's final judgment, which shall be administered by\nHis Son Jesus Christ, there shall by God's grace be manifested a\nglory so pervading and so new, that no vestige of what is old shall\nremain; for even our bodies shall pass from their old corruption and\nmortality to new incorruption and immortality. For to refer this\npromise to the present time, in which the saints are reigning with\ntheir King a thousand years, seems to me excessively barefaced, when\nit is most distinctly said, \"God shall wipe away all tears from\ntheir eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor\ncrying, but there shall be no more pain.\" And who is so absurd, and\nblinded by contentious opinionativeness, as to be audacious enough\nto affirm that in the midst of the calamities of this mortal state,\nGod's people, or even one single saint, does live, or has ever\nlived, or shall ever live, without tears or pain,--the fact being\nthat the holier a man is, and the fuller of holy desire, so much\nthe more abundant is the tearfulness of his supplication? Are not\nthese the utterances of a citizen of the heavenly Jerusalem: \"My\ntears have been my meat day and night;\"[752] and \"Every night shall\nI make my bed to swim; with my tears shall I water my couch;\"[753]\nand \"My groaning is not hid from Thee;\"[754] and \"My sorrow was\nrenewed?\"[755] Or are not those God's children who groan, being\nburdened, not that they wish to be unclothed, but clothed upon, that\nmortality may be swallowed up of life?[756] Do not they even who have\nthe first-fruits of the Spirit groan within themselves, waiting for\nthe adoption, the redemption of their body?[757] Was not the Apostle\nPaul himself a citizen of the heavenly Jerusalem, and was he not so\nall the more when he had heaviness and continual sorrow of heart for\nhis Israelitish brethren?[758] But when shall there be no more death\nin that city, except when it shall be said, \"O death, where is thy\ncontention?[759] O death, where is thy sting? The sting of death\nis sin.\"[760] Obviously there shall be no sin when it can be said,\n\"Where is\"--But as for the present it is not some poor weak citizen\nof this city, but this same Apostle John himself who says, \"If we\nsay that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not\nin us.\"[761] No doubt, though this book is called the Apocalypse,\nthere are in it many obscure passages to exercise the mind of the\nreader, and there are few passages so plain as to assist us in the\ninterpretation of the others, even though we take pains; and this\ndifficulty is increased by the repetition of the same things, in\nforms so different, that the things referred to seem to be different,\nalthough in fact they are only differently stated. But in the words,\n\"God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no\nmore death, neither sorrow, nor crying, but there shall be no more\npain,\" there is so manifest a reference to the future world and the\nimmortality and eternity of the saints,--for only then and only there\nshall such a condition be realized,--that if we think this obscure,\nwe need not expect to find anything plain in any part of Scripture.\n\n\n  18. _What the Apostle Peter predicted regarding the last judgment._\n\nLet us now see what the Apostle Peter predicted concerning this\njudgment. \"There shall come,\" he says, \"in the last days scoffers....\nNevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a\nnew earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.\"[762] There is nothing said\nhere about the resurrection of the dead, but enough certainly regarding\nthe destruction of this world. And by his reference to the deluge he\nseems as it were to suggest to us how far we should believe the ruin\nof the world will extend in the end of the world. For he says that\nthe world which then was perished, and not only the earth itself, but\nalso the heavens, by which we understand the air, the place and room\nof which was occupied by the water. Therefore the whole, or almost the\nwhole, of the gusty atmosphere (which he calls heaven, or rather the\nheavens, meaning the earth's atmosphere, and not the upper air in which\nsun, moon, and stars are set) was turned into moisture, and in this\nway perished together with the earth, whose former appearance had been\ndestroyed by the deluge. \"But the heavens and the earth which are now,\nby the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day\nof judgment and perdition of ungodly men.\" Therefore the heavens and\nthe earth, or the world which was preserved from the water to stand in\nplace of that world which perished in the flood, is itself reserved to\nfire at last in the day of the judgment and perdition of ungodly men.\nHe does not hesitate to affirm that in this great change men also shall\nperish: their nature, however, shall notwithstanding continue, though\nin eternal punishments. Some one will perhaps put the question, If\nafter judgment is pronounced the world itself is to burn, where shall\nthe saints be during the conflagration, and before it is replaced by\na new heavens and a new earth, since somewhere they must be, because\nthey have material bodies? We may reply that they shall be in the upper\nregions into which the flame of that conflagration shall not ascend,\nas neither did the water of the flood; for they shall have such bodies\nthat they shall be wherever they wish. Moreover, when they have become\nimmortal and incorruptible, they shall not greatly dread the blaze of\nthat conflagration, as the corruptible and mortal bodies of the three\nmen were able to live unhurt in the blazing furnace.\n\n\n  19. _What the Apostle Paul wrote to the Thessalonians about the\n      manifestation of Antichrist which shall precede the day of the\n      Lord._\n\nI see that I must omit many of the statements of the gospels and\nepistles about this last judgment, that this volume may not become\nunduly long; but I can on no account omit what the Apostle Paul says,\nin writing to the Thessalonians, \"We beseech you, brethren, by the\ncoming of our Lord Jesus Christ,\"[763] etc.\n\nNo one can doubt that he wrote this of Antichrist and of the day\nof judgment, which he here calls the day of the Lord, nor that he\ndeclared that this day should not come unless he first came who is\ncalled the apostate--apostate, to wit, from the Lord God. And if this\nmay justly be said of all the ungodly, how much more of him? But it\nis uncertain in what temple he shall sit, whether in that ruin of the\ntemple which was built by Solomon, or in the Church; for the apostle\nwould not call the temple of any idol or demon the temple of God.\nAnd on this account some think that in this passage Antichrist means\nnot the prince himself alone, but his whole body, that is, the mass\nof men who adhere to him, along with him their prince; and they also\nthink that we should render the Greek more exactly were we to read,\nnot \"in the temple of God,\" but \"for\" or \"as the temple of God,\" as\nif he himself were the temple of God, the Church.[764] Then as for\nthe words, \"And now ye know what withholdeth,\" _i.e._ ye know what\nhindrance or cause of delay there is, \"that he might be revealed in\nhis own time;\" they show that he was unwilling to make an explicit\nstatement, because he said that they knew. And thus we who have not\ntheir knowledge wish and are not able even with pains to understand\nwhat the apostle referred to, especially as his meaning is made still\nmore obscure by what he adds. For what does he mean by \"For the\nmystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now holdeth, let\nhim hold until he be taken out of the way: and then shall the wicked\nbe revealed?\" I frankly confess I do not know what he means. I will\nnevertheless mention such conjectures as I have heard or read.\n\nSome think that the Apostle Paul referred to the Roman empire, and that\nhe was unwilling to use language more explicit, lest he should incur\nthe calumnious charge of wishing ill to the empire which it was hoped\nwould be eternal; so that in saying, \"For the mystery of iniquity doth\nalready work,\" he alluded to Nero, whose deeds already seemed to be\nas the deeds of Antichrist. And hence some suppose that he shall rise\nagain and be Antichrist. Others, again, suppose that he is not even\ndead, but that he was concealed that he might be supposed to have been\nkilled, and that he now lives in concealment in the vigour of that\nsame age which he had reached when he was believed to have perished,\nand will live until he is revealed in his own time and restored to\nhis kingdom.[765] But I wonder that men can be so audacious in their\nconjectures. However, it is not absurd to believe that these words\nof the apostle, \"Only he who now holdeth, let him hold until he be\ntaken out of the way,\" refer to the Roman empire, as if it were said,\n\"Only he who now reigneth, let him reign until he be taken out of the\nway.\" \"And then shall the wicked be revealed:\" no one doubts that\nthis means Antichrist. But others think that the words, \"Ye know what\nwithholdeth,\" and \"The mystery of iniquity worketh,\" refer only to the\nwicked and the hypocrites who are in the Church, until they reach a\nnumber so great as to furnish Antichrist with a great people, and that\nthis is the _mystery_ of iniquity, because it seems hidden; also that\nthe apostle is exhorting the faithful tenaciously to hold the faith\nthey hold when he says, \"Only he who now holdeth, let him hold until he\nbe taken out of the way,\" that is, until the mystery of iniquity which\nnow is hidden departs from the Church. For they suppose that it is to\nthis same mystery John alludes when in his epistle he says, \"Little\nchildren, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that Antichrist\nshall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that\nit is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us;\nfor if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with\nus.\"[766] As therefore there went out from the Church many heretics,\nwhom John calls \"many antichrists,\" at that time prior to the end, and\nwhich John calls \"the last time,\" so in the end they shall go out who\ndo not belong to Christ, but to that last Antichrist, and then he shall\nbe revealed.\n\nThus various, then, are the conjectural explanations of the obscure\nwords of the apostle. That which there is no doubt he said is this,\nthat Christ will not come to judge quick and dead unless Antichrist,\nHis adversary, first come to seduce those who are dead in soul;\nalthough their seduction is a result of God's secret judgment already\npassed. For, as it is said, \"his presence shall be after the working\nof Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and with\nall seduction of unrighteousness in them that perish.\" For then\nshall Satan be loosed, and by means of that Antichrist shall work\nwith all power in a lying though a wonderful manner. It is commonly\nquestioned whether these works are called \"signs and lying wonders\"\nbecause he is to deceive men's senses by false appearances, or\nbecause the things he does, though they be true prodigies, shall be\na lie to those who shall believe that such things could be done only\nby God, being ignorant of the devil's power, and especially of such\nunexampled power as he shall then for the first time put forth. For\nwhen he fell from heaven as fire, and at a stroke swept away from the\nholy Job his numerous household and his vast flocks, and then as a\nwhirlwind rushed upon and smote the house and killed his children,\nthese were not deceitful appearances, and yet they were the works of\nSatan to whom God had given this power. Why they are called signs\nand lying wonders we shall then be more likely to know when the time\nitself arrives. But whatever be the reason of the name, they shall\nbe such signs and wonders as shall seduce those who shall deserve to\nbe seduced, \"because they received not the love of the truth that\nthey might be saved.\" Neither did the apostle scruple to go on to\nsay, \"For this cause God shall send upon them the working of error\nthat they should believe a lie.\" For God shall _send_, because God\nshall permit the devil to do these things, the permission being by\nHis own just judgment, though the doing of them is in pursuance\nof the devil's unrighteous and malignant purpose, \"that they all\nmight be judged who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in\nunrighteousness.\" Therefore, being judged, they shall be seduced,\nand, being seduced, they shall be judged. But, being judged, they\nshall be seduced by those secretly just and justly secret judgments\nof God, with which He has never ceased to judge since the first sin\nof the rational creatures; and, being seduced, they shall be judged\nin that last and manifest judgment administered by Jesus Christ, who\nwas Himself most unjustly judged and shall most justly judge.\n\n\n     20. _What the same apostle taught in the first Epistle to the\n        Thessalonians regarding the resurrection of the dead._\n\nBut the apostle has said nothing here regarding the resurrection of\nthe dead; but in his first Epistle to the Thessalonians he says, \"We\nwould not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which\nare asleep,\"[767] etc. These words of the apostle most distinctly\nproclaim the future resurrection of the dead, when the Lord Christ\nshall come to judge the quick and the dead.\n\nBut it is commonly asked whether those whom our Lord shall find alive\nupon earth, personated in this passage by the apostle and those who\nwere alive with him, shall never die at all, or shall pass with\nincomprehensible swiftness through death to immortality in the very\nmoment during which they shall be caught up along with those who\nrise again to meet the Lord in the air? For we cannot say that it is\nimpossible that they should both die and revive again while they are\ncarried aloft through the air. For the words, \"And so shall we ever\nbe with the Lord,\" are not to be understood as if he meant that we\nshall always remain in the air with the Lord; for He Himself shall\nnot remain there, but shall only pass through it as He comes. For\nwe shall go to meet Him as He comes, not where He remains; but \"so\nshall we be with the Lord,\" that is, we shall be with Him possessed\nof immortal bodies wherever we shall be with Him. We seem compelled\nto take the words in this sense, and to suppose that those whom the\nLord shall find alive upon earth shall in that brief space both\nsuffer death and receive immortality; for this same apostle says, \"In\nChrist shall all be made alive;\"[768] while, speaking of the same\nresurrection of the body, he elsewhere says, \"That which thou sowest\nis not quickened, except it die.\"[769] How, then, shall those whom\nChrist shall find alive upon earth be made alive to immortality in\nHim if they die not, since on this very account it is said, \"That\nwhich thou sowest is not quickened, except it die?\" Or if we cannot\nproperly speak of human bodies as sown, unless in so far as by dying\nthey do in some sort return to the earth, as also the sentence\npronounced by God against the sinning father of the human race runs,\n\"Earth thou art, and unto earth shalt thou return,\"[770] we must\nacknowledge that those whom Christ at His coming shall find still in\nthe body are not included in these words of the apostle nor in those\nof Genesis; for, being caught up into the clouds, they are certainly\nnot sown, neither going nor returning to the earth, whether they\nexperience no death at all or die for a moment in the air.\n\nBut, on the other hand, there meets us the saying of the same apostle\nwhen he was speaking to the Corinthians about the resurrection of\nthe body, \"We shall all rise,\" or, as other MSS. read, \"We shall all\nsleep.\"[771] Since, then, there can be no resurrection unless death\nhas preceded, and since we can in this passage understand by sleep\nnothing else than death, how shall _all_ either sleep or rise again\nif so many persons whom Christ shall find in the body shall neither\nsleep nor rise again? If, then, we believe that the saints who shall\nbe found alive at Christ's coming, and shall be caught up to meet\nHim, shall in that same ascent pass from mortal to immortal bodies,\nwe shall find no difficulty in the words of the apostle, either when\nhe says, \"That which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die,\" or\nwhen he says, \"We shall all rise,\" or \"all sleep,\" for not even the\nsaints shall be quickened to immortality unless they first die, however\nbriefly; and consequently they shall not be exempt from resurrection\nwhich is preceded by sleep, however brief. And why should it seem to\nus incredible that that multitude of bodies should be, as it were,\nsown in the air, and should in the air forthwith revive immortal and\nincorruptible, when we believe, on the testimony of the same apostle,\nthat the resurrection shall take place in the twinkling of an eye, and\nthat the dust of bodies long dead shall return with incomprehensible\nfacility and swiftness to those members that are now to live endlessly?\nNeither do we suppose that in the case of these saints the sentence,\n\"Earth thou art, and unto earth shalt thou return,\" is null, though\ntheir bodies do not, on dying, fall to earth, but both die and rise\nagain at once while caught up into the air. For \"Thou shalt return to\nearth\" means, Thou shalt at death return to that which thou wert before\nlife began. Thou shalt, when exanimate, be that which thou wert before\nthou wast animate. For it was into a face of earth that God breathed\nthe breath of life when man was made a living soul; as if it were\nsaid, Thou art earth with a soul, which thou wast not; thou shalt be\nearth without a soul, as thou wast. And this is what all bodies of the\ndead are before they rot; and what the bodies of those saints shall be\nif they die, no matter where they die, as soon as they shall give up\nthat life which they are immediately to receive back again. In this\nway, then, they return or go to earth, inasmuch as from being living\nmen they shall be earth, as that which becomes cinder is said to go\nto cinder; that which decays, to go to decay; and so of six hundred\nother things. But the manner in which this shall take place we can now\nonly feebly conjecture, and shall understand it only when it comes to\npass. For that there shall be a bodily resurrection of the dead when\nChrist comes to judge quick and dead, we must believe if we would be\nChristians. But if we are unable perfectly to comprehend the manner\nin which it shall take place, our faith is not on this account vain.\nNow, however, we ought, as we formerly promised, to show, as far as\nseems necessary, what the ancient prophetic books predicted concerning\nthis final judgment of God; and I fancy no great time need be spent in\ndiscussing and explaining these predictions, if the reader has been\ncareful to avail himself of the help we have already furnished.\n\n\n   21. _Utterances of the prophet Isaiah regarding the resurrection\n              of the dead and the retributive judgment._\n\nThe prophet Isaiah says, \"The dead shall rise again, and all who were\nin the graves shall rise again; and all who are in the earth shall\nrejoice: for the dew which is from Thee is their health, and the earth\nof the wicked shall fall.\"[772] All the former part of this passage\nrelates to the resurrection of the blessed; but the words, \"the earth\nof the wicked shall fall,\" is rightly understood as meaning that the\nbodies of the wicked shall fall into the ruin of damnation. And if we\nwould more exactly and carefully scrutinize the words which refer to\nthe resurrection of the good, we may refer to the first resurrection\nthe words, \"the dead shall rise again,\" and to the second the following\nwords, \"and all who were in the graves shall rise again.\" And if we\nask what relates to those saints whom the Lord at His coming shall\nfind alive upon earth, the following clause may suitably be referred\nto them: \"All who are in the earth shall rejoice: for the dew which\nis from Thee is their health.\" By \"health\" in this place it is best\nto understand immortality. For that is the most perfect health which\nis not repaired by nourishment as by a daily remedy. In like manner\nthe same prophet, affording hope to the good and terrifying the wicked\nregarding the day of judgment, says, \"Thus saith the Lord, Behold,\nI will flow down upon them as a river of peace, and upon the glory\nof the Gentiles as a rushing torrent: their sons shall be carried on\nthe shoulders, and shall be comforted on the knees. As one whom his\nmother comforteth, so shall I comfort you; and ye shall be comforted\nin Jerusalem. And ye shall see, and your heart shall rejoice, and your\nbones shall rise up like a herb; and the hand of the Lord shall be\nknown by His worshippers, and He shall threaten the contumacious. For,\nbehold, the Lord shall come as a fire, and as a whirlwind His chariots,\nto execute vengeance with indignation, and wasting with a flame of\nfire. For with fire of the Lord shall all the earth be judged, and all\nflesh with His sword: many shall be wounded by the Lord.\"[773] In His\npromise to the good he says that He will flow down as a river of peace,\nthat is to say, in the greatest possible abundance of peace. With this\npeace we shall in the end be refreshed; but of this we have spoken\nabundantly in the preceding book. It is this river in which he says\nHe shall flow down upon those to whom He promises so great happiness,\nthat we may understand that in the region of that felicity, which is\nin heaven, all things are satisfied from this river. But because there\nshall thence flow, even upon earthly bodies, the peace of incorruption\nand immortality, therefore he says that He shall flow down as this\nriver, that He may as it were pour Himself from things above to things\nbeneath, and make men the equals of the angels. By \"Jerusalem,\" too,\nwe should understand not that which serves with her children, but that\nwhich, according to the apostle, is our free mother, eternal in the\nheavens.[774] In her we shall be comforted as we pass toilworn from\nearth's cares and calamities, and be taken up as her children on her\nknees and shoulders. Inexperienced and new to such blandishments, we\nshall be received into unwonted bliss. There we shall see, and our\nheart shall rejoice. He does not say what we shall see; but what but\nGod, that the promise in the Gospel may be fulfilled in us, \"Blessed\nare the pure in heart, for they shall see God?\"[775] What shall we see\nbut all those things which now we see not, but believe in, and of which\nthe idea we form, according to our feeble capacity, is incomparably\nless than the reality? \"And ye shall see,\" he says, \"and your heart\nshall rejoice.\" Here ye believe, there ye shall see.\n\nBut because he said, \"Your heart shall rejoice,\" lest we should suppose\nthat the blessings of that Jerusalem are only spiritual, he adds, \"And\nyour bones shall rise up like a herb,\" alluding to the resurrection\nof the body, and as it were supplying an omission he had made. For\nit will not take place when we have seen; but we shall see when it\nhas taken place. For he had already spoken of the new heavens and the\nnew earth, speaking repeatedly, and under many figures, of the things\npromised to the saints, and saying, \"There shall be new heavens, and a\nnew earth: and the former shall not be remembered nor come into mind;\nbut they shall find in it gladness and exultation. Behold, I will\nmake Jerusalem an exultation, and my people a joy. And I will exult in\nJerusalem, and joy in my people; and the voice of weeping shall be no\nmore heard in her;\"[776] and other promises, which some endeavour to\nrefer to carnal enjoyment during the thousand years. For, in the manner\nof prophecy, figurative and literal expressions are mingled, so that a\nserious mind may, by useful and salutary effort, reach the spiritual\nsense; but carnal sluggishness, or the slowness of an uneducated and\nundisciplined mind, rests in the superficial letter, and thinks there\nis nothing beneath to be looked for. But let this be enough regarding\nthe style of those prophetic expressions just quoted. And now, to\nreturn to their interpretation. When he had said, \"And your bones shall\nrise up like a herb,\" in order to show that it was the resurrection of\nthe good, though a bodily resurrection, to which he alluded, he added,\n\"And the hand of the Lord shall be known by His worshippers.\" What\nis this but the hand of Him who distinguishes those who worship from\nthose who despise Him? Regarding these the context immediately adds,\n\"And He shall threaten the contumacious,\" or, as another translator has\nit, \"the unbelieving.\" He shall not actually threaten then, but the\nthreats which are now uttered shall then be fulfilled in effect. \"For\nbehold,\" he says, \"the Lord shall come as a fire, and as a whirlwind\nHis chariots, to execute vengeance with indignation, and wasting with a\nflame of fire. For with fire of the Lord shall all the earth be judged,\nand all flesh with His sword: many shall be wounded by the Lord.\" By\n_fire_, _whirlwind_, _sword_, he means the judicial punishment of God.\nFor he says that the Lord Himself shall come as a fire, to those, that\nis to say, to whom His coming shall be penal. By His _chariots_ (for\nthe word is plural) we suitably understand the ministration of angels.\nAnd when he says that all flesh and all the earth shall be judged with\nHis fire and sword, we do not understand the spiritual and holy to be\nincluded, but the earthly and carnal, of whom it is said that they\n\"mind earthly things,\"[777] and \"to be carnally minded is death,\"[778]\nand whom the Lord calls simply flesh when He says, \"My Spirit shall\nnot always remain in these men, for they are flesh.\"[779] As to the\nwords, \"Many shall be wounded by the Lord,\" this wounding shall produce\nthe second death. It is possible, indeed, to understand _fire_,\n_sword_, and _wound_ in a good sense. For the Lord said that He wished\nto send fire on the earth.[780] And the cloven tongues appeared to\nthem as fire when the Holy Spirit came.[781] And our Lord says, \"I am\nnot come to send peace on earth, but a sword.\"[782] And Scripture says\nthat the word of God is a doubly sharp sword,[783] on account of the\ntwo edges, the two Testaments. And in the Song of Songs the holy Church\nsays that she is wounded with love,[784]--pierced, as it were, with the\narrow of love. But here, where we read or hear that the Lord shall come\nto execute vengeance, it is obvious in what sense we are to understand\nthese expressions.\n\nAfter briefly mentioning those who shall be consumed in this\njudgment, speaking of the wicked and sinners under the figure of the\nmeats forbidden by the old law, from which they had not abstained,\nhe summarily recounts the grace of the new testament, from the first\ncoming of the Saviour to the last judgment, of which we now speak;\nand herewith he concludes his prophecy. For he relates that the Lord\ndeclares that He is coming to gather all nations, that they may come\nand witness His glory.[785] For, as the apostle says, \"All have\nsinned and are in want of the glory of God.\"[786] And he says that He\nwill do wonders among them, at which they shall marvel and believe in\nHim; and that from them He will send forth those that are saved into\nvarious nations, and distant islands which have not heard His name\nnor seen His glory, and that they shall declare His glory among the\nnations, and shall _bring_ the brethren of those to whom the prophet\nwas speaking, _i.e._ shall bring to the faith under God the Father\nthe brethren of the elect Israelites; and that they shall bring from\nall nations an offering to the Lord on beasts of burden and waggons\n(which are understood to mean the aids furnished by God in the shape\nof angelic or human ministry), to the holy city Jerusalem, which at\npresent is scattered over the earth, in the faithful saints. For\nwhere divine aid is given, men believe, and where they believe, they\ncome. And the Lord compared them, in a figure, to the children of\nIsrael offering sacrifice to Him in His house with psalms, which\nis already everywhere done by the Church; and He promised that\nfrom among them He would choose for Himself priests and Levites,\nwhich also we see already accomplished. For we see that priests and\nLevites are now chosen, not from a certain family and blood, as was\noriginally the rule in the priesthood according to the order of\nAaron, but as befits the new testament, under which Christ is the\nHigh Priest after the order of Melchisedec, in consideration of the\nmerit which is bestowed upon each man by divine grace. And these\npriests are not to be judged by their mere title, which is often\nborne by unworthy men, but by that holiness which is not common to\ngood men and bad.\n\nAfter having thus spoken of this mercy of God which is now\nexperienced by the Church, and is very evident and familiar to us,\nhe foretells also the ends to which men shall come when the last\njudgment has separated the good and the bad, saying by the prophet,\nor the prophet himself speaking for God, \"For as the new heavens\nand the new earth shall remain before me, said the Lord, so shall\nyour seed and your name remain, and there shall be to them month\nafter month, and Sabbath after Sabbath. All flesh shall come to\nworship before me in Jerusalem, said the Lord. And they shall go\nout, and shall see the members of the men who have sinned against\nme: their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched;\nand they shall be for a spectacle to all flesh.\"[787] At this point\nthe prophet closed his book, as at this point the world shall come\nto an end. Some, indeed, have translated \"carcases\"[788] instead of\n\"members of the men,\" meaning by _carcases_ the manifest punishment\nof the body, although _carcase_ is commonly used only of dead flesh,\nwhile the bodies here spoken of shall be animated, else they could\nnot be sensible of any pain; but perhaps they may, without absurdity,\nbe called carcases, as being the bodies of those who are to fall into\nthe second death. And for the same reason it is said, as I have\nalready quoted, by this same prophet, \"The earth of the wicked shall\nfall.\"[789] It is obvious that those translators who use a different\nword for _men_ do not mean to include only males, for no one will\nsay that the women who sinned shall not appear in that judgment; but\nthe male sex, being the more worthy, and that from which the woman\nwas derived, is intended to include both sexes. But that which is\nespecially pertinent to our subject is this, that since the words\n\"All flesh shall come\" apply to the good, for the people of God shall\nbe composed of every race of men,--for all men shall not be present,\nsince the greater part shall be in punishment,--but, as I was saying,\nsince _flesh_ is used of the good, and _members_ or _carcases_ of the\nbad, certainly it is thus put beyond a doubt that that judgment in\nwhich the good and the bad shall be allotted to their destinies shall\ntake place after the resurrection of the body, our faith in which is\nthoroughly established by the use of these words.\n\n\n   22. _What is meant by the good going out to see the punishment of\n                             the wicked._\n\nBut in what way shall the good go out to see the punishment of the\nwicked? Are they to leave their happy abodes by a bodily movement, and\nproceed to the places of punishment, so as to witness the torments of\nthe wicked in their bodily presence? Certainly not; but they shall\ngo out by knowledge. For this expression, _go out_, signifies that\nthose who shall be punished shall be without. And thus the Lord also\ncalls these places \"the outer darkness,\"[790] to which is opposed that\nentrance concerning which it is said to the good servant, \"Enter into\nthe joy of thy Lord,\" that it may not be supposed that the wicked\ncan enter thither and be known, but rather that the good by their\nknowledge go out to them, because the good are to know that which is\nwithout. For those who shall be in torment shall not know what is\ngoing on within in the joy of the Lord; but they who shall enter into\nthat joy shall know what is going on outside in the outer darkness.\nTherefore it is said, \"They shall go out,\" because they shall know\nwhat is done by those who are without. For if the prophets were able\nto know things that had not yet happened, by means of that indwelling\nof God in their minds, limited though it was, shall not the immortal\nsaints know things that have already happened, when God shall be all\nin all?[791] The seed, then, and the name of the saints shall remain\nin that blessedness,--the seed, to wit, of which John says, \"And his\nseed remaineth in him;\"[792] and the name, of which it was said through\nIsaiah himself, \"I will give them an everlasting name.\"[793] \"And there\nshall be to them month after month, and Sabbath after Sabbath,\" as if\nit were said, Moon after moon, and rest upon rest, both of which they\nshall themselves be when they shall pass from the old shadows of time\ninto the new lights of eternity. The worm that dieth not, and the fire\nthat is not quenched, which constitute the punishment of the wicked,\nare differently interpreted by different people. For some refer both\nto the body, others refer both to the soul; while others again refer\nthe fire literally to the body, and the worm figuratively to the soul,\nwhich seems the more credible idea. But the present is not the time to\ndiscuss this difference, for we have undertaken to occupy this book\nwith the last judgment, in which the good and the bad are separated:\ntheir rewards and punishments we shall more carefully discuss elsewhere.\n\n\n  23. _What Daniel predicted regarding the persecution of Antichrist,\n         the judgment of God, and the kingdom of the saints._\n\nDaniel prophesies of the last judgment in such a way as to indicate\nthat Antichrist shall first come, and to carry on his description to\nthe eternal reign of the saints. For when in prophetic vision he had\nseen four beasts, signifying four kingdoms, and the fourth conquered\nby a certain king, who is recognised as Antichrist, and after this\nthe eternal kingdom of the Son of man, that is to say, of Christ, he\nsays, \"My spirit was terrified, I Daniel in the midst of my body, and\nthe visions of my head troubled me,\"[794] etc. Some have interpreted\nthese four kingdoms as signifying those of the Assyrians, Persians,\nMacedonians, and Romans. They who desire to understand the fitness\nof this interpretation may read Jerome's book on Daniel, which is\nwritten with a sufficiency of care and erudition. But he who reads\nthis passage, even half-asleep, cannot fail to see that the kingdom of\nAntichrist shall fiercely, though for a short time, assail the Church\nbefore the last judgment of God shall introduce the eternal reign\nof the saints. For it is patent from the context that the _time_,\n_times_, _and half a time_, means a year, and two years, and half a\nyear, that is to say, three years and a half. Sometimes in Scripture\nthe same thing is indicated by months. For though the word _times_\nseems to be used here in the Latin indefinitely, that is only because\nthe Latins have no dual, as the Greeks have, and as the Hebrews also\nare said to have. Times, therefore, is used for two times. As for the\nten kings, whom, as it seems, Antichrist is to find in the person of\nten individuals when he comes, I own I am afraid we may be deceived in\nthis, and that he may come unexpectedly while there are not ten kings\nliving in the Roman world. For what if this number ten signifies the\nwhole number of kings who are to precede his coming, as totality is\nfrequently symbolized by a thousand, or a hundred, or seven, or other\nnumbers, which it is not necessary to recount?\n\nIn another place the same Daniel says, \"And there shall be a time of\ntrouble, such as was not since there was born a nation upon earth\nuntil that time: and in that time all Thy people which shall be\nfound written in the book shall be delivered. And many of them that\nsleep in the mound of earth shall arise, some to everlasting life,\nand some to shame and everlasting confusion. And they that be wise\nshall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and many of the just\nas the stars for ever.\"[795] This passage is very similar to the\none we have quoted from the Gospel,[796] at least so far as regards\nthe resurrection of dead bodies. For those who are there said to\nbe \"in the graves\" are here spoken of as \"sleeping in the mound of\nearth,\" or, as others translate, \"in the dust of earth.\" There it is\nsaid, \"They shall come forth;\" so here, \"They shall arise.\" There,\n\"They that have done good, to the resurrection of life; and they\nthat have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment;\" here, \"Some\nto everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting confusion.\"\nNeither is it to be supposed a difference, though in place of the\nexpression in the Gospel, \"All who are in their graves,\" the prophet\ndoes not say \"all,\" but \"many of them that sleep in the mound of\nearth.\" For _many_ is sometimes used in Scripture for _all_. Thus it\nwas said to Abraham, \"I have set thee as the father of many nations,\"\nthough in another place it was said to him, \"In thy seed shall all\nnations be blessed.\"[797] Of such a resurrection it is said a little\nafterwards to the prophet himself, \"And come thou and rest: for there\nis yet a day till the completion of the consummation; and thou shalt\nrest, and rise in thy lot in the end of the days.\"[798]\n\n\n    24. _Passages from the Psalms of David which predict the end of\n                   the world and the last judgment._\n\nThere are many allusions to the last judgment in the Psalms, but\nfor the most part only casual and slight. I cannot, however, omit\nto mention what is said there in express terms of the end of this\nworld: \"In the beginning hast Thou laid the foundations of the\nearth, O Lord; and the heavens are the work of Thy hands. They\nshall perish, but Thou shalt endure; yea, all of them shall wax old\nlike a garment; and as a vesture Thou shalt change them, and they\nshall be changed: but Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not\nfail.\"[799] Why is it that Porphyry, while he lauds the piety of the\nHebrews in worshipping a God great and true, and terrible to the\ngods themselves, follows the oracles of these gods in accusing the\nChristians of extreme folly because they say that this world shall\nperish? For here we find it said in the sacred books of the Hebrews,\nto that God whom this great philosopher acknowledges to be terrible\neven to the gods themselves, \"The heavens are the work of Thy hands:\nthey shall perish.\" When the heavens, the higher and more secure\npart of the world, perish, shall the world itself be preserved? If\nthis idea is not relished by Jupiter, whose oracle is quoted by this\nphilosopher as an unquestionable authority in rebuke of the credulity\nof the Christians, why does he not similarly rebuke the wisdom of\nthe Hebrews as folly, seeing that the prediction is found in their\nmost holy books? But if this Hebrew wisdom, with which Porphyry is so\ncaptivated that he extols it through the utterances of his own gods,\nproclaims that the heavens are to perish, how is he so infatuated\nas to detest the faith of the Christians partly, if not chiefly, on\nthis account, that they believe the world is to perish?--though how\nthe heavens are to perish if the world does not is not easy to see.\nAnd, indeed, in the sacred writings which are peculiar to ourselves,\nand not common to the Hebrews and us,--I mean the evangelic and\napostolic books,--the following expressions are used: \"The figure\nof this world passeth away;\"[800] \"The world passeth away;\"[801]\n\"Heaven and earth shall pass away,\"[802]--expressions which are, I\nfancy, somewhat milder than \"They shall _perish_.\" In the Epistle\nof the Apostle Peter, too, where the world which then was is said\nto have perished, being overflowed with water, it is sufficiently\nobvious what part of the world is signified by the whole, and in\nwhat sense the word _perished_ is to be taken, and what heavens were\nkept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and\nperdition of ungodly men.[803] And when he says a little afterwards,\n\"The day of the Lord will come as a thief; in the which the heavens\nshall pass away with a great rush, and the elements shall melt with\nburning heat, and the earth and the works which are in it shall be\nburned up;\" and then adds, \"Seeing, then, that all these things shall\nbe dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be?\"[804]--these\nheavens which are to perish may be understood to be the same which\nhe said were kept in store reserved for fire; and the elements which\nare to be burned are those which are full of storm and disturbance\nin this lowest part of the world in which he said that these heavens\nwere kept in store; for the higher heavens in whose firmament\nare set the stars are safe, and remain in their integrity. For\neven the expression of Scripture, that \"the stars shall fall from\nheaven,\"[805] not to mention that a different interpretation is much\npreferable, rather shows that the heavens themselves shall remain,\nif the stars are to fall from them. This expression, then, is either\nfigurative, as is more credible, or this phenomenon will take place\nin this lowest heaven, like that mentioned by Virgil,--\n\n          \"A meteor with a train of light\n           Athwart the sky gleamed dazzling bright,\n           Then in Id\u00e6an woods was lost.\"[806]\n\nBut the passage I have quoted from the psalm seems to except none\nof the heavens from the destiny of destruction; for he says, \"The\nheavens are the works of Thy hands: they shall perish;\" so that,\nas none of them are excepted from the category of God's works,\nnone of them are excepted from destruction. For our opponents\nwill not condescend to defend the Hebrew piety, which has won the\napprobation of their gods, by the words of the Apostle Peter, whom\nthey vehemently detest; nor will they argue that, as the apostle in\nhis epistle understands a part when he speaks of the whole world\nperishing in the flood, though only the lowest part of it, and the\ncorresponding heavens were destroyed, so in the psalm the whole is\nused for a part, and it is said \"They shall perish,\" though only\nthe lowest heavens are to perish. But since, as I said, they will\nnot condescend to reason thus, lest they should seem to approve\nof Peter's meaning, or ascribe as much importance to the final\nconflagration as we ascribe to the deluge, whereas they contend that\nno waters or flames could destroy the whole human race, it only\nremains to them to maintain that their gods lauded the wisdom of the\nHebrews because they had not read this psalm.\n\nIt is the last judgment of God which is referred to also in the 50th\nPsalm in the words, \"God shall come manifestly, our God, and shall\nnot keep silence: fire shall devour before Him, and it shall be very\ntempestuous round about Him. He shall call the heaven above, and\nthe earth, to judge His people. Gather His saints together to Him;\nthey who make a covenant with Him over sacrifices.\"[807] This we\nunderstand of our Lord Jesus Christ, whom we look for from heaven\nto judge the quick and the dead. For He shall come manifestly to\njudge justly the just and the unjust, who before came hiddenly to\nbe unjustly judged by the unjust. He, I say, shall come manifestly,\nand shall not keep silence, that is, shall make Himself known by\nHis voice of judgment, who before, when He came hiddenly, was silent\nbefore His judge when He was led as a sheep to the slaughter, and,\nas a lamb before the shearer, opened not His mouth, as we read that\nit was prophesied of Him by Isaiah,[808] and as we see it fulfilled\nin the Gospel.[809] As for the _fire_ and _tempest_, we have already\nsaid how these are to be interpreted when we were explaining a\nsimilar passage in Isaiah.[810] As to the expression, \"He shall call\nthe heaven above,\" as the saints and the righteous are rightly called\n_heaven_, no doubt this means what the apostle says, \"We shall be\ncaught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the\nair.\"[811] For if we take the bare literal sense, how is it possible\nto call the heaven above, as if the heaven could be anywhere else\nthan above? And the following expression, \"And the earth to judge\nHis people,\" if we supply only the words, \"He shall call,\" that is\nto say, \"He shall call the earth also,\" and do not supply \"above,\"\nseems to give us a meaning in accordance with sound doctrine, the\nheaven symbolizing those who will judge along with Christ, and the\nearth those who shall be judged; and thus the words, \"He shall call\nthe heaven above,\" would not mean, \"He shall catch up into the air,\"\nbut \"He shall lift up to seats of judgment.\" Possibly, too, \"He shall\ncall the heaven,\" may mean, He shall call the angels in the high\nand lofty places, that He may descend with them to do judgment; and\n\"He shall call the earth also\" would then mean, He shall call the\nmen on the earth to judgment. But if with the words \"and the earth\"\nwe understand not only \"He shall call,\" but also \"above,\" so as to\nmake the full sense be, He shall call the heaven above, and He shall\ncall the earth above, then I think it is best understood of the men\nwho shall be caught up to meet Christ in the air, and that they are\ncalled _the heaven_ with reference to their souls, and _the earth_\nwith reference to their bodies. Then what is \"to judge His people,\"\nbut to separate by judgment the good from the bad, as the sheep from\nthe goats? Then he turns to address the angels: \"Gather His saints\ntogether unto Him.\" For certainly a matter so important must be\naccomplished by the ministry of angels. And if we ask who the saints\nare who are gathered unto Him by the angels, we are told, \"They who\nmake a covenant with Him over sacrifices.\" This is the whole life of\nthe saints, to make a covenant with God over sacrifices. For \"over\nsacrifices\" either refers to works of mercy, which are preferable to\nsacrifices in the judgment of God, who says, \"I desire mercy more\nthan sacrifices;\"[812] or if \"over sacrifices\" means in sacrifices,\nthen these very works of mercy are the sacrifices with which God\nis pleased, as I remember to have stated in the tenth book of this\nwork;[813] and in these works the saints make a covenant with God,\nbecause they do them for the sake of the promises which are contained\nin His new testament or covenant. And hence, when His saints have\nbeen gathered to Him and set at His right hand in the last judgment,\nChrist shall say, \"Come, ye blessed of my Father, take possession of\nthe kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I\nwas hungry, and ye gave me to eat,\"[814] and so on, mentioning the\ngood works of the good, and their eternal rewards assigned by the\nlast sentence of the Judge.\n\n\n  25. _Of Malachi's prophecy, in which he speaks of the last\n      judgment, and of a cleansing which some are to undergo by\n      purifying punishments._\n\nThe prophet Malachi or Malachias, who is also called Angel, and\nis by some (for Jerome[815] tells us that this is the opinion of\nthe Hebrews) identified with Ezra the priest,[816] others of whose\nwritings have been received into the canon, predicts the last\njudgment, saying, \"Behold, He cometh, saith the Lord Almighty; and\nwho shall abide the day of His entrance? ... for I am the Lord your\nGod, and I change not.\"[817] From these words it more evidently\nappears that some shall in the last judgment suffer some kind of\npurgatorial punishments; for what else can be understood by the word,\n\"Who shall abide the day of His entrance, or who shall be able to\nlook upon Him? for He enters as a moulder's fire, and as the herb\nof fullers: and He shall sit fusing and purifying as if over gold\nand silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and pour them out\nlike gold and silver?\" Similarly Isaiah says, \"The Lord shall wash\nthe filthiness of the sons and daughters of Zion, and shall cleanse\naway the blood from their midst, by the spirit of judgment and by the\nspirit of burning.\"[818] Unless perhaps we should say that they are\ncleansed from filthiness and in a manner clarified, when the wicked\nare separated from them by penal judgment, so that the elimination\nand damnation of the one party is the purgation of the others,\nbecause they shall henceforth live free from the contamination of\nsuch men. But when he says, \"And he shall purify the sons of Levi,\nand pour them out like gold and silver, and they shall offer to the\nLord sacrifices in righteousness; and the sacrifices of Judah and\nJerusalem shall be pleasing to the Lord,\" he declares that those\nwho shall be purified shall then please the Lord with sacrifices of\nrighteousness, and consequently they themselves shall be purified\nfrom their own unrighteousness which made them displeasing to\nGod. Now they themselves, when they have been purified, shall be\nsacrifices of complete and perfect righteousness; for what more\nacceptable offering can such persons make to God than themselves? But\nthis question of purgatorial punishments we must defer to another\ntime, to give it a more adequate treatment. By the sons of Levi\nand Judah and Jerusalem we ought to understand the Church herself,\ngathered not from the Hebrews only, but from other nations as well;\nnor such a Church as she now is, when \"if we say that we have no\nsin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us,\"[819] but as\nshe shall then be, purged by the last judgment as a threshing-floor\nby a winnowing wind, and those of her members who need it being\ncleansed by fire, so that there remains absolutely not one who offers\nsacrifice for his sins. For all who make such offerings are assuredly\nin their sins, for the remission of which they make offerings, that\nhaving made to God an acceptable offering, they may then be absolved.\n\n\n   26. _Of the sacrifices offered to God by the saints, which are to\n    be pleasing to Him, as in the primitive days and former years._\n\nAnd it was with the design of showing that His city shall not then\nfollow this custom, that God said that the sons of Levi should offer\nsacrifices in righteousness,--not therefore in sin, and consequently\nnot for sin. And hence we see how vainly the Jews promise themselves\na return of the old times of sacrificing according to the law of\nthe old testament, grounding on the words which follow, \"And the\nsacrifice of Judah and Jerusalem shall be pleasing to the Lord, as\nin the primitive days, and as in former years.\" For in the times\nof the law they offered sacrifices not in righteousness but in\nsins, offering especially and primarily for sins, so much so that\neven the priest himself, whom we must suppose to have been their\nmost righteous man, was accustomed to offer, according to God's\ncommandments, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the\npeople. And therefore we must explain how we are to understand the\nwords, \"as in the primitive days, and as in former years;\" for\nperhaps he alludes to the time in which our first parents were in\nparadise. Then, indeed, intact and pure from all stain and blemish\nof sin, they offered themselves to God as the purest sacrifices. But\nsince they were banished thence on account of their transgression,\nand human nature was condemned in them, with the exception of the one\nMediator and those who have been baptized, and are as yet infants,\n\"there is none clean from stain, not even the babe whose life has\nbeen but for a day upon the earth.\"[820] But if it be replied that\nthose who offer in faith may be said to offer in righteousness,\nbecause the righteous lives by faith,[821]--he deceives himself,\nhowever, if he says that he has no sin, and therefore he does not say\nso, because he lives by faith,--will any man say this time of faith\ncan be placed on an equal footing with that consummation when they\nwho offer sacrifices in righteousness shall be purified by the fire\nof the last judgment? And consequently, since it must be believed\nthat after such a cleansing the righteous shall retain no sin,\nassuredly that time, so far as regards its freedom from sin, can be\ncompared to no other period, unless to that during which our first\nparents lived in paradise in the most innocent happiness before their\ntransgression. It is this period, then, which is properly understood\nwhen it is said, \"as in the primitive days, and as in former years.\"\nFor in Isaiah, too, after the new heavens and the new earth have been\npromised, among other elements in the blessedness of the saints which\nare there depicted by allegories and figures, from giving an adequate\nexplanation of which I am prevented by a desire to avoid prolixity,\nit is said, \"According to the days of the tree of life shall be the\ndays of my people.\"[822] And who that has looked at Scripture does\nnot know where God planted the tree of life, from whose fruit He\nexcluded our first parents when their own iniquity ejected them from\nparadise, and round which a terrible and fiery fence was set?\n\nBut if any one contends that those days of the tree of life mentioned\nby the prophet Isaiah are the present times of the Church of Christ,\nand that Christ Himself is prophetically called the Tree of Life,\nbecause He is Wisdom, and of wisdom Solomon says, \"It is a tree of\nlife to all who embrace it;\"[823] and if they maintain that our\nfirst parents did not pass _years_ in paradise, but were driven\nfrom it so soon that none of their children were begotten there,\nand that therefore that time cannot be alluded to in words which\nrun, \"as in the primitive days, and as in former years,\" I forbear\nentering on this question, lest by discussing everything I become\nprolix, and leave the whole subject in uncertainty. For I see another\nmeaning, which should keep us from believing that a restoration of\nthe primitive days and former years of the legal sacrifices could\nhave been promised to us by the prophet as a great boon. For the\nanimals selected as victims under the old law were required to be\nimmaculate, and free from all blemish whatever, and symbolized holy\nmen free from all sin, the only instance of which character was found\nin Christ. As, therefore, after the judgment those who are worthy\nof such purification shall be purified even by fire, and shall be\nrendered thoroughly sinless, and shall offer themselves to God in\nrighteousness, and be indeed victims immaculate and free from all\nblemish whatever, they shall then certainly be \"as in the primitive\ndays, and as in former years,\" when the purest victims were offered,\nthe shadow of this future reality. For there shall then be in the\nbody and soul of the saints the purity which was symbolized in the\nbodies of these victims.\n\nThen, with reference to those who are worthy not of cleansing but of\ndamnation, He says, \"And I will draw near to you to judgment, and I\nwill be a swift witness against evil-doers and against adulterers;\"\nand after enumerating other damnable crimes, He adds, \"For I am the\nLord your God, and I am not changed.\" It is as if He said, Though\nyour fault has changed you for the worse, and my grace has changed\nyou for the better, I am not changed. And he says that He Himself\nwill be a witness, because in His judgment He needs no witnesses;\nand that He will be \"swift,\" either because He is to come suddenly,\nand the judgment which seemed to lag shall be very swift by His\nunexpected arrival, or because He will convince the consciences\nof men directly and without any prolix harangue. \"For,\" as it is\nwritten, \"in the thoughts of the wicked His examination shall be\nconducted.\"[824] And the apostle says, \"The thoughts accusing or else\nexcusing, in the day in which God shall judge the hidden things of\nmen, according to my gospel in Jesus Christ.\"[825] Thus, then, shall\nthe Lord be a swift witness, when He shall suddenly bring back into\nthe memory that which shall convince and punish the conscience.\n\n\n  27. _Of the separation of the good and the bad, which proclaim the\n            discriminating influence of the last judgment._\n\nThe passage also which I formerly quoted for another purpose from\nthis prophet refers to the last judgment, in which he says, \"They\nshall be mine, saith the Lord Almighty, in the day in which I make\nup my gains,\"[826] etc. When this diversity between the rewards and\npunishments which distinguish the righteous from the wicked shall\nappear under that Sun of righteousness in the brightness of life\neternal,--a diversity which is not discerned under this sun which\nshines on the vanity of this life,--there shall then be such a\njudgment as has never before been.\n\n\n     28. _That the law of Moses must be spiritually understood to\n      preclude the damnable murmurs of a carnal interpretation._\n\nIn the succeeding words, \"Remember the law of Moses my servant,\nwhich I commanded to him in Horeb for all Israel,\"[827] the prophet\nopportunely mentions precepts and statutes, after declaring the\nimportant distinction hereafter to be made between those who observe\nand those who despise the law. He intends also that they learn to\ninterpret the law spiritually, and find Christ in it, by whose\njudgment that separation between the good and the bad is to be made.\nFor it is not without reason that the Lord Himself says to the Jews,\n\"Had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of\nme.\"[828] For by receiving the law carnally, without perceiving that\nits earthly promises were figures of things spiritual, they fell into\nsuch murmurings as audaciously to say, \"It is vain to serve God; and\nwhat profit is it that we have kept His ordinance, and that we have\nwalked suppliantly before the face of the Lord Almighty? And now we\ncall aliens happy; yea, they that work wickedness are set up.\"[829]\nIt was these words of theirs which in a manner compelled the prophet\nto announce the last judgment, in which the wicked shall not even\nin appearance be happy, but shall manifestly be most miserable; and\nin which the good shall be oppressed with not even a transitory\nwretchedness, but shall enjoy unsullied and eternal felicity. For\nhe had previously cited some similar expressions of those who said,\n\"Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the Lord, and\nsuch are pleasing to Him.\"[830] It was, I say, by understanding the\nlaw of Moses carnally that they had come to murmur thus against God.\nAnd hence, too, the writer of the 73d Psalm says that his feet were\nalmost gone, his steps had well-nigh slipped, because he was envious\nof sinners while he considered their prosperity, so that he said\namong other things, How doth God know, and is there knowledge in the\nMost High? and again, Have I sanctified my heart in vain, and washed\nmy hands in innocency?[831] He goes on to say that his efforts to\nsolve this most difficult problem, which arises when the good seem\nto be wretched and the wicked happy, were in vain until he went into\nthe sanctuary of God, and understood the last things.[832] For in the\nlast judgment things shall not be so; but in the manifest felicity of\nthe righteous and manifest misery of the wicked quite another state\nof things shall appear.\n\n\n  29. _Of the coming of Elias before the judgment, that the Jews may\n      be converted to Christ by his preaching and explanation of\n      Scripture._\n\nAfter admonishing them to give heed to the law of Moses, as he\nforesaw that for a long time to come they would not understand it\nspiritually and rightly, he went on to say, \"And, behold, I will send\nto you Elias the Tishbite before the great and signal day of the Lord\ncome: and he shall turn the heart of the father to the son, and the\nheart of a man to his next of kin, lest I come and utterly smite the\nearth.\"[833] It is a familiar theme in the conversation and heart\nof the faithful, that in the last days before the judgment the Jews\nshall believe in the true Christ, that is, our Christ, by means of\nthis great and admirable prophet Elias who shall expound the law to\nthem. For not without reason do we hope that before the coming of\nour Judge and Saviour Elias shall come, because we have good reason\nto believe that he is now alive; for, as Scripture most distinctly\ninforms us,[834] he was taken up from this life in a chariot of fire.\nWhen, therefore, he is come, he shall give a spiritual explanation\nof the law which the Jews at present understand carnally, and shall\nthus \"turn the heart of the father to the son,\" that is, the heart\nof fathers to their children; for the Septuagint translators have\nfrequently put the singular for the plural number. And the meaning\nis, that the sons, that is, the Jews, shall understand the law as\nthe fathers, that is, the prophets, and among them Moses himself,\nunderstood it. For the heart of the fathers shall be turned to their\nchildren when the children understand the law as their fathers did;\nand the heart of the children shall be turned to their fathers when\nthey have the same sentiments as the fathers. The Septuagint used\nthe expression, \"and the heart of a man to his next of kin,\" because\nfathers and children are eminently neighbours to one another. Another\nand a preferable sense can be found in the words of the Septuagint\ntranslators, who have translated Scripture with an eye to prophecy,\nthe sense, viz., that Elias shall turn the heart of God the Father\nto the Son, not certainly as if he should bring about this love of\nthe Father for the Son, but meaning that he should make it known, and\nthat the Jews also, who had previously hated, should then love the\nSon who is our Christ. For so far as regards the Jews, God has His\nheart turned away from our Christ, this being their conception about\nGod and Christ. But in their case the heart of God shall be turned to\nthe Son when they themselves shall turn in heart, and learn the love\nof the Father towards the Son. The words following, \"and the heart of\na man to his next of kin,\"--that is, Elias shall also turn the heart\nof a man to his next of kin,--how can we understand this better than\nas the heart of a man to the man Christ? For though in the form of\nGod He is our God, yet, taking the form of a servant, He condescended\nto become also our next of kin. It is this, then, which Elias will\ndo, \"lest,\" he says, \"I come and smite the earth utterly.\" For they\nwho mind earthly things are the earth. Such are the carnal Jews until\nthis day; and hence these murmurs of theirs against God, \"The wicked\nare pleasing to Him,\" and \"It is a vain thing to serve God.\"[835]\n\n\n  30. _That in the books of the Old Testament, where it is said\n      that God shall judge the world, the person of Christ is not\n      explicitly indicated, but it plainly appears from some passages\n      in which the Lord God speaks that Christ is meant._\n\nThere are many other passages of Scripture bearing on the last\njudgment of God,--so many, indeed, that to cite them all would swell\nthis book to an unpardonable size. Suffice it to have proved that\nboth Old and New Testament enounce the judgment. But in the Old it\nis not so definitely declared as in the New that the judgment shall\nbe administered by Christ, that is, that Christ shall descend from\nheaven as the Judge; for when it is therein stated by the Lord God\nor His prophet that the Lord God shall come, we do not necessarily\nunderstand this of Christ. For both the Father, and the Son, and the\nHoly Ghost are the Lord God. We must not, however, leave this without\nproof. And therefore we must first show how Jesus Christ speaks in\nthe prophetical books under the title of the Lord God, while yet\nthere can be no doubt that it is Jesus Christ who speaks; so that\nin other passages where this is not at once apparent, and where\nnevertheless it is said that the Lord God will come to that last\njudgment, we may understand that Jesus Christ is meant. There is a\npassage in the prophet Isaiah which illustrates what I mean. For God\nsays by the prophet, \"Hear me, Jacob and Israel, whom I call. I am\nthe first, and I am for ever: and my hand has founded the earth, and\nmy right hand has established the heaven. I will call them, and they\nshall stand together, and be gathered, and hear. Who has declared\nto them these things? In love of thee I have done thy pleasure upon\nBabylon, that I might take away the seed of the Chaldeans. I have\nspoken, and I have called: I have brought him, and have made his way\nprosperous. Come ye near unto me, and hear this. I have not spoken in\nsecret from the beginning; when they were made, there was I. And now\nthe Lord God and His Spirit hath sent me.\"[836] It was Himself who\nwas speaking as the Lord God; and yet we should not have understood\nthat it was Jesus Christ had He not added, \"And now the Lord God\nand His Spirit hath sent me.\" For He said this with reference to\nthe form of a servant, speaking of a future event as if it were\npast, as in the same prophet we read, \"He was led as a sheep to the\nslaughter,\"[837] not \"He shall be led;\" but the past tense is used to\nexpress the future. And prophecy constantly speaks in this way.\n\nThere is also another passage in Zechariah which plainly declares\nthat the Almighty sent the Almighty; and of what persons can this be\nunderstood but of God the Father and God the Son? For it is written,\n\"Thus saith the Lord Almighty, After the glory hath He sent me unto\nthe nations which spoiled you; for he that toucheth you toucheth the\napple of His eye. Behold, I will bring mine hand upon them, and they\nshall be a spoil to their servants: and ye shall know that the Lord\nAlmighty hath sent me.\"[838] Observe, the Lord Almighty saith that\nthe Lord Almighty sent Him. Who can presume to understand these words\nof any other than Christ, who is speaking to the lost sheep of the\nhouse of Israel? For He says in the Gospel, \"I am not sent save to\nthe lost sheep of the house of Israel,\"[839] which He here compared\nto the pupil of God's eye, to signify the profoundest love. And\nto this class of sheep the apostles themselves belonged. But after\nthe glory, to wit, of His resurrection,--for before it happened the\nevangelist said that \"Jesus was not yet glorified,\"[840]--He was\nsent unto the nations in the persons of His apostles; and thus the\nsaying of the psalm was fulfilled, \"Thou wilt deliver me from the\ncontradictions of the people; Thou wilt set me as the head of the\nnations.\"[841] So that those who had spoiled the Israelites, and\nwhom the Israelites had served when they were subdued by them, were\nnot themselves to be spoiled in the same fashion, but were in their\nown persons to become the spoil of the Israelites. For this had been\npromised to the apostles when the Lord said, \"I will make you fishers\nof men.\"[842] And to one of them He says, \"From henceforth thou shalt\ncatch men.\"[843] They were then to become a spoil, but in a good\nsense, as those who are snatched from that strong one when he is\nbound by a stronger.[844]\n\nIn like manner the Lord, speaking by the same prophet, says, \"And it\nshall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the\nnations that come against Jerusalem. And I will pour upon the house\nof David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace\nand mercy; and they shall look upon me because they have insulted me,\nand they shall mourn for Him as for one very dear, and shall be in\nbitterness as for an only-begotten.\"[845] To whom but to God does it\nbelong to destroy all the nations that are hostile to the holy city\nJerusalem, which \"come against it,\" that is, are opposed to it, or, as\nsome translate, \"come upon it,\" as if putting it down under them; or\nto pour out upon the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem\nthe spirit of grace and mercy? This belongs doubtless to God, and it\nis to God the prophet ascribes the words; and yet Christ shows that He\nis the God who does these so great and divine things, when He goes on\nto say, \"And they shall look upon me because they have insulted me,\nand they shall mourn for Him as if for one very dear (or beloved), and\nshall be in bitterness for Him as for an only-begotten.\" For in that\nday the Jews--those of them, at least, who shall receive the spirit of\ngrace and mercy--when they see Him coming in His majesty, and recognise\nthat it is He whom they, in the person of their parents, insulted when\nHe came before in His humiliation, shall repent of insulting Him in\nHis passion: and their parents themselves, who were the perpetrators\nof this huge impiety, shall see Him when they rise; but this will be\nonly for their punishment, and not for their correction. It is not of\nthem we are to understand the words, \"And I will pour upon the house\nof David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace\nand mercy, and they shall look upon me because they have insulted me;\"\nbut we are to understand the words of their descendants, who shall at\nthat time believe through Elias. But as we say to the Jews, You killed\nChrist, although it was their parents who did so, so these persons\nshall grieve that they in some sort did what their progenitors did.\nAlthough, therefore, those that receive the spirit of mercy and grace,\nand believe, shall not be condemned with their impious parents, yet\nthey shall mourn as if they themselves had done what their parents\ndid. Their grief shall arise not so much from guilt as from pious\naffection. Certainly the words which the Septuagint have translated,\n\"They shall look upon me because they insulted me,\" stand in the\nHebrew, \"They shall look upon me whom they pierced.\"[846] And by this\nword the crucifixion of Christ is certainly more plainly indicated. But\nthe Septuagint translators preferred to allude to the insult which was\ninvolved in His whole passion. For in point of fact they insulted Him\nboth when He was arrested and when He was bound, when He was judged,\nwhen He was mocked by the robe they put on Him and the homage they did\non bended knee, when He was crowned with thorns and struck with a rod\non the head, when He bore His cross, and when at last He hung upon the\ntree. And therefore we recognise more fully the Lord's passion when we\ndo not confine ourselves to one interpretation, but combine both, and\nread both \"insulted\" and \"pierced.\"\n\nWhen, therefore, we read in the prophetical books that God is to come\nto do judgment at the last, from the mere mention of the judgment,\nand although there is nothing else to determine the meaning, we\nmust gather that Christ is meant; for though the Father will judge,\nHe will judge by the coming of the Son. For He Himself, by His own\nmanifested presence, \"judges no man, but has committed all judgment\nto the Son;\"[847] for as the Son was judged as a man, He shall also\njudge in human form. For it is none but He of whom God speaks by\nIsaiah under the name of Jacob and Israel, of whose seed Christ\ntook a body, as it is written, \"Jacob is my servant, I will uphold\nHim; Israel is mine elect, my Spirit has assumed Him: I have put my\nSpirit upon Him; He shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. He\nshall not cry, nor cease, neither shall His voice be heard without.\nA bruised reed shall He not break, and the smoking flax shall He not\nquench: but in truth shall He bring forth judgment. He shall shine\nand shall not be broken, until He sets judgment in the earth: and\nthe nations shall hope in His name.\"[848] The Hebrew has not \"Jacob\"\nand \"Israel;\" but the Septuagint translators, wishing to show the\nsignificance of the expression \"my servant,\" and that it refers\nto the form of a servant in which the Most High humbled Himself,\ninserted the name of that man from whose stock He took the form of a\nservant. The Holy Spirit was given to Him, and was manifested, as the\nevangelist testifies, in the form of a dove.[849] He brought forth\njudgment to the Gentiles, because He predicted what was hidden from\nthem. In His meekness He did not cry, nor did He cease to proclaim\nthe truth. But His voice was not heard, nor is it heard, without,\nbecause He is not obeyed by those who are outside of His body. And\nthe Jews themselves, who persecuted Him, He did not break, though\nas a bruised reed they had lost their integrity, and as smoking\nflax their light was quenched; for He spared them, having come to\nbe judged and not yet to judge. He brought forth judgment in truth,\ndeclaring that they should be punished did they persist in their\nwickedness. His face shone on the Mount,[850] His fame in the world.\nHe is not broken nor overcome, because neither in Himself nor in His\nChurch has persecution prevailed to annihilate Him. And therefore\nthat has not, and shall not, be brought about which His enemies said\nor say, \"When shall He die, and His name perish?\"[851] \"until He\nset judgment in the earth.\" Behold, the hidden thing which we were\nseeking is discovered. For this is the last judgment, which He will\nset in the earth when He comes from heaven. And it is in Him, too,\nwe already see the concluding expression of the prophecy fulfilled:\n\"In His name shall the nations hope.\" And by this fulfilment, which\nno one can deny, men are encouraged to believe in that which is most\nimpudently denied. For who could have hoped for that which even those\nwho do not yet believe in Christ now see fulfilled among us, and\nwhich is so undeniable that they can but gnash their teeth and pine\naway? Who, I say, could have hoped that the nations would hope in\nthe name of Christ, when He was arrested, bound, scourged, mocked,\ncrucified, when even the disciples themselves had lost the hope which\nthey had begun to have in Him? The hope which was then entertained\nscarcely by the one thief on the cross, is now cherished by nations\neverywhere on the earth, who are marked with the sign of the cross on\nwhich He died that they may not die eternally.\n\nThat the last judgment, then, shall be administered by Jesus Christ\nin the manner predicted in the sacred writings is denied or doubted\nby no one, unless by those who, through some incredible animosity or\nblindness, decline to believe these writings, though already their\ntruth is demonstrated to all the world. And at or in connection with\nthat judgment the following events shall come to pass, as we have\nlearned: Elias the Tishbite shall come; the Jews shall believe;\nAntichrist shall persecute; Christ shall judge; the dead shall rise;\nthe good and the wicked shall be separated; the world shall be burned\nand renewed. All these things, we believe, shall come to pass; but how,\nor in what order, human understanding cannot perfectly teach us, but\nonly the experience of the events themselves. My opinion, however, is,\nthat they will happen in the order in which I have related them.\n\nTwo books yet remain to be written by me, in order to complete, by\nGod's help, what I promised. One of these will explain the punishment\nof the wicked, the other the happiness of the righteous; and in them\nI shall be at special pains to refute, by God's grace, the arguments\nby which some unhappy creatures seem to themselves to undermine the\ndivine promises and threatenings, and to ridicule as empty words\nstatements which are the most salutary nutriment of faith. But they\nwho are instructed in divine things hold the truth and omnipotence\nof God to be the strongest arguments in favour of those things\nwhich, however incredible they seem to men, are yet contained in the\nScriptures, whose truth has already in many ways been proved; for\nthey are sure that God can in no wise lie, and that He can do what is\nimpossible to the unbelieving.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[673] Matt. viii. 29.\n\n[674] Rom. ix. 14.\n\n[675] Rom. xi. 33.\n\n[676] Ps. cxliv. 4.\n\n[677] Eccles. i. 2, 3.\n\n[678] Eccles. ii. 13, 14.\n\n[679] Eccles. viii. 14.\n\n[680] Eccles. xii. 13, 14.\n\n[681] Rom. iii. 20-22.\n\n[682] Matt. xiii. 52.\n\n[683] Matt. xi. 22.\n\n[684] Matt. xi. 24.\n\n[685] Matt. xii. 41, 42.\n\n[686] Augustine quotes the whole passage, Matt. xiii. 37-43.\n\n[687] Matt. xix. 28.\n\n[688] Matt. xii. 27.\n\n[689] 1 Cor. xv. 10.\n\n[690] 1 Cor. vi. 3.\n\n[691] _Ep._ 199.\n\n[692] Matt. xxv. 34-41, given in full.\n\n[693] John v. 22-24.\n\n[694] John v. 25, 26.\n\n[695] Matt. viii. 22.\n\n[696] Cor. v. 14, 15.\n\n[697] Ps. ci. 1.\n\n[698] John v. 28, 29.\n\n[699] Rev. xx. 1-6. The whole passage is quoted.\n\n[700] Pet. iii. 8.\n\n[701] _Serm._ 259.\n\n[702] Milliarii.\n\n[703] Mark iii. 27; \"Vasa\" for \"goods.\"\n\n[704] Matt. xix. 29.\n\n[705] 2 Cor. vi. 10.\n\n[706] Ps. cv. 8.\n\n[707] Col. i. 13.\n\n[708] 2 Tim. ii. 19.\n\n[709] Ps. cxxiii. 2.\n\n[710] Rev. xx. 9, 10.\n\n[711] 1 John ii. 19.\n\n[712] Matt. xxiv. 12.\n\n[713] Between His first and second coming.\n\n[714] Matt. xxv. 34.\n\n[715] Matt. xxviii. 20.\n\n[716] Matt. xiii. 39-41.\n\n[717] Matt. v. 19.\n\n[718] Matt. xxiii. 3.\n\n[719] Matt. v. 20.\n\n[720] Col. iii. 1, 2.\n\n[721] Phil. iii. 20.\n\n[722] Phil. ii. 21.\n\n[723] Matt. xviii. 18.\n\n[724] 1 Cor. v. 12.\n\n[725] Rev. xx. 4.\n\n[726] Rev. xiv. 13.\n\n[727] Rom. xiv. 9.\n\n[728] 2 Cor. vi. 14.\n\n[729] And, as Augustine remarks, are therefore called _cadavera_,\nfrom _cadere_, \"to fall.\"\n\n[730] Col. iii. 1.\n\n[731] Rom. vi. 4.\n\n[732] Eph. v. 14.\n\n[733] Ecclus. ii. 7.\n\n[734] Rom. xiv. 4.\n\n[735] 1 Cor. x. 12.\n\n[736] 1 Peter ii. 9.\n\n[737] Matt. xxv. 41.\n\n[738] Ps. lxix. 9.\n\n[739] Isa. xxvi. 11.\n\n[740] 2 Thess. ii. 8.\n\n[741] Ch. 24.\n\n[742] 1 Cor. vii. 31, 32.\n\n[743] Col. iii. 3.\n\n[744] Matt. viii. 22.\n\n[745] Rom. viii. 10.\n\n[746] \"Apud inferos,\" _i.e._ in hell, in the sense in which the word\nis used in the Psalms and in the Creed.\n\n[747] Matt. xxv. 46.\n\n[748] Rev. xxi. 1.\n\n[749] Rev. xv. 2.\n\n[750] Rev. xxi. 2-5.\n\n[751] Isa. xlv. 8.\n\n[752] Ps. xlii. 3.\n\n[753] Ps. vi. 6.\n\n[754] Ps. xxxviii. 9.\n\n[755] Ps. xxxix. 2.\n\n[756] 2 Cor. v. 4.\n\n[757] Rom. viii. 23.\n\n[758] Rom. ix. 2.\n\n[759] Augustine therefore read \u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2, and not with the Vulgate, \u03bd\u03af\u03ba\u03b7.\n\n[760] 1 Cor. xv. 55.\n\n[761] 1 John i. 8.\n\n[762] 2 Pet. iii. 3-13. The whole passage is quoted by Augustine.\n\n[763] 2 Thess. ii. 1-11. Whole passage given in the Latin. In ver. 3\n_refuga_ is used instead of the Vulgate's _discessio_.\n\n[764] Augustine adds the words, \"Sicut dicimus, Sedet in amicum, id\nest, velut amicus; vel si quid aliud isto locutionis genere dici\nsolet.\"\n\n[765] Suetonius' _Nero_, c. 57.\n\n[766] 1 John ii. 18, 19.\n\n[767] 1 Thess. iv. 13-16.\n\n[768] 1 Cor. xv. 22.\n\n[769] 1 Cor. xv. 36.\n\n[770] Gen. iii. 19.\n\n[771] 1 Cor. xv. 51.\n\n[772] Isa. xxvi. 19.\n\n[773] Isa. lxvi. 12-16.\n\n[774] Gal. iv. 26.\n\n[775] Matt. v. 8.\n\n[776] Isa. lxv. 17-19.\n\n[777] Phil. iii. 19.\n\n[778] Rom. viii. 6.\n\n[779] Gen. vi. 3.\n\n[780] Luke xii. 49.\n\n[781] Acts ii. 3.\n\n[782] Matt. x. 34.\n\n[783] Heb. iv. 12.\n\n[784] Song of Sol. ii. 5.\n\n[785] Isa. lxvi. 18.\n\n[786] Rom. iii. 23.\n\n[787] Isa. lxvi. 22-24.\n\n[788] As the Vulgate: _cadavera virorum_.\n\n[789] Here Augustine inserts the remark, \"Who does not see that\n_cadavera_ (carcases) are so called from _cadendo_ (falling)?\"\n\n[790] Matt. xxv. 30.\n\n[791] 1 Cor. xv. 28.\n\n[792] 1 John iii. 9.\n\n[793] Isa. lvi. 5.\n\n[794] Dan. vii. 15-28. Passage cited at length.\n\n[795] Dan. xii. 1-3.\n\n[796] John v. 28.\n\n[797] Gen. xvii. 5, and xxii. 18.\n\n[798] Dan. xii. 13.\n\n[799] Ps. cii. 25-27.\n\n[800] 1 Cor. vii. 31.\n\n[801] 1 John ii. 17.\n\n[802] Matt. xxiv. 35.\n\n[803] 2 Pet. iii. 6.\n\n[804] 2 Pet. iii. 10, 11.\n\n[805] Matt. xxiv. 29.\n\n[806] _\u00c6neid_, ii. 694.\n\n[807] Ps. l. 3-5.\n\n[808] Isa. liii. 7.\n\n[809] Matt. xxvi. 63.\n\n[810] Ch. 21.\n\n[811] 1 Thess. iv. 17.\n\n[812] Hos. vi. 6.\n\n[813] Ch. 6.\n\n[814] Matt. xxv. 34.\n\n[815] In his _Proem. ad Mal._\n\n[816] See Smith's _Bible Dict._\n\n[817] Mal. iii. 1-6. Whole passage quoted.\n\n[818] Isa. iv. 4.\n\n[819] 1 John i. 8.\n\n[820] Job xiv. 4.\n\n[821] Rom. i. 17.\n\n[822] Isa. lxv. 22.\n\n[823] Prov. iii. 18.\n\n[824] Wisd. i. 9.\n\n[825] Rom. ii. 15, 16.\n\n[826] Mal. iii. 17-iv. 3.\n\n[827] Mal. iv. 4.\n\n[828] John v. 46.\n\n[829] Mal. iii. 14, 15.\n\n[830] Mal. ii. 17.\n\n[831] In innocentibus.\n\n[832] Ps. lxxiii.\n\n[833] Mal. iv. 5, 6.\n\n[834] 2 Kings ii. 11.\n\n[835] Mal. ii. 17, iii. 14.\n\n[836] Isa. xlviii. 12-16.\n\n[837] Isa. liii. 7.\n\n[838] Zech. ii. 8, 9.\n\n[839] Matt. xv. 24.\n\n[840] John vii. 39.\n\n[841] Ps. xviii. 43.\n\n[842] Matt. iv. 19.\n\n[843] Luke v. 10.\n\n[844] Matt. xii. 29.\n\n[845] Zech. xii. 9, 10.\n\n[846] So the Vulgate.\n\n[847] John v. 22.\n\n[848] Isa. xlii. 1-4.\n\n[849] John i. 32.\n\n[850] Matt. xvii. 1, 2.\n\n[851] Ps. xli. 5.\n\n\n\n\n                          BOOK TWENTY-FIRST.\n\n                               ARGUMENT.\n\n  OF THE END RESERVED FOR THE CITY OF THE DEVIL, NAMELY, THE ETERNAL\n      PUNISHMENT OF THE DAMNED; AND OF THE ARGUMENTS WHICH UNBELIEF\n      BRINGS AGAINST IT.\n\n\n  1. _Of the order of the discussion, which requires that we first\n      speak of the eternal punishment of the lost in company with the\n      devil, and then of the eternal happiness of the saints._\n\nI propose, with such ability as God may grant me, to discuss in this\nbook more thoroughly the nature of the punishment which shall be\nassigned to the devil and all his retainers, when the two cities, the\none of God, the other of the devil, shall have reached their proper\nends through Jesus Christ our Lord, the Judge of quick and dead.\nAnd I have adopted this order, and preferred to speak, first of the\npunishment of the devils, and afterwards of the blessedness of the\nsaints, because the _body_ partakes of either destiny; and it seems\nto be more incredible that bodies endure in everlasting torments than\nthat they continue to exist without any pain in everlasting felicity.\nConsequently, when I shall have demonstrated that that punishment\nought not to be incredible, this will materially aid me in proving\nthat which is much more credible, viz. the immortality of the bodies\nof the saints which are delivered from all pain. Neither is this\norder out of harmony with the divine writings, in which sometimes,\nindeed, the blessedness of the good is placed first, as in the words,\n\"They that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they\nthat have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation;\"[852] but\nsometimes also last, as, \"The Son of man shall send forth His angels,\nand they shall gather out of His kingdom all things which offend,\nand shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing\nand gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as\nthe sun in the kingdom of His Father;\"[853] and that, \"These shall\ngo away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life\neternal.\"[854] And though we have not room to cite instances, any\none who examines the prophets will find that they adopt now the one\narrangement and now the other. My own reason for following the latter\norder I have given.\n\n\n       2. _Whether it is possible for bodies to last for ever in\n                            burning fire._\n\nWhat, then, can I adduce to convince those who refuse to believe that\nhuman bodies, animated and living, can not only survive death, but\nalso last in the torments of everlasting fires? They will not allow\nus to refer this simply to the power of the Almighty, but demand\nthat we persuade them by some example. If, then, we reply to them,\nthat there are animals which certainly are corruptible, because they\nare mortal, and which yet live in the midst of flames; and likewise,\nthat in springs of water so hot that no one can put his hand in it\nwith impunity a species of worm is found, which not only lives there,\nbut cannot live elsewhere; they either refuse to believe these facts\nunless we can show them, or, if we are in circumstances to prove them\nby ocular demonstration or by adequate testimony, they contend, with\nthe same scepticism, that these facts are not examples of what we\nseek to prove, inasmuch as these animals do not live for ever, and\nbesides, they live in that blaze of heat without pain, the element\nof fire being congenial to their nature, and causing it to thrive\nand not to suffer,--just as if it were not more incredible that it\nshould thrive than that it should suffer in such circumstances. It\nis strange that anything should suffer in fire and yet live, but\nstranger that it should live in fire and not suffer. If, then, the\nlatter be believed, why not also the former?\n\n\n      3. _Whether bodily suffering necessarily terminates in the\n                      destruction of the flesh._\n\nBut, say they, there is no body which can suffer and cannot also\ndie. How do we know this? For who can say with certainty that the\ndevils do not suffer in their bodies, when they own that they are\ngrievously tormented? And if it is replied that there is no earthly\nbody--that is to say, no solid and perceptible body, or, in one word,\nno flesh--which can suffer and cannot die, is not this to tell us\nonly what men have gathered from experience and their bodily senses?\nFor they indeed have no acquaintance with any flesh but that which\nis mortal; and this is their whole argument, that what they have had\nno experience of they judge quite impossible. For we cannot call it\nreasoning to make pain a presumption of death, while, in fact, it\nis rather a sign of life. For though it be a question whether that\nwhich suffers can continue to live for ever, yet it is certain that\neverything which suffers pain does live, and that pain can exist\nonly in a living subject. It is necessary, therefore, that he who is\npained be living, not necessary that pain kill him; for every pain\ndoes not kill even those mortal bodies of ours which are destined to\ndie. And that any pain kills them is caused by the circumstance that\nthe soul is so connected with the body that it succumbs to great pain\nand withdraws; for the structure of our members and vital parts is\nso infirm that it cannot bear up against that violence which causes\ngreat or extreme agony. But in the life to come this connection of\nsoul and body is of such a kind, that as it is dissolved by no lapse\nof time, so neither is it burst asunder by any pain. And so, although\nit be true that in this world there is no flesh which can suffer pain\nand yet cannot die, yet in the world to come there shall be flesh\nsuch as now there is not, as there will also be death such as now\nthere is not. For death will not be abolished, but will be eternal,\nsince the soul will neither be able to enjoy God and live, nor to die\nand escape the pains of the body. The first death drives the soul\nfrom the body against her will: the second death holds the soul in\nthe body against her will. The two have this in common, that the soul\nsuffers against her will what her own body inflicts.\n\nOur opponents, too, make much of this, that in this world there is no\nflesh which can suffer pain and cannot die; while they make nothing\nof the fact that there is something which is greater than the body.\nFor the spirit, whose presence animates and rules the body, can both\nsuffer pain and cannot die. Here then is something which, though it\ncan feel pain, is immortal. And this capacity, which we now see in\nthe spirit of all, shall be hereafter in the bodies of the damned.\nMoreover, if we attend to the matter a little more closely, we see\nthat what is called bodily pain is rather to be referred to the soul.\nFor it is the soul, not the body, which is pained, even when the pain\noriginates with the body,--the soul feeling pain at the point where\nthe body is hurt. As then we speak of bodies feeling and living,\nthough the feeling and life of the body are from the soul, so also we\nspeak of bodies being pained, though no pain can be suffered by the\nbody apart from the soul. The soul, then, is pained with the body in\nthat part where something occurs to hurt it; and it is pained alone,\nthough it be in the body, when some invisible cause distresses it,\nwhile the body is safe and sound. Even when not associated with the\nbody it is pained; for certainly that rich man was suffering in hell\nwhen he cried, \"I am tormented in this flame.\"[855] But as for the\nbody, it suffers no pain when it is soulless; and even when animate\nit can suffer only by the soul's suffering. If, therefore, we might\ndraw a just presumption from the existence of pain to that of death,\nand conclude that where pain can be felt death can occur, death would\nrather be the property of the soul, for to it pain more peculiarly\nbelongs. But, seeing that that which suffers most cannot die, what\nground is there for supposing that those bodies, because destined\nto suffer, are therefore destined to die? The Platonists indeed\nmaintained that these earthly bodies and dying members gave rise\nto the fears, desires, griefs, and joys of the soul. \"Hence,\" says\nVirgil (_i.e._ from these earthly bodies and dying members),\n\n          \"Hence wild desires and grovelling fears,\n           And human laughter, human tears.\"[856]\n\nBut in the fourteenth book of this work[857] we have proved that,\naccording to the Platonists' own theory, souls, even when purged\nfrom all pollution of the body, are yet possessed by a monstrous\ndesire to return again into their bodies. But where desire can exist,\ncertainly pain also can exist; for desire frustrated, either by\nmissing what it aims at or losing what it had attained, is turned\ninto pain. And therefore, if the soul, which is either the only or\nthe chief sufferer, has yet a kind of immortality of its own, it\nis inconsequent to say that because the bodies of the damned shall\nsuffer pain, therefore they shall die. In fine, if the body causes\nthe soul to suffer, why can the body not cause death as well as\nsuffering, unless because it does not follow that what causes pain\ncauses death as well? And why then is it incredible that these fires\ncan cause pain but not death to those bodies we speak of, just as the\nbodies themselves cause pain, but not therefore death, to the souls?\nPain is therefore no necessary presumption of death.\n\n\n        4. _Examples from nature proving that bodies may remain\n                    unconsumed and alive in fire._\n\nIf, therefore, the salamander lives in fire, as naturalists[858]\nhave recorded, and if certain famous mountains of Sicily have been\ncontinually on fire from the remotest antiquity until now, and yet\nremain entire, these are sufficiently convincing examples that\neverything which burns is not consumed. As the soul, too, is a proof\nthat not everything which can suffer pain can also die, why then do\nthey yet demand that we produce real examples to prove that it is not\nincredible that the bodies of men condemned to everlasting punishment\nmay retain their soul in the fire, may burn without being consumed,\nand may suffer without perishing? For suitable properties will be\ncommunicated to the substance of the flesh by Him who has endowed the\nthings we see with so marvellous and diverse properties, that their\nvery multitude prevents our wonder. For who but God the Creator of all\nthings has given to the flesh of the peacock its antiseptic property?\nThis property, when I first heard of it, seemed to me incredible;\nbut it happened at Carthage that a bird of this kind was cooked and\nserved up to me, and, taking a suitable slice of flesh from its breast,\nI ordered it to be kept, and when it had been kept as many days as\nmake any other flesh stinking, it was produced and set before me, and\nemitted no offensive smell. And after it had been laid by for thirty\ndays and more, it was still in the same state; and a year after, the\nsame still, except that it was a little more shrivelled, and drier. Who\ngave to chaff such power to freeze that it preserves snow buried under\nit, and such power to warm that it ripens green fruit?\n\nBut who can explain the strange properties of fire itself, which\nblackens everything it burns, though itself bright; and which, though\nof the most beautiful colours, discolours almost all it touches and\nfeeds upon, and turns blazing fuel into grimy cinders? Still this is\nnot laid down as an absolutely uniform law; for, on the contrary,\nstones baked in glowing fire themselves also glow, and though the\nfire be rather of a red hue, and they white, yet white is congruous\nwith light, and black with darkness. Thus, though the fire burns\nthe wood in calcining the stones, these contrary effects do not\nresult from the contrariety of the materials. For though wood and\nstone differ, they are not contraries, like black and white, the\none of which colours is produced in the stones, while the other is\nproduced in the wood by the same action of fire, which imparts its\nown brightness to the former, while it begrimes the latter, and which\ncould have no effect on the one were it not fed by the other. Then\nwhat wonderful properties do we find in charcoal, which is so brittle\nthat a light tap breaks it and a slight pressure pulverizes it, and\nyet is so strong that no moisture rots it, nor any time causes it\nto decay. So enduring is it, that it is customary in laying down\nlandmarks to put charcoal underneath them, so that if, after the\nlongest interval, any one raises an action, and pleads that there is\nno boundary stone, he may be convicted by the charcoal below. What\nthen has enabled it to last so long without rotting, though buried in\nthe damp earth in which [its original] wood rots, except this same\nfire which consumes all things?\n\nAgain, let us consider the wonders of lime; for besides growing\nwhite in fire, which makes other things black, and of which I have\nalready said enough, it has also a mysterious property of conceiving\nfire within it. Itself cold to the touch, it yet has a hidden store\nof fire, which is not at once apparent to our senses, but which\nexperience teaches us, lies as it were slumbering within it even\nwhile unseen. And it is for this reason called \"quick lime,\" as if\nthe fire were the invisible soul quickening the visible substance or\nbody. But the marvellous thing is, that this fire is kindled when\nit is extinguished. For to disengage the hidden fire the lime is\nmoistened or drenched with water, and then, though it be cold before,\nit becomes hot by that very application which cools what is hot. As\nif the fire were departing from the lime and breathing its last,\nit no longer lies hid, but appears; and then the lime lying in the\ncoldness of death cannot be requickened, and what we before called\n\"quick,\" we now call \"slaked.\" What can be stranger than this? Yet\nthere is a greater marvel still. For if you treat the lime, not with\nwater, but with oil, which is as fuel to fire, no amount of oil will\nheat it. Now if this marvel had been told us of some Indian mineral\nwhich we had no opportunity of experimenting upon, we should either\nhave forthwith pronounced it a falsehood, or certainly should have\nbeen greatly astonished. But things that daily present themselves\nto our own observation we despise, not because they are really less\nmarvellous, but because they are common; so that even some products\nof India itself, remote as it is from ourselves, cease to excite our\nadmiration as soon as we can admire them at our leisure.[859]\n\nThe diamond is a stone possessed by many among ourselves, especially\nby jewellers and lapidaries, and the stone is so hard that it can\nbe wrought neither by iron nor fire, nor, they say, by anything at\nall except goat's blood. But do you suppose it is as much admired by\nthose who own it and are familiar with its properties as by those to\nwhom it is shown for the first time? Persons who have not seen it\nperhaps do not believe what is said of it, or if they do, they wonder\nas at a thing beyond their experience; and if they happen to see\nit, still they marvel because they are unused to it, but gradually\nfamiliar experience [of it] dulls their admiration. We know that\nthe loadstone has a wonderful power of attracting iron. When I first\nsaw it I was thunderstruck, for I saw an iron ring attracted and\nsuspended by the stone; and then, as if it had communicated its own\nproperty to the iron it attracted, and had made it a substance like\nitself, this ring was put near another, and lifted it up; and as the\nfirst ring clung to the magnet, so did the second ring to the first.\nA third and a fourth were similarly added, so that there hung from\nthe stone a kind of chain of rings, with their hoops connected, not\ninterlinking, but attached together by their outer surface. Who would\nnot be amazed at this virtue of the stone, subsisting as it does not\nonly in itself, but transmitted through so many suspended rings, and\nbinding them together by invisible links? Yet far more astonishing\nis what I heard about this stone from my brother in the episcopate,\nSeverus bishop of Milevis. He told me that Bathanarius, once count of\nAfrica, when the bishop was dining with him, produced a magnet, and\nheld it under a silver plate on which he placed a bit of iron; then\nas he moved his hand with the magnet underneath the plate, the iron\nupon the plate moved about accordingly. The intervening silver was\nnot affected at all, but precisely as the magnet was moved backwards\nand forwards below it, no matter how quickly, so was the iron\nattracted above. I have related what I myself have witnessed; I have\nrelated what I was told by one whom I trust as I trust my own eyes.\nLet me further say what I have read about this magnet. When a diamond\nis laid near it, it does not lift iron; or if it has already lifted\nit, as soon as the diamond approaches, it drops it. These stones\ncome from India. But if we cease to admire them because they are now\nfamiliar, how much less must they admire them who procure them very\neasily and send them to us? Perhaps they are held as cheap as we hold\nlime, which, because it is common, we think nothing of, though it has\nthe strange property of burning when water, which is wont to quench\nfire, is poured on it, and of remaining cool when mixed with oil,\nwhich ordinarily feeds fire.\n\n\n    5. _That there are many things which reason cannot account for,\n                   and which are nevertheless true._\n\nNevertheless, when we declare the miracles which God has wrought,\nor will yet work, and which we cannot bring under the very eyes of\nmen, sceptics keep demanding that we shall explain these marvels\nto reason. And because we cannot do so, inasmuch as they are above\nhuman comprehension, they suppose we are speaking falsely. These\npersons themselves, therefore, ought to account for all these marvels\nwhich we either can or do see. And if they perceive that this is\nimpossible for man to do, they should acknowledge that it cannot be\nconcluded that a thing has not been or shall not be because it cannot\nbe reconciled to reason, since there are things now in existence of\nwhich the same is true. I will not, then, detail the multitude of\nmarvels which are related in books, and which refer not to things\nthat happened once and passed away, but that are permanent in certain\nplaces, where, if any one has the desire and opportunity, he may\nascertain their truth; but a few only I recount. The following are\nsome of the marvels men tell us:--The salt of Agrigentum in Sicily,\nwhen thrown into the fire, becomes fluid as if it were in water, but\nin the water it crackles as if it were in the fire. The Garamant\u00e6\nhave a fountain so cold by day that no one can drink it, so hot by\nnight no one can touch it.[860] In Epirus, too, there is a fountain\nwhich, like all others, quenches lighted torches, but, unlike all\nothers, lights quenched torches. There is a stone found in Arcadia,\nand called asbestos, because once lit it cannot be put out. The wood\nof a certain kind of Egyptian fig-tree sinks in water, and does not\nfloat like other wood; and, stranger still, when it has been sunk\nto the bottom for some time, it rises again to the surface, though\nnature requires that when soaked in water it should be heavier than\never. Then there are the apples of Sodom, which grow indeed to an\nappearance of ripeness, but, when you touch them with hand or tooth,\nthe peel cracks, and they crumble into dust and ashes. The Persian\nstone pyrites burns the hand when it is tightly held in it, and so\ngets its name from fire. In Persia, too, there is found another\nstone called selenite, because its interior brilliancy waxes and\nwanes with the moon. Then in Cappadocia the mares are impregnated by\nthe wind, and their foals live only three years. Tilon, an Indian\nisland, has this advantage over all other lands, that no tree which\ngrows in it ever loses its foliage.\n\nThese and numberless other marvels recorded in the history, not of\npast events, but of permanent localities, I have no time to enlarge\nupon and diverge from my main object; but let those sceptics who\nrefuse to credit the divine writings give me, if they can, a rational\naccount of them. For their only ground of unbelief in the Scriptures\nis, that they contain incredible things, just such as I have been\nrecounting. For, say they, reason cannot admit that flesh burn and\nremain unconsumed, suffer without dying. Mighty reasoners, indeed,\nwho are competent to give the reason of all the marvels that exist!\nLet them then give us the reason of the few things we have cited,\nand which, if they did not know they existed, and were only assured\nby us they would at some future time occur, they would believe still\nless than that which they now refuse to credit on our word. For\nwhich of them would believe us if, instead of saying that the living\nbodies of men hereafter will be such as to endure everlasting pain\nand fire without ever dying, we were to say that in the world to\ncome there will be salt which becomes liquid in fire as if it were\nin water, and crackles in water as if it were in fire; or that there\nwill be a fountain whose water in the chill air of night is so hot\nthat it cannot be touched, while in the heat of day it is so cold\nthat it cannot be drunk; or that there will be a stone which by its\nown heat burns the hand when tightly held, or a stone which cannot\nbe extinguished if it has been lit in any part; or any of those\nwonders I have cited, while omitting numberless others? If we were\nto say that these things would be found in the world to come, and\nour sceptics were to reply, \"If you wish us to believe these things,\nsatisfy our reason about each of them,\" we should confess that we\ncould not, because the frail comprehension of man cannot master these\nand such-like wonders of God's working; and that yet our reason was\nthoroughly convinced that the Almighty does nothing without reason,\nthough the frail mind of man cannot explain the reason; and that\nwhile we are in many instances uncertain what He intends, yet that it\nis always most certain that nothing which He intends is impossible\nto Him; and that when He declares His mind, we believe Him whom we\ncannot believe to be either powerless or false. Nevertheless these\ncavillers at faith and exactors of reason, how do they dispose of\nthose things of which a reason cannot be given, and which yet exist,\nthough in apparent contrariety to the nature of things? If we had\nannounced that these things were to be, these sceptics would have\ndemanded from us the reason of them, as they do in the case of those\nthings which we are announcing as destined to be. And consequently,\nas these present marvels are not non-existent, though human reason\nand discourse are lost in such works of God, so those things we speak\nof are not impossible because inexplicable; for in this particular\nthey are in the same predicament as the marvels of earth.\n\n\n  6. _That all marvels are not of nature's production, but that some\n    are due to human ingenuity and others to diabolic contrivance._\n\nAt this point they will perhaps reply, \"These things have no\nexistence; we don't believe one of them; they are travellers' tales\nand fictitious romances;\" and they may add what has the appearance\nof argument, and say, \"If you believe such things as these, believe\nwhat is recorded in the same books, that there was or is a temple of\nVenus in which a candelabrum set in the open air holds a lamp, which\nburns so strongly that no storm or rain extinguishes it, and which\nis therefore called, like the stone mentioned above, the asbestos\nor inextinguishable lamp.\" They may say this with the intention of\nputting us into a dilemma: for if we say this is incredible, then\nwe shall impugn the truth of the other recorded marvels; if, on the\nother hand, we admit that this is credible, we shall avouch the pagan\ndeities. But, as I have already said in the eighteenth book of this\nwork, we do not hold it necessary to believe all that profane history\ncontains, since, as Varro says, even historians themselves disagree\non so many points, that one would think they intended and were at\npains to do so; but we believe, if we are disposed, those things\nwhich are not contradicted by these books, which we do not hesitate\nto say we _are_ bound to believe. But as to those permanent miracles\nof nature, whereby we wish to persuade the sceptical of the miracles\nof the world to come, those are quite sufficient for our purpose\nwhich we ourselves can observe, or of which it is not difficult to\nfind trustworthy witnesses. Moreover, that temple of Venus, with its\ninextinguishable lamp, so far from hemming us into a corner, opens\nan advantageous field to our argument. For to this inextinguishable\nlamp we add a host of marvels wrought by men, or by magic,--that is,\nby men under the influence of devils, or by the devils directly,--for\nsuch marvels we cannot deny without impugning the truth of the sacred\nScriptures we believe. That lamp, therefore, was either by some\nmechanical and human device fitted with asbestos, or it was arranged\nby magical art in order that the worshippers might be astonished, or\nsome devil under the name of Venus so signally manifested himself\nthat this prodigy both began and became permanent. Now devils are\nattracted to dwell in certain temples by means of the creatures\n(God's creatures, not theirs), who present to them what suits their\nvarious tastes. They are attracted not by food like animals, but,\nlike spirits, by such symbols as suit their taste, various kinds\nof stones, woods, plants, animals, songs, rites. And that men may\nprovide these attractions, the devils first of all cunningly seduce\nthem, either by imbuing their hearts with a secret poison, or by\nrevealing themselves under a friendly guise, and thus make a few of\nthem their disciples, who become the instructors of the multitude.\nFor unless they first instructed men, it were impossible to know what\neach of them desires, what they shrink from, by what name they should\nbe invoked or constrained to be present. Hence the origin of magic\nand magicians. But, above all, they possess the hearts of men, and\nare chiefly proud of this possession when they transform themselves\ninto angels of light. Very many things that occur, therefore,\nare their doing; and these deeds of theirs we ought all the more\ncarefully to shun as we acknowledge them to be very surprising.\nAnd yet these very deeds forward my present arguments. For if such\nmarvels are wrought by unclean devils, how much mightier are the holy\nangels! and what cannot that God do who made the angels themselves\ncapable of working miracles!\n\nIf, then, very many effects can be contrived by human art, of so\nsurprising a kind that the uninitiated think them divine, as when,\n_e.g._, in a certain temple two magnets have been adjusted, one in\nthe roof, another in the floor, so that an iron image is suspended in\nmid-air between them, one would suppose by the power of the divinity,\nwere he ignorant of the magnets above and beneath; or, as in the case\nof that lamp of Venus which we already mentioned as being a skilful\nadaptation of asbestos; if, again, by the help of magicians, whom\nScripture calls sorcerers and enchanters, the devils could gain such\npower that the noble poet Virgil should consider himself justified in\ndescribing a very powerful magician in these lines:\n\n          \"Her charms can cure what souls she please,\n           Rob other hearts of healthful ease,\n           Turn rivers backward to their source,\n           And make the stars forget their course,\n                 And call up ghosts from night:\n           The ground shall bellow 'neath your feet:\n           The mountain-ash shall quit its seat,\n                 And travel down the height;\"[861]--\n\nif this be so, how much more able is God to do those things which to\nsceptics are incredible, but to His power easy, since it is He who\nhas given to stones and all other things their virtue, and to men\ntheir skill to use them in wonderful ways; He who has given to the\nangels a nature more mighty than that of all that lives on earth;\nHe whose power surpasses all marvels, and whose wisdom in working,\nordaining, and permitting is no less marvellous in its governance of\nall things than in its creation of all!\n\n\n      7. _That the ultimate reason for believing miracles is the\n                     omnipotence of the Creator._\n\nWhy, then, cannot God effect both that the bodies of the dead\nshall rise, and that the bodies of the damned shall be tormented\nin everlasting fire,--God, who made the world full of countless\nmiracles in sky, earth, air, and waters, while itself is a miracle\nunquestionably greater and more admirable than all the marvels it is\nfilled with? But those with whom or against whom we are arguing,\nwho believe both that there is a God who made the world, and that\nthere are gods created by Him who administer the world's laws as\nHis vicegerents,--our adversaries, I say, who, so far from denying\nemphatically, assert that there are powers in the world which effect\nmarvellous results (whether of their own accord, or because they\nare invoked by some rite or prayer, or in some magical way), when\nwe lay before them the wonderful properties of other things which\nare neither rational animals nor rational spirits, but such material\nobjects as those we have just cited, are in the habit of replying,\nThis is their natural property, their nature; these are the powers\nnaturally belonging to them. Thus the whole reason why Agrigentine\nsalt dissolves in fire and crackles in water is that this is its\nnature. Yet this seems rather contrary to nature, which has given\nnot to fire but to water the power of melting salt, and the power\nof scorching it not to water but to fire. But this, they say, is\nthe natural property of _this_ salt, to show effects contrary to\nthese. The same reason, therefore, is assigned to account for that\nGaramantian fountain, of which one and the same runlet is chill by\nday and boiling by night, so that in either extreme it cannot be\ntouched. So also of that other fountain which, though it is cold\nto the touch, and though it, like other fountains, extinguishes a\nlighted torch, yet, unlike other fountains, and in a surprising\nmanner, kindles an extinguished torch. So of the asbestos stone,\nwhich, though it has no heat of its own, yet when kindled by fire\napplied to it, cannot be extinguished. And so of the rest, which\nI am weary of reciting, and in which, though there seems to be an\nextraordinary property contrary to nature, yet no other reason is\ngiven for them than this, that this is their nature,--a brief reason\ntruly, and, I own, a satisfactory reply. But since God is the author\nof all natures, how is it that our adversaries, when they refuse to\nbelieve what we affirm, on the ground that it is impossible, are\nunwilling to accept from us a better explanation than their own,\nviz. that this is the will of Almighty God,--for certainly He is\ncalled Almighty only because He is mighty to do all He will,--He who\nwas able to create so many marvels, not only unknown, but very well\nascertained, as I have been showing, and which, were they not under\nour own observation, or reported by recent and credible witnesses,\nwould certainly be pronounced impossible? For as for those marvels\nwhich have no other testimony than the writers in whose books we\nread them, and who wrote without being divinely instructed, and are\ntherefore liable to human error, we cannot justly blame any one who\ndeclines to believe them.\n\nFor my own part, I do not wish all the marvels I have cited to be\nrashly accepted, for I do not myself believe them implicitly, save\nthose which have either come under my own observation, or which\nany one can readily verify,--such as the lime which is heated by\nwater and cooled by oil; the magnet which by its mysterious and\ninsensible suction attracts the iron, but has no effect on a straw;\nthe peacock's flesh which triumphs over the corruption from which\nnot the flesh of Plato is exempt; the chaff so chilling that it\nprevents snow from melting, so heating that it forces apples to\nripen; the glowing fire, which, in accordance with its glowing\nappearance, whitens the stones it bakes, while, contrary to its\nglowing appearance, it begrimes most things it burns (just as dirty\nstains are made by oil, however pure it be, and as the lines drawn\nby white silver are black); the charcoal, too, which by the action\nof fire is so completely changed from its original, that a finely\nmarked piece of wood becomes hideous, the tough becomes brittle, the\ndecaying incorruptible. Some of these things I know in common with\nmany other persons, some of them in common with all men; and there\nare many others which I have not room to insert in this book. But of\nthose which I have cited, though I have not myself seen, but only\nread about them, I have been unable to find trustworthy witnesses\nfrom whom I could ascertain whether they are facts, except in the\ncase of that fountain in which burning torches are extinguished and\nextinguished torches lit, and of the apples of Sodom, which are\nripe to appearance, but are filled with dust. And indeed I have not\nmet with any who said they had seen that fountain in Epirus, but\nwith some who knew there was a similar fountain in Gaul not far\nfrom Grenoble. The fruit of the trees of Sodom, however, is not\nonly spoken of in books worthy of credit, but so many persons say\nthat they have seen it that I cannot doubt the fact. But the rest\nof the prodigies I receive without definitely affirming or denying\nthem; and I have cited them because I read them in the authors of\nour adversaries, and that I might prove how many things many among\nthemselves believe, because they are written in the works of their\nown literary men, though no rational explanation of them is given,\nand yet they scorn to believe us when we assert that Almighty God\nwill do what is beyond their experience and observation; and this\nthey do even though we assign a reason for His work. For what better\nand stronger reason for such things can be given than to say that the\nAlmighty is able to bring them to pass, and will bring them to pass,\nhaving predicted them in those books in which many other marvels\nwhich have already come to pass were predicted? Those things which\nare regarded as impossible will be accomplished according to the\nword, and by the power of that God who predicted and effected that\nthe incredulous nations should believe incredible wonders.\n\n\n  8. _That it is not contrary to nature that, in an object whose\n      nature is known, there should be discovered an alteration of\n      the properties which have been known as its natural properties._\n\nBut if they reply that their reason for not believing us when we say\nthat human bodies will always burn and yet never die, is that the\nnature of human bodies is known to be quite otherwise constituted; if\nthey say that for this miracle we cannot give the reason which was\nvalid in the case of those natural miracles, viz. that this is the\nnatural property, the nature of the thing,--for we know that this\nis not the nature of human flesh,--we find our answer in the sacred\nwritings, that even this human flesh was constituted in one fashion\nbefore there was sin,--was constituted, in fact, so that it could not\ndie,--and in another fashion after sin, being made such as we see it in\nthis miserable state of mortality, unable to retain enduring life. And\nso in the resurrection of the dead shall it be constituted differently\nfrom its present well-known condition. But as they do not believe these\nwritings of ours, in which we read what nature man had in paradise, and\nhow remote he was from the necessity of death,--and indeed, if they did\nbelieve them, we should of course have little trouble in debating with\nthem the future punishment of the damned,--we must produce from the\nwritings of their own most learned authorities some instances to show\nthat it is possible for a thing to become different from what it was\nformerly known characteristically to be.\n\nFrom the book of Marcus Varro, entitled, _Of the Race Of the Roman\nPeople_, I cite word for word the following instance: \"There\noccurred a remarkable celestial portent; for Castor records that,\nin the brilliant star Venus, called Vesperugo by Plautus, and the\nlovely Hesperus by Homer, there occurred so strange a prodigy, that\nit changed its colour, size, form, course, which never happened\nbefore nor since. Adrastus of Cyzicus, and Dion of Naples, famous\nmathematicians, said that this occurred in the reign of Ogyges.\"\nSo great an author as Varro would certainly not have called this a\nportent had it not seemed to be contrary to nature. For we say that\nall portents are contrary to nature; but they are not so. For how is\nthat contrary to nature which happens by the will of God, since the\nwill of so mighty a Creator is certainly the nature of each created\nthing? A portent, therefore, happens not contrary to nature, but\ncontrary to what we know as nature. But who can number the multitude\nof portents recorded in profane histories? Let us then at present fix\nour attention on this one only which concerns the matter in hand.\nWhat is there so arranged by the Author of the nature of heaven and\nearth as the exactly ordered course of the stars? What is there\nestablished by laws so sure and inflexible? And yet, when it pleased\nHim who with sovereignty and supreme power regulates all He has\ncreated, a star conspicuous among the rest by its size and splendour\nchanged its colour, size, form, and, most wonderful of all, the order\nand law of its course! Certainly that phenomenon disturbed the canons\nof the astronomers, if there were any then, by which they tabulate,\nas by unerring computation, the past and future movements of the\nstars, so as to take upon them to affirm that this which happened to\nthe morning star (Venus) never happened before nor since. But we read\nin the divine books that even the sun itself stood still when a holy\nman, Joshua the son of Nun, had begged this from God until victory\nshould finish the battle he had begun; and that it even went back,\nthat the promise of fifteen years added to the life of king Hezekiah\nmight be sealed by this additional prodigy. But these miracles, which\nwere vouchsafed to the merits of holy men, even when our adversaries\nbelieve them, they attribute to magical arts; so Virgil, in the lines\nI quoted above, ascribes to magic the power to\n\n          \"Turn rivers backward to their source,\n           And make the stars forget their course.\"\n\nFor in our sacred books we read that this also happened, that a river\n\"turned backward,\" was stayed above while the lower part flowed\non, when the people passed over under the above-mentioned leader,\nJoshua the son of Nun; and also when Elias the prophet crossed; and\nafterwards, when his disciple Elisha passed through it: and we have\njust mentioned how, in the case of king Hezekiah, the greatest of the\n\"stars forgot its course.\" But what happened to Venus, according to\nVarro, was not said by him to have happened in answer to any man's\nprayer.\n\nLet not the sceptics then benight themselves in this knowledge of\nthe nature of things, as if divine power cannot bring to pass in an\nobject anything else than what their own experience has shown them\nto be in its nature. Even the very things which are most commonly\nknown as natural would not be less wonderful nor less effectual to\nexcite surprise in all who beheld them, if men were not accustomed to\nadmire nothing but what is rare. For who that thoughtfully observes\nthe countless multitude of men, and their similarity of nature, can\nfail to remark with surprise and admiration the individuality of each\nman's appearance, suggesting to us, as it does, that unless men were\nlike one another, they would not be distinguished from the rest of the\nanimals; while unless, on the other hand, they were unlike, they could\nnot be distinguished from one another, so that those whom we declare\nto be like, we also find to be unlike? And the unlikeness is the more\nwonderful consideration of the two; for a common nature seems rather\nto require similarity. And yet, because the very rarity of things is\nthat which makes them wonderful, we are filled with much greater wonder\nwhen we are introduced to two men so like, that we either always or\nfrequently mistake in endeavouring to distinguish between them.\n\nBut possibly, though Varro is a heathen historian, and a very learned\none, they may disbelieve that what I have cited from him truly\noccurred; or they may say the example is invalid, because the star\ndid not for any length of time continue to follow its new course, but\nreturned to its ordinary orbit. There is, then, another phenomenon at\npresent open to their observation, and which, in my opinion, ought\nto be sufficient to convince them that, though they have observed\nand ascertained some natural law, they ought not on that account to\nprescribe to God, as if He could not change and turn it into something\nvery different from what they have observed. The land of Sodom was not\nalways as it now is; but once it had the appearance of other lands, and\nenjoyed equal if not richer fertility; for, in the divine narrative, it\nwas compared to the paradise of God. But after it was touched [by fire]\nfrom heaven, as even pagan history testifies, and as is now witnessed\nby those who visit the spot, it became unnaturally and horribly\nsooty in appearance; and its apples, under a deceitful appearance\nof ripeness, contain ashes within. Here is a thing which was of one\nkind, and is of another. You see how its nature was converted by the\nwonderful transmutation wrought by the Creator of all natures into so\nvery disgusting a diversity,--an alteration which after so long a time\ntook place, and after so long a time still continues.\n\nAs therefore it was not impossible to God to create such natures as\nHe pleased, so it is not impossible to Him to change these natures\nof His own creation into whatever He pleases, and thus spread abroad\na multitude of those marvels which are called monsters, portents,\nprodigies, phenomena,[862] and which if I were minded to cite and\nrecord, what end would there be to this work? They say that they are\ncalled \"monsters,\" because they _demonstrate_ or signify something;\n\"portents,\" because they _portend_ something; and so forth.[863]\nBut let their diviners see how they are either deceived, or even\nwhen they do predict true things, it is because they are inspired by\nspirits, who are intent upon entangling the minds of men (worthy,\nindeed, of such a fate) in the meshes of a hurtful curiosity, or how\nthey light now and then upon some truth, because they make so many\npredictions. Yet, for our part, these things which happen contrary\nto nature, and are said to be contrary to nature (as the apostle,\nspeaking after the manner of men, says, that to graff the wild olive\ninto the good olive, and to partake of its fatness, is contrary to\nnature), and are called monsters, phenomena, portents, prodigies,\nought to demonstrate, portend, predict that God will bring to pass\nwhat He has foretold regarding the bodies of men, no difficulty\npreventing Him, no law of nature prescribing to Him His limit. How He\nhas foretold what He is to do, I think I have sufficiently shown in\nthe preceding book, culling from the sacred Scriptures, both of the\nNew and Old Testaments, not, indeed, all the passages that relate to\nthis, but as many as I judged to suffice for this work.\n\n\n         9. _Of hell, and the nature of eternal punishments._\n\nSo then what God by His prophet has said of the everlasting\npunishment of the damned shall come to pass--shall without fail\ncome to pass,--\"their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire\nbe quenched.\"[864] In order to impress this upon us most forcibly,\nthe Lord Jesus Himself, when ordering us to cut off our members,\nmeaning thereby those persons whom a man loves as the most useful\nmembers of his body, says, \"It is better for thee to enter into life\nmaimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that\nnever shall be quenched; where their worm dieth not, and their fire\nis not quenched.\" Similarly of the foot: \"It is better for thee to\nenter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into\nthe fire that never shall be quenched; where their worm dieth not,\nand the fire is not quenched.\" So, too, of the eye: \"It is better\nfor thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having\ntwo eyes to be cast into hell fire; where their worm dieth not, and\nthe fire is not quenched.\"[865] He did not shrink from using the\nsame words three times over in one passage. And who is not terrified\nby this repetition, and by the threat of that punishment uttered so\nvehemently by the lips of the Lord Himself?\n\nNow they who would refer both the fire and the worm to the spirit,\nand not to the body, affirm that the wicked, who are separated from\nthe kingdom of God, shall be burned, as it were, by the anguish of\na spirit repenting too late and fruitlessly; and they contend that\nfire is therefore not inappropriately used to express this burning\ntorment, as when the apostle exclaims, \"Who is offended, and I burn\nnot?\"[866] The worm, too, they think, is to be similarly understood.\nFor it is written, they say, \"As the moth consumes the garment, and\nthe worm the wood, so does grief consume the heart of a man.\"[867]\nBut they who make no doubt that in that future punishment both\nbody and soul shall suffer, affirm that the body shall be burned\nwith fire, while the soul shall be, as it were, gnawed by a worm\nof anguish. Though this view is more reasonable,--for it is absurd\nto suppose that either body or soul will escape pain in the future\npunishment,--yet, for my own part, I find it easier to understand\nboth as referring to the body than to suppose that neither does;\nand I think that Scripture is silent regarding the spiritual pain\nof the damned, because, though not expressed, it is necessarily\nunderstood that in a body thus tormented the soul also is tortured\nwith a fruitless repentance. For we read in the ancient Scriptures,\n\"The vengeance of the flesh of the ungodly is fire and worms.\"[868]\nIt might have been more briefly said, \"The vengeance of the ungodly.\"\nWhy, then, was it said, \"The flesh of the ungodly,\" unless because\nboth the fire and the worm are to be the punishment of the flesh? Or\nif the object of the writer in saying, \"The vengeance of the flesh,\"\nwas to indicate that this shall be the punishment of those who live\nafter the flesh (for this leads to the second death, as the apostle\nintimated when he said, \"For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall\ndie\"[869]), let each one make his own choice, either assigning the\nfire to the body and the worm to the soul,--the one figuratively,\nthe other really,--or assigning both really to the body. For I have\nalready sufficiently made out that animals can live in the fire, in\nburning without being consumed, in pain without dying, by a miracle\nof the most omnipotent Creator, to whom no one can deny that this\nis possible, if he be not ignorant by whom has been made all that\nis wonderful in all nature. For it is God Himself who has wrought\nall these miracles, great and small, in this world which I have\nmentioned, and incomparably more which I have omitted, and who has\nenclosed these marvels in this world, itself the greatest miracle of\nall. Let each man, then, choose which he will, whether he thinks that\nthe worm is real and pertains to the body, or that spiritual things\nare meant by bodily representations, and that it belongs to the soul.\nBut which of these is true will be more readily discovered by the\nfacts themselves, when there shall be in the saints such knowledge as\nshall not require that their own experience teach them the nature of\nthese punishments, but as shall, by its own fulness and perfection,\nsuffice to instruct them in this matter. For \"now we know in part,\nuntil that which is perfect is come;\"[870] only, this we believe\nabout those future bodies, that they shall be such as shall certainly\nbe pained by the fire.\n\n\n  10. _Whether the fire of hell, if it be material fire, can burn the\n     wicked spirits, that is to say, devils, who are immaterial._\n\nHere arises the question: If the fire is not to be immaterial,\nanalogous to the pain of the soul, but material, burning by contact,\nso that bodies may be tormented in it, how can evil spirits be\npunished in it? For it is undoubtedly the same fire which is to serve\nfor the punishment of men and of devils, according to the words of\nChrist: \"Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared\nfor the devil and his angels;\"[871] unless, perhaps, as learned men\nhave thought, the devils have a kind of body made of that dense and\nhumid air which we feel strikes us when the wind is blowing. And\nif this kind of substance could not be affected by fire, it could\nnot burn when heated in the baths. For in order to burn, it is\nfirst burned, and affects other things as itself is affected. But\nif any one maintains that the devils have no bodies, this is not\na matter either to be laboriously investigated, or to be debated\nwith keenness. For why may we not assert that even immaterial\nspirits may, in some extraordinary way, yet really be pained by the\npunishment of material fire, if the spirits of men, which also are\ncertainly immaterial, are both now contained in material members\nof the body, and in the world to come shall be indissolubly united\nto their own bodies? Therefore, though the devils have no bodies,\nyet their spirits, that is, the devils themselves, shall be brought\ninto thorough contact with the material fires, to be tormented by\nthem; not that the fires themselves with which they are brought into\ncontact shall be animated by their connection with these spirits,\nand become animals composed of body and spirit, but, as I said, this\njunction will be effected in a wonderful and ineffable way, so that\nthey shall receive pain from the fires, but give no life to them.\nAnd, in truth, this other mode of union, by which bodies and spirits\nare bound together and become animals, is thoroughly marvellous, and\nbeyond the comprehension of man, though this it is which is man.\n\nI would indeed say that these spirits will burn without any body of\ntheir own, as that rich man was burning in hell when he exclaimed, \"I\nam tormented in this flame,\"[872] were I not aware that it is aptly\nsaid in reply, that that flame was of the same nature as the eyes he\nraised and fixed on Lazarus, as the tongue on which he entreated that\na little cooling water might be dropped, or as the finger of Lazarus,\nwith which he asked that this might be done,--all of which took place\nwhere souls exist without bodies. Thus, therefore, both that flame in\nwhich he burned and that drop he begged were immaterial, and resembled\nthe visions of sleepers or persons in an ecstasy, to whom immaterial\nobjects appear in a bodily form. For the man himself who is in such a\nstate, though it be in spirit only, not in body, yet sees himself so\nlike to his own body that he cannot discern any difference whatever.\nBut that hell, which also is called a lake of fire and brimstone,[873]\nwill be material fire, and will torment the bodies of the damned,\nwhether men or devils,--the solid bodies of the one, aerial bodies of\nthe others; or if only men have bodies as well as souls, yet the evil\nspirits, though without bodies, shall be so connected with the bodily\nfires as to receive pain without imparting life. One fire certainly\nshall be the lot of both, for thus the truth has declared.\n\n\n   11. _Whether it is just that the punishments of sins last longer\n                   than the sins themselves lasted._\n\nSome, however, of those against whom we are defending the city of\nGod, think it unjust that any man be doomed to an eternal punishment\nfor sins which, no matter how great they were, were perpetrated in\na brief space of time; as if any law ever regulated the duration\nof the punishment by the duration of the offence punished! Cicero\ntells us that the laws recognise eight kinds of penalty,--damages,\nimprisonment, scourging, reparation,[874] disgrace, exile, death,\nslavery. Is there any one of these which may be compressed into a\nbrevity proportioned to the rapid commission of the offence, so\nthat no longer time may be spent in its punishment than in its\nperpetration, unless, perhaps, reparation? For this requires that\nthe offender suffer what he did, as that clause of the law says,\n\"Eye for eye, tooth for tooth.\"[875] For certainly it is possible\nfor an offender to lose his eye by the severity of legal retaliation\nin as brief a time as he deprived another of his eye by the cruelty\nof his own lawlessness. But if scourging be a reasonable penalty for\nkissing another man's wife, is not the fault of an instant visited\nwith long hours of atonement, and the momentary delight punished with\nlasting pain? What shall we say of imprisonment? Must the criminal\nbe confined only for so long a time as he spent on the offence for\nwhich he is committed? or is not a penalty of many years' confinement\nimposed on the slave who has provoked his master with a word, or has\nstruck him a blow that is quickly over? And as to damages, disgrace,\nexile, slavery, which are commonly inflicted so as to admit of no\nrelaxation or pardon, do not these resemble eternal punishments in so\nfar as this short life allows a resemblance? For they are not eternal\nonly because the life in which they are endured is not eternal;\nand yet the crimes which are punished with these most protracted\nsufferings are perpetrated in a very brief space of time. Nor is\nthere any one who would suppose that the pains of punishment should\noccupy as short a time as the offence; or that murder, adultery,\nsacrilege, or any other crime, should be measured, not by the\nenormity of the injury or wickedness, but by the length of time spent\nin its perpetration. Then as to the award of death for any great\ncrime, do the laws reckon the punishment to consist in the brief\nmoment in which death is inflicted, or in this, that the offender is\neternally banished from the society of the living? And just as the\npunishment of the first death cuts men off from this present mortal\ncity, so does the punishment of the second death cut men off from\nthat future immortal city. For as the laws of this present city do\nnot provide for the executed criminal's return to it, so neither\nis he who is condemned to the second death recalled again to life\neverlasting. But if temporal sin is visited with eternal punishment,\nhow, then, they say, is that true which your Christ says, \"With\nthe same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you\nagain?\"[876] and they do not observe that \"the same measure\" refers,\nnot to an equal space of time, but to the retribution of evil, or, in\nother words, to the law by which he who has done evil suffers evil.\nBesides, these words could be appropriately understood as referring\nto the matter of which our Lord was speaking when He used them, viz.\njudgments and condemnation. Thus, if he who unjustly judges and\ncondemns is himself justly judged and condemned, he receives \"with\nthe same measure\" though not the same thing as he gave. For judgment\nhe gave, and judgment he receives, though the judgment he gave was\nunjust, the judgment he receives just.\n\n\n  12. _Of the greatness of the first transgression, on account of\n      which eternal punishment is due to all who are not within the\n      pale of the Saviour's grace._\n\nBut eternal punishment seems hard and unjust to human perceptions,\nbecause in the weakness of our mortal condition there is wanting\nthat highest and purest wisdom by which it can be perceived how\ngreat a wickedness was committed in that first transgression. The\nmore enjoyment man found in God, the greater was his wickedness\nin abandoning Him; and he who destroyed in himself a good which\nmight have been eternal, became worthy of eternal evil. Hence the\nwhole mass of the human race is condemned; for he who at first gave\nentrance to sin has been punished with all his posterity who were in\nhim as in a root, so that no one is exempt from this just and due\npunishment, unless delivered by mercy and undeserved grace; and the\nhuman race is so apportioned that in some is displayed the efficacy\nof merciful grace, in the rest the efficacy of just retribution. For\nboth could not be displayed in all; for if all had remained[877]\nunder the punishment of just condemnation, there would have been\nseen in no one the mercy of redeeming grace. And, on the other hand,\nif all had been transferred from darkness to light, the severity of\nretribution would have been manifested in none. But many more are\nleft under punishment than are delivered from it, in order that it\nmay thus be shown what was due to all. And had it been inflicted on\nall, no one could justly have found fault with the justice of Him who\ntaketh vengeance; whereas, in the deliverance of so many from that\njust award, there is cause to render the most cordial thanks to the\ngratuitous bounty of Him who delivers.\n\n\n   13. _Against the opinion of those who think that the punishments\n              of the wicked after death are purgatorial._\n\nThe Platonists, indeed, while they maintain that no sins are\nunpunished, suppose that all punishment is administered for remedial\npurposes,[878] be it inflicted by human or divine law, in this life\nor after death; for a man may be scathless here, or, though punished,\nmay yet not amend. Hence that passage of Virgil, where, when he had\nsaid of our earthly bodies and mortal members, that our souls derive--\n\n          \"Hence wild desires and grovelling fears,\n           And human laughter, human tears;\n           Immured in dungeon-seeming night,\n           They look abroad, yet see no light,\"\n\ngoes on to say:\n\n          \"Nay, when at last the life has fled,\n           And left the body cold and dead,\n           E'en then there passes not away\n           The painful heritage of clay;\n           Full many a long-contracted stain\n           Perforce must linger deep in grain.\n           So penal sufferings they endure\n           For ancient crime, to make them pure;\n           Some hang aloft in open view,\n           For winds to pierce them through and through,\n           While others purge their guilt deep-dyed\n           In burning fire or whelming tide.\"[879]\n\nThey who are of this opinion would have all punishments after death\nto be purgatorial; and as the elements of air, fire, and water are\nsuperior to earth, one or other of these may be the instrument of\nexpiating and purging away the stain contracted by the contagion of\nearth. So Virgil hints at the air in the words, \"Some hang aloft for\nwinds to pierce;\" at the water in \"whelming tide;\" and at fire in the\nexpression \"in burning fire.\" For our part, we recognise that even in\nthis life some punishments are purgatorial,--not, indeed, to those\nwhose life is none the better, but rather the worse for them, but\nto those who are constrained by them to amend their life. All other\npunishments, whether temporal or eternal, inflicted as they are on\nevery one by divine providence, are sent either on account of past\nsins, or of sins presently allowed in the life, or to exercise and\nreveal a man's graces. They may be inflicted by the instrumentality\nof bad men and angels as well as of the good. For even if any one\nsuffers some hurt through another's wickedness or mistake, the man\nindeed sins whose ignorance or injustice does the harm; but God,\nwho by His just though hidden judgment permits it to be done, sins\nnot. But temporary punishments are suffered by some in this life\nonly, by others after death, by others both now and then; but all\nof them before that last and strictest judgment. But of those who\nsuffer temporary punishments after death, all are not doomed to\nthose everlasting pains which are to follow that judgment; for to\nsome, as we have already said, what is not remitted in this world is\nremitted in the next, that is, they are not punished with the eternal\npunishment of the world to come.\n\n\n      14. _Of the temporary punishments of this life to which the\n                     human condition is subject._\n\nQuite exceptional are those who are not punished in this life, but\nonly afterwards. Yet that there have been some who have reached the\ndecrepitude of age without experiencing even the slightest sickness,\nand who have had uninterrupted enjoyment of life, I know both from\nreport and from my own observation. However, the very life we mortals\nlead is itself all punishment, for it is all temptation, as the\nScriptures declare, where it is written, \"Is not the life of man\nupon earth a temptation?\"[880] For ignorance is itself no slight\npunishment, or want of culture, which it is with justice thought so\nnecessary to escape, that boys are compelled, under pain of severe\npunishment, to learn trades or letters; and the learning to which\nthey are driven by punishment is itself so much of a punishment\nto them, that they sometimes prefer the pain that drives them to\nthe pain to which they are driven by it. And who would not shrink\nfrom the alternative, and elect to die, if it were proposed to\nhim either to suffer death or to be again an infant? Our infancy,\nindeed, introducing us to this life not with laughter but with tears,\nseems unconsciously to predict the ills we are to encounter.[881]\nZoroaster alone is said to have laughed when he was born, and that\nunnatural omen portended no good to him. For he is said to have been\nthe inventor of magical arts, though indeed they were unable to\nsecure to him even the poor felicity of this present life against\nthe assaults of his enemies. For, himself king of the Bactrians, he\nwas conquered by Ninus king of the Assyrians. In short, the words\nof Scripture, \"An heavy yoke is upon the sons of Adam, from the\nday that they go out of their mother's womb till the day that they\nreturn to the mother of all things,\"[882]--these words so infallibly\nfind fulfilment, that even the little ones, who by the laver of\nregeneration have been freed from the bond of original sin in which\nalone they were held, yet suffer many ills, and in some instances\nare even exposed to the assaults of evil spirits. But let us not for\na moment suppose that this suffering is prejudicial to their future\nhappiness, even though it has so increased as to sever soul from\nbody, and to terminate their life in that early age.\n\n\n  15. _That everything which the grace of God does in the way of\n      rescuing us from the inveterate evils in which we are sunk,\n      pertains to the future world, in which all things are made new._\n\nNevertheless, in the \"heavy yoke that is laid upon the sons of Adam,\nfrom the day that they go out of their mother's womb to the day that\nthey return to the mother of all things,\" there is found an admirable\nthough painful monitor teaching us to be sober-minded, and convincing\nus that this life has become penal in consequence of that outrageous\nwickedness which was perpetrated in Paradise, and that all to which\nthe New Testament invites belongs to that future inheritance which\nawaits us in the world to come, and is offered for our acceptance, as\nthe earnest that we may, in its own due time, obtain that of which it\nis the pledge. Now, therefore, let us walk in hope, and let us by the\nspirit mortify the deeds of the flesh, and so make progress from day\nto day. For \"the Lord knoweth them that are His;\"[883] and \"as many\nas are led by the Spirit of God, they are sons of God,\"[884] but by\ngrace, not by nature. For there is but one Son of God by nature, who\nin His compassion became Son of man for our sakes, that we, by nature\nsons of men, might by grace become through Him sons of God. For He,\nabiding unchangeable, took upon Him our nature, that thereby He might\ntake us to Himself; and, holding fast His own divinity, He became\npartaker of our infirmity, that we, being changed into some better\nthing, might, by participating in His righteousness and immortality,\nlose our own properties of sin and mortality, and preserve whatever\ngood quality He had implanted in our nature, perfected now by sharing\nin the goodness of His nature. For as by the sin of one man we have\nfallen into a misery so deplorable, so by the righteousness of one\nMan, who also is God, shall we come to a blessedness inconceivably\nexalted. Nor ought any one to trust that he has passed from the one\nman to the other until he shall have reached that place where there\nis no temptation, and have entered into the peace which he seeks\nin the many and various conflicts of this war, in which \"the flesh\nlusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh.\"[885]\nNow, such a war as this would have had no existence, if human\nnature had, in the exercise of free will, continued stedfast in the\nuprightness in which it was created. But now in its misery it makes\nwar upon itself, because in its blessedness it would not continue\nat peace with God; and this, though it be a miserable calamity, is\nbetter than the earlier stages of this life, which do not recognise\nthat a war is to be maintained. For better is it to contend with\nvices than without conflict to be subdued by them. Better, I say, is\nwar with the hope of peace everlasting than captivity without any\nthought of deliverance. We long, indeed, for the cessation of this\nwar, and, kindled by the flame of divine love, we burn for entrance\non that well-ordered peace in which whatever is inferior is for ever\nsubordinated to what is above it. But if (which God forbid) there\nhad been no hope of so blessed a consummation, we should still have\npreferred to endure the hardness of this conflict, rather than, by\nour non-resistance, to yield ourselves to the dominion of vice.\n\n\n  16. _The laws of grace, which extend to all the epochs of the life\n                          of the regenerate._\n\nBut such is God's mercy towards the vessels of mercy which He has\nprepared for glory, that even the first age of man, that is, infancy,\nwhich submits without any resistance to the flesh, and the second\nage, which is called boyhood, and which has not yet understanding\nenough to undertake this warfare, and therefore yields to almost\nevery vicious pleasure (because though this age has the power of\nspeech,[886] and may therefore seem to have passed infancy, the mind\nis still too weak to comprehend the commandment), yet if either of\nthese ages has received the sacraments of the Mediator, then, although\nthe present life be immediately brought to an end, the child, having\nbeen translated from the power of darkness to the kingdom of Christ,\nshall not only be saved from eternal punishments, but shall not even\nsuffer purgatorial torments after death. For spiritual regeneration of\nitself suffices to prevent any evil consequences resulting after death\nfrom the connection with death which carnal generation forms.[887] But\nwhen we reach that age which can now comprehend the commandment, and\nsubmit to the dominion of law, we must declare war upon vices, and\nwage this war keenly, lest we be landed in damnable sins. And if vices\nhave not gathered strength, by habitual victory they are more easily\novercome and subdued; but if they have been used to conquer and rule,\nit is only with difficulty and labour they are mastered. And indeed\nthis victory cannot be sincerely and truly gained but by delighting\nin true righteousness, and it is faith in Christ that gives this. For\nif the law be present with its command, and the Spirit be absent with\nHis help, the presence of the prohibition serves only to increase\nthe desire to sin, and adds the guilt of transgression. Sometimes,\nindeed, patent vices are overcome by other and hidden vices, which are\nreckoned virtues, though pride and a kind of ruinous self-sufficiency\nare their informing principles. Accordingly vices are then only to be\nconsidered overcome when they are conquered by the love of God, which\nGod Himself alone gives, and which He gives only through the Mediator\nbetween God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who became a partaker of\nour mortality that He might make us partakers of His divinity. But few\nindeed are they who are so happy as to have passed their youth without\ncommitting any damnable sins, either by dissolute or violent conduct,\nor by following some godless and unlawful opinions, but have subdued by\ntheir greatness of soul everything in them which could make them the\nslaves of carnal pleasures. The greater number having first become\ntransgressors of the law that they have received, and having allowed\nvice to have the ascendency in them, then flee to grace for help, and\nso, by a penitence more bitter, and a struggle more violent than it\nwould otherwise have been, they subdue the soul to God, and thus give\nit its lawful authority over the flesh, and become victors. Whoever,\ntherefore, desires to escape eternal punishment, let him not only be\nbaptized, but also justified in Christ, and so let him in truth pass\nfrom the devil to Christ. And let him not fancy that there are any\npurgatorial pains except before that final and dreadful judgment. We\nmust not, however, deny that even the eternal fire will be proportioned\nto the deserts of the wicked, so that to some it will be more, and to\nothers less painful, whether this result be accomplished by a variation\nin the temperature of the fire itself, graduated according to every\none's merit, or whether it be that the heat remains the same, but that\nall do not feel it with equal intensity of torment.\n\n\n   17. _Of those who fancy that no men shall be punished eternally._\n\nI must now, I see, enter the lists of amicable controversy with those\ntender-hearted Christians who decline to believe that any, or that all\nof those whom the infallibly just Judge may pronounce worthy of the\npunishment of hell, shall suffer eternally, and who suppose that they\nshall be delivered after a fixed term of punishment, longer or shorter\naccording to the amount of each man's sin. In respect of this matter,\nOrigen was even more indulgent; for he believed that even the devil\nhimself and his angels, after suffering those more severe and prolonged\npains which their sins deserved, should be delivered from their\ntorments, and associated with the holy angels. But the Church, not\nwithout reason, condemned him for this and other errors, especially for\nhis theory of the ceaseless alternation of happiness and misery, and\nthe interminable transitions from the one state to the other at fixed\nperiods of ages; for in this theory he lost even the credit of being\nmerciful, by allotting to the saints real miseries for the expiation\nof their sins, and false happiness, which brought them no true and\nsecure joy, that is, no fearless assurance of eternal blessedness. Very\ndifferent, however, is the error we speak of, which is dictated by\nthe tenderness of these Christians who suppose that the sufferings of\nthose who are condemned in the judgment will be temporary, while the\nblessedness of all who are sooner or later set free will be eternal.\nWhich opinion, if it is good and true because it is merciful, will be\nso much the better and truer in proportion as it becomes more merciful.\nLet, then, this fountain of mercy be extended, and flow forth even to\nthe lost angels, and let them also be set free, at least after as many\nand long ages as seem fit! Why does this stream of mercy flow to all\nthe human race, and dry up as soon as it reaches the angelic? And yet\nthey dare not extend their pity further, and propose the deliverance\nof the devil himself. Or if any one is bold enough to do so, he does\nindeed put to shame their charity, but is himself convicted of error\nthat is more unsightly, and a wresting of God's truth that is more\nperverse, in proportion as his clemency of sentiment seems to be\ngreater.[888]\n\n\n 18. _Of those who fancy that, on account of the saints' intercession,\n             no man shall be damned in the last judgment._\n\nThere are others, again, with whose opinions I have become acquainted\nin conversation, who, though they seem to reverence the holy\nScriptures, are yet of reprehensible life, and who accordingly, in\ntheir own interest, attribute to God a still greater compassion towards\nmen. For they acknowledge that it is truly predicted in the divine word\nthat the wicked and unbelieving are worthy of punishment, but they\nassert that, when the judgment comes, mercy will prevail. For, say\nthey, God, having compassion on them, will give them up to the prayers\nand intercessions of His saints. For if the saints used to pray for\nthem when they suffered from their cruel hatred, how much more will\nthey do so when they see them prostrate and humble suppliants? For\nwe cannot, they say, believe that the saints shall lose their bowels\nof compassion when they have attained the most perfect and complete\nholiness; so that they who, when still sinners, prayed for their\nenemies, should now, when they are freed from sin, withhold from\ninterceding for their suppliants. Or shall God refuse to listen to so\nmany of His beloved children, when their holiness has purged their\nprayers of all hindrance to His answering them? And the passage of the\npsalm which is cited by those who admit that wicked men and infidels\nshall be punished for a long time, though in the end delivered from\nall sufferings, is claimed also by the persons we are now speaking of\nas making much more for them. The verse runs: \"Shall God forget to\nbe gracious? Shall He in anger shut up His tender mercies?\"[889] His\nanger, they say, would condemn all that are unworthy of everlasting\nhappiness to endless punishment. But if He suffer them to be punished\nfor a long time, or even at all, must He not shut up His tender\nmercies, which the Psalmist implies He will not do? For he does not\nsay, Shall He in anger shut up His tender mercies for a long period?\nbut he implies that He will not shut them up at all.\n\nAnd they deny that thus God's threat of judgment is proved to be\nfalse even though He condemn no man, any more than we can say that\nHis threat to overthrow Nineveh was false, though the destruction\nwhich was absolutely predicted was not accomplished. For He did\nnot say, \"Nineveh shall be overthrown if they do not repent and\namend their ways,\" but without any such condition He foretold that\nthe city should be overthrown. And this prediction, they maintain,\nwas true because God predicted the punishment which they deserved,\nalthough He was not to inflict it. For though He spared them on\ntheir repentance, yet He was certainly aware that they would repent,\nand, notwithstanding, absolutely and definitely predicted that the\ncity should be overthrown. This was true, they say, in the truth\nof severity, because they were worthy of it; but in respect of the\ncompassion which checked His anger, so that He spared the suppliants\nfrom the punishment with which He had threatened the rebellious, it\nwas not true. If, then, He spared those whom His own holy prophet\nwas provoked at His sparing, how much more shall He spare those\nmore wretched suppliants for whom all His saints shall intercede?\nAnd they suppose that this conjecture of theirs is not hinted at\nin Scripture, for the sake of stimulating many to reformation of\nlife through fear of very protracted or eternal sufferings, and of\nstimulating others to pray for those who have not reformed. However,\nthey think that the divine oracles are not altogether silent on this\npoint; for they ask to what purpose is it said, \"How great is Thy\ngoodness which Thou hast hidden for them that fear Thee,\"[890] if it\nbe not to teach us that the great and hidden sweetness of God's mercy\nis concealed in order that men may fear? To the same purpose they\nthink the apostle said, \"For God hath concluded all men in unbelief,\nthat He may have mercy upon all,\"[891] signifying that no one should\nbe condemned by God. And yet they who hold this opinion do not extend\nit to the acquittal or liberation of the devil and his angels. Their\nhuman tenderness is moved only towards men, and they plead chiefly\ntheir own cause, holding out false hopes of impunity to their own\ndepraved lives by means of this quasi compassion of God to the whole\nrace. Consequently they who promise this impunity even to the prince\nof the devils and his satellites make a still fuller exhibition of\nthe mercy of God.\n\n\n  19. _Of those who promise impunity from all sins even to heretics,\n     through virtue of their participation of the body of Christ._\n\nSo, too, there are others who promise this deliverance from eternal\npunishment, not, indeed, to all men, but only to those who have been\nwashed in Christian baptism, and who become partakers of the body of\nChrist, no matter how they have lived, or what heresy or impiety they\nhave fallen into. They ground this opinion on the saying of Jesus,\n\"This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that if any man eat\nthereof, he shall not die. I am the living bread which came down from\nheaven. If a man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever.\"[892]\nTherefore, say they, it follows that these persons must be delivered\nfrom death eternal, and at one time or other be introduced to\neverlasting life.\n\n\n  20. _Of those who promise this indulgence not to all, but only to\n      those who have been baptized as catholics, though afterwards\n      they have broken out into many crimes and heresies._\n\nThere are others still who make this promise not even to all who\nhave received the sacraments of the baptism of Christ and of His\nbody, but only to the catholics, however badly they have lived. For\nthese have eaten the body of Christ, not only sacramentally but\nreally, being incorporated in His body, as the apostle says, \"We,\nbeing many, are one bread, one body;\"[893] so that, though they have\nafterwards lapsed into some heresy, or even into heathenism and\nidolatry, yet by virtue of this one thing, that they have received\nthe baptism of Christ, and eaten the body of Christ, in the body of\nChrist, that is to say, in the catholic Church, they shall not die\neternally, but at one time or other obtain eternal life; and all\nthat wickedness of theirs shall not avail to make their punishment\neternal, but only proportionately long and severe.\n\n\n  21. _Of those who assert that all catholics who continue in the\n      faith, even though by the depravity of their lives they\n      have merited hell fire, shall be saved on account of the\n      \"foundation\" of their faith._\n\nThere are some, too, who found upon the expression of Scripture,\n\"He that endureth to the end shall be saved,\"[894] and who promise\nsalvation only to those who continue in the Church catholic; and\nthough such persons have lived badly, yet, say they, they shall\nbe saved as by fire through virtue of the foundation of which the\napostle says, \"For other foundation hath no man laid than that which\nis laid, which is Christ Jesus. Now if any man build upon this\nfoundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; every\nman's work shall be made manifest: for the day of the Lord shall\ndeclare it, for it shall be revealed by fire; and each man's work\nshall be proved of what sort it is. If any man's work shall endure\nwhich he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. But if any\nman's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself\nshall be saved; yet so as through fire.\"[895] They say, accordingly,\nthat the catholic Christian, no matter what his life be, has Christ\nas his foundation, while this foundation is not possessed by any\nheresy which is separated from the unity of His body. And therefore,\nthrough virtue of this foundation, even though the catholic Christian\nby the inconsistency of his life has been as one building up wood,\nhay, stubble, upon it, they believe that he shall be saved by fire,\nin other words, that he shall be delivered after tasting the pain of\nthat fire to which the wicked shall be condemned at the last judgment.\n\n\n   22. _Of those who fancy that the sins which are intermingled with\n       alms-deeds shall not be charged at the day of judgment._\n\nI have also met with some who are of opinion that such only as\nneglect to cover their sins with alms-deeds shall be punished in\neverlasting fire; and they cite the words of the Apostle James, \"He\nshall have judgment without mercy who hath shown no mercy.\"[896]\nTherefore, say they, he who has not amended his ways, but yet has\nintermingled his profligate and wicked actions with works of mercy,\nshall receive mercy in the judgment, so that he shall either quite\nescape condemnation, or shall be liberated from his doom after some\ntime shorter or longer. They suppose that this was the reason why\nthe Judge Himself of quick and dead declined to mention anything\nelse than works of mercy done or omitted, when awarding to those on\nHis right hand life eternal, and to those on His left everlasting\npunishment.[897] To the same purpose, they say, is the daily petition\nwe make in the Lord's prayer, \"Forgive us our debts, as we forgive\nour debtors.\"[898] For, no doubt, whoever pardons the person who has\nwronged him does a charitable action. And this has been so highly\ncommended by the Lord Himself, that He says, \"For if ye forgive men\ntheir trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: but if\nye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive\nyour trespasses.\"[899] And so it is to this kind of alms-deeds that\nthe saying of the Apostle James refers, \"He shall have judgment\nwithout mercy that hath shown no mercy.\" And our Lord, they say, made\nno distinction of great and small sins, but \"Your Father will forgive\nyour sins, if ye forgive men theirs.\" Consequently they conclude\nthat, though a man has led an abandoned life up to the last day of\nit, yet whatsoever his sins have been, they are all remitted by\nvirtue of this daily prayer, if only he has been mindful to attend to\nthis one thing, that when they who have done him any injury ask his\npardon, he forgive them from his heart.\n\nWhen, by God's help, I have replied to all these errors, I shall\nconclude this (twenty-first) book.\n\n\n   23. _Against those who are of opinion that the punishment neither\n           of the devil nor of wicked men shall be eternal._\n\nFirst of all, it behoves us to inquire and to recognise why the\nChurch has not been able to tolerate the idea that promises cleansing\nor indulgence to the devil even after the most severe and protracted\npunishment. For so many holy men, imbued with the spirit of the Old\nand New Testament, did not grudge to angels of any rank or character\nthat they should enjoy the blessedness of the heavenly kingdom\nafter being cleansed by suffering, but rather they perceived that\nthey could not invalidate nor evacuate the divine sentence which\nthe Lord predicted that He would pronounce in the judgment, saying,\n\"Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the\ndevil and his angels.\"[900] For here it is evident that the devil\nand his angels shall burn in everlasting fire. And there is also\nthat declaration in the Apocalypse, \"The devil their deceiver was\ncast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where also are the beast\nand the false prophet. And they shall be tormented day and night\nfor ever.\"[901] In the former passage \"everlasting\" is used, in the\nlatter \"for ever;\" and by these words Scripture is wont to mean\nnothing else than endless duration. And therefore no other reason,\nno reason more obvious and just, can be found for holding it as the\nfixed and immovable belief of the truest piety, that the devil and\nhis angels shall never return to the justice and life of the saints,\nthan that Scripture, which deceives no man, says that God spared them\nnot, and that they were condemned beforehand by Him, and cast into\nprisons of darkness in hell,[902] being reserved to the judgment of\nthe last day, when eternal fire shall receive them, in which they\nshall be tormented world without end. And if this be so, how can it\nbe believed that all men, or even some, shall be withdrawn from the\nendurance of punishment after some time has been spent in it? how\ncan this be believed without enervating our faith in the eternal\npunishment of the devils? For if all or some of those to whom it\nshall be said, \"Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire,\nprepared for the devil and his angels,\"[903] are not to be always in\nthat fire, then what reason is there for believing that the devil\nand his angels shall always be there? Or is perhaps the sentence of\nGod, which is to be pronounced on wicked men and angels alike, to\nbe true in the case of the angels, false in that of men? Plainly\nit will be so if the conjectures of men are to weigh more than the\nword of God. But because this is absurd, they who desire to be rid\nof eternal punishment ought to abstain from arguing against God, and\nrather, while yet there is opportunity, obey the divine commands.\nThen what a fond fancy is it to suppose that eternal punishment\nmeans long-continued punishment, while eternal life means life\nwithout end, since Christ in the very same passage spoke of both in\nsimilar terms in one and the same sentence, \"These shall go away\ninto eternal punishment, but the righteous into life eternal!\"[904]\nIf both destinies are \"eternal,\" then we must either understand both\nas long-continued but at last terminating, or both as endless. For\nthey are correlative,--on the one hand, punishment eternal, on the\nother hand, life eternal. And to say in one and the same sense, life\neternal shall be endless, punishment eternal shall come to an end, is\nthe height of absurdity. Wherefore, as the eternal life of the saints\nshall be endless, so too the eternal punishment of those who are\ndoomed to it shall have no end.\n\n\n   24. _Against those who fancy that in the judgment of God all the\n    accused will be spared in virtue of the prayers of the saints._\n\nAnd this reasoning is equally conclusive against those who, in their\nown interest, but under the guise of a greater tenderness of spirit,\nattempt to invalidate the words of God, and who assert that these\nwords are true, not because men shall suffer those things which are\nthreatened by God, but because they deserve to suffer them. For God,\nthey say, will yield them to the prayers of His saints, who will then\nthe more earnestly pray for their enemies, as they shall be more\nperfect in holiness, and whose prayers will be the more efficacious\nand the more worthy of God's ear, because now purged from all sin\nwhatsoever. Why, then, if in that perfected holiness their prayers be\nso pure and all-availing, will they not use them in behalf of the\nangels for whom eternal fire is prepared, that God may mitigate His\nsentence and alter it, and extricate them from that fire? Or will\nthere, perhaps, be some one hardy enough to affirm that even the holy\nangels will make common cause with holy men (then become the equals of\nGod's angels), and will intercede for the guilty, both men and angels,\nthat mercy may spare them the punishment which truth has pronounced\nthem to deserve? But this has been asserted by no one sound in the\nfaith, nor will be. Otherwise there is no reason why the Church should\nnot even now pray for the devil and his angels, since God her Master\nhas ordered her to pray for her enemies. The reason, then, which\nprevents the Church from now praying for the wicked angels, whom she\nknows to be her enemies, is the identical reason which shall prevent\nher, however perfected in holiness, from praying at the last judgment\nfor those men who are to be punished in eternal fire. At present she\nprays for her enemies among men, because they have yet opportunity for\nfruitful repentance. For what does she especially beg for them but that\n\"God would grant them repentance,\" as the apostle says, \"that they\nmay return to soberness out of the snare of the devil, by whom they\nare held captive according to his will?\"[905] But if the Church were\ncertified who those are, who, though they are still abiding in this\nlife, are yet predestinated to go with the devil into eternal fire,\nthen for them she could no more pray than for him. But since she has\nthis certainty regarding no man, she prays for all her enemies who yet\nlive in this world; and yet she is not heard in behalf of all. But she\nis heard in the case of those only who, though they oppose the Church,\nare yet predestinated to become her sons through her intercession. But\nif any retain an impenitent heart until death, and are not converted\nfrom enemies into sons, does the Church continue to pray for them,\nfor the spirits, _i.e._, of such persons deceased? And why does she\ncease to pray for them, unless because the man who was not translated\ninto Christ's kingdom while he was in the body, is now judged to be of\nSatan's following?\n\nIt is then, I say, the same reason which prevents the Church at any\ntime from praying for the wicked angels, which prevents her from\npraying hereafter for those men who are to be punished in eternal fire;\nand this also is the reason why, though she prays even for the wicked\nso long as they live, she yet does not even in this world pray for the\nunbelieving and godless who are dead. For some of the dead, indeed, the\nprayer of the Church or of pious individuals is heard; but it is for\nthose who, having been regenerated in Christ, did not spend their life\nso wickedly that they can be judged unworthy of such compassion, nor so\nwell that they can be considered to have no need of it. As also, after\nthe resurrection, there will be some of the dead to whom, after they\nhave endured the pains proper to the spirits of the dead, mercy shall\nbe accorded, and acquittal from the punishment of eternal fire. For\nwere there not some whose sins, though not remitted in this life, shall\nbe remitted in that which is to come, it could not be truly said, \"They\nshall not be forgiven, neither in this world, neither in that which is\nto come.\"[906] But when the Judge of quick and dead has said, \"Come,\nye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the\nfoundation of the world,\" and to those on the other side, \"Depart from\nme, ye cursed, into the eternal fire, which is prepared for the devil\nand his angels,\" and \"These shall go away into eternal punishment, but\nthe righteous into eternal life,\"[907] it were excessively presumptuous\nto say that the punishment of any of those whom God has said shall go\naway into eternal punishment shall not be eternal, and so bring either\ndespair or doubt upon the corresponding promise of life eternal.\n\nLet no man then so understand the words of the Psalmist, \"Shall God\nforget to be gracious? shall He shut up in His anger His tender\nmercies?\"[908] as if the sentence of God were true of good men, false\nof bad men, or true of good men and wicked angels, but false of bad\nmen. For the Psalmist's words refer to the vessels of mercy and the\nchildren of the promise, of whom the prophet himself was one; for\nwhen he had said, \"Shall God forget to be gracious? shall He shut up\nin His anger His tender mercies?\" and then immediately subjoins, \"And\nI said, Now I begin: this is the change wrought by the right hand\nof the Most High,\"[909] he manifestly explained what he meant by the\nwords, \"Shall He shut up in His anger His tender mercies?\" For God's\nanger is this mortal life, in which man is made like to vanity, and\nhis days pass as a shadow.[910] Yet in this anger God does not forget\nto be gracious, causing His sun to shine and His rain to descend\non the just and the unjust;[911] and thus He does not in His anger\ncut short His tender mercies, and especially in what the Psalmist\nspeaks of in the words, \"Now I begin: this change is from the right\nhand of the Most High;\" for He changes for the better the vessels of\nmercy, even while they are still in this most wretched life, which\nis God's anger, and even while His anger is manifesting itself in\nthis miserable corruption; for \"in His anger He does not shut up His\ntender mercies.\" And since the truth of this divine canticle is quite\nsatisfied by this application of it, there is no need to give it a\nreference to that place in which those who do not belong to the city\nof God are punished in eternal fire. But if any persist in extending\nits application to the torments of the wicked, let them at least\nunderstand it so that the anger of God, which has threatened the\nwicked with eternal punishment, shall abide, but shall be mixed with\nmercy to the extent of alleviating the torments which might justly\nbe inflicted; so that the wicked shall neither wholly escape, nor\nonly for a time endure these threatened pains, but that they shall be\nless severe and more endurable than they deserve. Thus the anger of\nGod shall continue, and at the same time He will not in this anger\nshut up His tender mercies. But even this hypothesis I am not to be\nsupposed to affirm because I do not positively oppose it.[912]\n\nAs for those who find an empty threat rather than a truth in such\npassages as these: \"Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting\nfire;\" and \"These shall go away into eternal punishment;\"[913] and\n\"They shall be tormented for ever and ever;\"[914] and \"Their worm\nshall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched,\"[915]--such\npersons, I say, are most emphatically and abundantly refuted, not by\nme so much as by the divine Scripture itself. For the men of Nineveh\nrepented in this life, and therefore their repentance was fruitful,\ninasmuch as they sowed in that field which the Lord meant to be sown\nin tears that it might afterwards be reaped in joy. And yet who\nwill deny that God's prediction was fulfilled in their case, if at\nleast he observes that God destroys sinners not only in anger but\nalso in compassion? For sinners are destroyed in two ways,--either,\nlike the Sodomites, the men themselves are punished for their sins,\nor, like the Ninevites, the men's sins are destroyed by repentance.\nGod's prediction, therefore, was fulfilled,--the wicked Nineveh was\noverthrown, and a good Nineveh built up. For its walls and houses\nremained standing; the city was overthrown in its depraved manners.\nAnd thus, though the prophet was provoked that the destruction which\nthe inhabitants dreaded, because of his prediction, did not take\nplace, yet that which God's foreknowledge had predicted did take\nplace, for He who foretold the destruction knew how it should be\nfulfilled in a less calamitous sense.\n\nBut that these perversely compassionate persons may see what is the\npurport of these words, \"How great is the abundance of Thy sweetness,\nLord, which Thou hast hidden for them that fear Thee,\"[916] let them\nread what follows: \"And Thou hast perfected it for them that hope\nin Thee.\" For what means, \"Thou hast hidden it for them that fear\nThee,\" \"Thou hast perfected it for them that hope in Thee,\" unless\nthis, that to those who through fear of punishment seek to establish\ntheir own righteousness by the law, the righteousness of God is not\nsweet, because they are ignorant of it? They have not tasted it. For\nthey hope in themselves, not in Him; and therefore God's abundant\nsweetness is hidden from them. They fear God, indeed, but it is with\nthat servile fear \"which is not in love; for perfect love casteth\nout fear.\"[917] Therefore to them that hope in Him He perfecteth His\nsweetness, inspiring them with His own love, so that with a holy fear,\nwhich love does not cast out, but which endureth for ever, they may,\nwhen they glory, glory in the Lord. For the righteousness of God is\nChrist, \"who is of God made unto us,\" as the apostle says, \"wisdom,\nand righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: as it is\nwritten, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.\"[918] This\nrighteousness of God, which is the gift of grace without merits, is\nnot known by those who go about to establish their own righteousness,\nand are therefore not subject to the righteousness of God, which is\nChrist.[919] But it is in this righteousness that we find the great\nabundance of God's sweetness, of which the psalm says, \"Taste and see\nhow sweet the Lord is.\"[920] And this we rather taste than partake of\nto satiety in this our pilgrimage. We hunger and thirst for it now,\nthat hereafter we may be satisfied with it when we see Him as He is,\nand that is fulfilled which is written, \"I shall be satisfied when\nThy glory shall be manifested.\"[921] It is thus that Christ perfects\nthe great abundance of His sweetness to them that hope in Him. But if\nGod conceals His sweetness from them that fear Him in the sense that\nthese our objectors fancy, so that men's ignorance of His purpose of\nmercy towards the wicked may lead them to fear Him and live better,\nand so that there may be prayer made for those who are not living as\nthey ought, how then does He perfect His sweetness to them that hope in\nHim, since, if their dreams be true, it is this very sweetness which\nwill prevent Him from punishing those who do not hope in Him? Let us\nthen seek that sweetness of His, which He perfects to them that hope in\nHim, not that which He is supposed to perfect to those who despise and\nblaspheme Him; for in vain, after this life, does a man seek for what\nhe has neglected to provide while in this life.\n\nThen, as to that saying of the apostle, \"For God hath concluded all in\nunbelief, that He may have mercy upon all,\"[922] it does not mean that\nHe will condemn no one; but the foregoing context shows what is meant.\nThe apostle composed the epistle for the Gentiles who were already\nbelievers; and when he was speaking to them of the Jews who were yet\nto believe, he says, \"For as ye in times past believed not God, yet\nhave now obtained mercy through their unbelief; even so have these also\nnow not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.\"\nThen he added the words in question with which these persons beguile\nthemselves: \"For God concluded all in unbelief, that He might have\nmercy upon all.\" All whom, if not all those of whom he was speaking,\njust as if he had said, \"Both you and them?\" God then concluded all\nthose in unbelief, both Jews and Gentiles, whom He foreknew and\npredestinated to be conformed to the image of His Son, in order that\nthey might be confounded by the bitterness of unbelief, and might\nrepent and believingly turn to the sweetness of God's mercy, and might\ntake up that exclamation of the psalm, \"How great is the abundance\nof Thy sweetness, O Lord, which Thou hast hidden for them that fear\nThee, but hast perfected to them that hope,\" not in themselves, but\n\"in Thee.\" He has mercy, then, on all the vessels of mercy. And what\nmeans \"all?\" Both those of the Gentiles and those of the Jews whom He\npredestinated, called, justified, glorified: none of these will be\ncondemned by Him; but we cannot say none of all men whatever.\n\n\n  25. _Whether those who received heretical baptism, and have\n      afterwards fallen away to wickedness of life; or those who have\n      received catholic baptism, but have afterwards passed over to\n      heresy and schism; or those who have remained in the catholic\n      Church in which they were baptized, but have continued to live\n      immorally,--may hope through the virtue of the sacraments for\n      the remission of eternal punishment._\n\nBut let us now reply to those who promise deliverance from eternal\nfire, not to the devil and his angels (as neither do they of whom\nwe have been speaking), nor even to all men whatever, but only to\nthose who have been washed by the baptism of Christ, and have become\npartakers of His body and blood, no matter how they have lived,\nno matter what heresy or impiety they have fallen into. But they\nare contradicted by the apostle, where he says, \"Now the works of\nthe flesh are manifest, which are these; fornication, uncleanness,\nlasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variances, emulations,\nwrath, strife, heresies, envyings, drunkenness, revellings, and the\nlike: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time\npast, for they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom\nof God.\"[923] Certainly this sentence of the apostle is false, if\nsuch persons shall be delivered after any lapse of time, and shall\nthen inherit the kingdom of God. But as it is not false, they shall\ncertainly never inherit the kingdom of God. And if they shall never\nenter that kingdom, then they shall always be retained in eternal\npunishment; for there is no middle place where he may live unpunished\nwho has not been admitted into that kingdom.\n\nAnd therefore we may reasonably inquire how we are to understand\nthese words of the Lord Jesus: \"This is the bread which cometh down\nfrom heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. I am the living\nbread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread,\nhe shall live for ever.\"[924] And those, indeed, whom we are now\nanswering, are refuted in their interpretation of this passage by\nthose whom we are shortly to answer, and who do not promise this\ndeliverance to all who have received the sacraments of baptism and\nthe Lord's body, but only to the catholics, however wickedly they\nlive; for these, say they, have eaten the Lord's body not only\nsacramentally, but really, being constituted members of His body, of\nwhich the apostle says, \"We being many are one bread, one body.\"[925]\nHe then who is in the unity of Christ's body (that is to say, in the\nChristian membership), of which body the faithful have been wont to\nreceive the sacrament at the altar, that man is truly said to eat the\nbody and drink the blood of Christ. And consequently heretics and\nschismatics being separate from the unity of this body, are able to\nreceive the same sacrament, but with no profit to themselves,--nay,\nrather to their own hurt, so that they are rather more severely\njudged than liberated after some time. For they are not in that bond\nof peace which is symbolized by that sacrament.\n\nBut again, even those who sufficiently understand that he who is\nnot in the body of Christ cannot be said to eat the body of Christ,\nare in error when they promise liberation from the fire of eternal\npunishment to persons who fall away from the unity of that body\ninto heresy, or even into heathenish superstition. For, in the\nfirst place, they ought to consider how intolerable it is, and\nhow discordant with sound doctrine, to suppose that many, indeed,\nor almost all, who have forsaken the Church catholic, and have\noriginated impious heresies and become heresiarchs, should enjoy a\ndestiny superior to those who never were catholics, but have fallen\ninto the snares of these others; that is to say, if the fact of their\ncatholic baptism and original reception of the sacrament of the body\nof Christ in the true body of Christ is sufficient to deliver these\nheresiarchs from eternal punishment. For certainly he who deserts\nthe faith, and from a deserter becomes an assailant, is worse than\nhe who has not deserted the faith he never held. And, in the second\nplace, they are contradicted by the apostle, who, after enumerating\nthe works of the flesh, says with reference to heresies, \"They who do\nsuch things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.\"\n\nAnd therefore neither ought such persons as lead an abandoned and\ndamnable life to be confident of salvation, though they persevere\nto the end in the communion of the Church catholic, and comfort\nthemselves with the words, \"He that endureth to the end shall\nbe saved.\" By the iniquity of their life they abandon that very\nrighteousness of life which Christ is to them, whether it be by\nfornication, or by perpetrating in their body the other uncleannesses\nwhich the apostle would not so much as mention, or by a dissolute\nluxury, or by doing any one of those things of which he says,\n\"They who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.\"\nConsequently, they who do such things shall not exist anywhere but\nin eternal punishment, since they cannot be in the kingdom of God.\nFor, while they continue in such things to the very end of life, they\ncannot be said to abide in Christ to the end; for to abide in Him is\nto abide in the faith of Christ. And this faith, according to the\napostle's definition of it, \"worketh by love.\"[926] And \"love,\" as\nhe elsewhere says, \"worketh no evil.\"[927] Neither can these persons\nbe said to eat the body of Christ, for they cannot even be reckoned\namong His members. For, not to mention other reasons, they cannot be\nat once the members of Christ and the members of a harlot. In fine,\nHe Himself, when He says, \"He that eateth my flesh and drinketh\nmy blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him,\"[928] shows what it is in\nreality, and not sacramentally, to eat His body and drink His blood;\nfor this is to dwell in Christ, that He also may dwell in us. So\nthat it is as if He said, He that dwelleth not in me, and in whom\nI do not dwell, let him not say or think that he eateth my body or\ndrinketh my blood. Accordingly, they who are not Christ's members do\nnot dwell in Him. And they who make themselves members of a harlot,\nare not members of Christ unless they have penitently abandoned that\nevil, and have returned to this good to be reconciled to it.\n\n\n   26. _What it is to have Christ for a foundation, and who they are\n              to whom salvation as by fire is promised._\n\nBut, say they, the catholic Christians have Christ for a foundation,\nand they have not fallen away from union with Him, no matter how\ndepraved a life they have built on this foundation, as wood, hay,\nstubble; and accordingly the well-directed faith by which Christ is\ntheir foundation will suffice to deliver them some time from the\ncontinuance of that fire, though it be with loss, since those things\nthey have built on it shall be burned. Let the Apostle James summarily\nreply to them: \"If any man say he has faith, and have not works, can\nfaith save him?\"[929] And who then is it, they ask, of whom the Apostle\nPaul says, \"But he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire?\"[930] Let\nus join them in their inquiry; and one thing is very certain, that it\nis not he of whom James speaks, else we should make the two apostles\ncontradict one another, if the one says, \"Though a man's works be evil,\nhis faith will save him as by fire,\" while the other says, \"If he have\nnot good works, can his faith save him?\"\n\nWe shall then ascertain who it is who can be saved by fire, if we\nfirst discover what it is to have Christ for a foundation. And this\nwe may very readily learn from the image itself. In a building the\nfoundation is first. Whoever, then, has Christ in his heart, so that\nno earthly or temporal things--not even those that are legitimate\nand allowed--are preferred to Him, has Christ as a foundation. But\nif these things be preferred, then even though a man seem to have\nfaith in Christ, yet Christ is not the foundation to that man; and\nmuch more if he, in contempt of wholesome precepts, seek forbidden\ngratifications, is he clearly convicted of putting Christ not first\nbut last, since he has despised Him as his ruler, and has preferred\nto fulfil his own wicked lusts, in contempt of Christ's commands and\nallowances. Accordingly, if any Christian man loves a harlot, and,\nattaching himself to her, becomes one body, he has not now Christ for\na foundation. But if any one loves his own wife, and loves her as\nChrist would have him love her, who can doubt that he has Christ for\na foundation? But if he loves her in the world's fashion, carnally,\nas the disease of lust prompts him, and as the Gentiles love who know\nnot God, even this the apostle, or rather Christ by the apostle,\nallows as a venial fault. And therefore even such a man may have\nChrist for a foundation. For so long as he does not prefer such an\naffection or pleasure to Christ, Christ is his foundation, though\non it he builds wood, hay, stubble; and therefore he shall be saved\nas by fire. For the fire of affliction shall burn such luxurious\npleasures and earthly loves, though they be not damnable, because\nenjoyed in lawful wedlock. And of this fire the fuel is bereavement,\nand all those calamities which consume these joys. Consequently the\nsuperstructure will be loss to him who has built it, for he shall\nnot retain it, but shall be agonized by the loss of those things\nin the enjoyment of which he found pleasure. But by this fire he\nshall be saved through virtue of the foundation, because even if a\npersecutor demanded whether he would retain Christ or these things,\nhe would prefer Christ. Would you hear, in the apostle's own words,\nwho he is who builds on the foundation gold, silver, precious stones?\n\"He that is unmarried,\" he says, \"careth for the things that belong\nto the Lord, how he may please the Lord.\"[931] Would you hear who\nhe is that buildeth wood, hay, stubble? \"But he that is married\ncareth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his\nwife.\"[932] \"Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day\nshall declare it,\"--the day, no doubt, of tribulation--\"because,\"\nsays he, \"it shall be revealed by fire.\"[933] He calls tribulation\nfire, just as it is elsewhere said, \"The furnace proves the vessels\nof the potter, and the trial of affliction righteous men.\"[934] And\n\"The fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any\nman's work abide\"--for a man's care for the things of the Lord, how\nhe may please the Lord, abides--\"which he hath built thereupon,\nhe shall receive a reward,\"--that is, he shall reap the fruit of\nhis care. \"But if any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer\nloss,\"--for what he loved he shall not retain:--\"but he himself shall\nbe saved,\"--for no tribulation shall have moved him from that stable\nfoundation,--\"yet so as by fire;\"[935] for that which he possessed\nwith the sweetness of love he does not lose without the sharp sting\nof pain. Here, then, as seems to me, we have a fire which destroys\nneither, but enriches the one, brings loss to the other, proves both.\n\nBut if this passage [of Corinthians] is to interpret that fire of\nwhich the Lord shall say to those on His left hand, \"Depart from me,\nye cursed, into everlasting fire,\"[936] so that among these we are\nto believe there are those who build on the foundation wood, hay,\nstubble, and that they, through virtue of the good foundation, shall\nafter a time be liberated from the fire that is the award of their\nevil deserts, what then shall we think of those on the right hand,\nto whom it shall be said, \"Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit\nthe kingdom prepared for you,\"[937] unless that they are those who\nhave built on the foundation gold, silver, precious stones? But if\nthe fire of which our Lord speaks is the same as that of which the\napostle says, \"Yet so as by fire,\" then both--that is to say, both\nthose on the right as well as those on the left--are to be cast into\nit. For that fire is to try both, since it is said, \"For the day of\nthe Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and\nthe fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.\"[938] If,\ntherefore, the fire shall try both, in order that if any man's work\nabide--_i.e._ if the superstructure be not consumed by the fire--he\nmay receive a reward, and that if his work is burned he may suffer\nloss, certainly that fire is not the eternal fire itself. For into\nthis latter fire only those on the left hand shall be cast, and that\nwith final and everlasting doom; but that former fire proves those\non the right hand. But some of them it so proves that it does not\nburn and consume the structure which is found to have been built\nby them on Christ as the foundation; while others of them it proves\nin another fashion, so as to burn what they have built up, and thus\ncause them to suffer loss, while they themselves are saved because\nthey have retained Christ, who was laid as their sure foundation,\nand have loved Him above all. But if they are saved, then certainly\nthey shall stand at the right hand, and shall with the rest hear\nthe sentence, \"Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom\nprepared for you;\" and not at the left hand, where those shall be\nwho shall not be saved, and shall therefore hear the doom, \"Depart\nfrom me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire.\" For from that fire no\nman shall be saved, because they all shall go away into eternal\npunishment, where their worms shall not die, nor their fire be\nquenched, in which they shall be tormented day and night for ever.\n\nBut if it be said that in the interval of time between the death of\nthis body and that last day of judgment and retribution which shall\nfollow the resurrection, the bodies of the dead shall be exposed\nto a fire of such a nature that it shall not affect those who have\nnot in this life indulged in such pleasures and pursuits as shall\nbe consumed like wood, hay, stubble, but shall affect those others\nwho have carried with them structures of that kind; if it be said\nthat such worldliness, being venial, shall be consumed in the fire\nof tribulation either here only, or here and hereafter both, or here\nthat it may not be hereafter,--this I do not contradict, because\npossibly it is true. For perhaps even the death of the body is\nitself a part of this tribulation, for it results from the first\ntransgression, so that the time which follows death takes its colour\nin each case from the nature of the man's building. The persecutions,\ntoo, which have crowned the martyrs, and which Christians of all\nkinds suffer, try both buildings like a fire, consuming some, along\nwith the builders themselves, if Christ is not found in them as their\nfoundation, while others they consume without the builders, because\nChrist is found in them, and they are saved, though with loss; and\nother buildings still they do not consume, because such materials as\nabide for ever are found in them. In the end of the world there shall\nbe in the time of Antichrist tribulation such as has never before\nbeen. How many edifices there shall then be, of gold or of hay, built\non the best foundation, Christ Jesus, which that fire shall prove,\nbringing joy to some, loss to others, but without destroying either\nsort, because of this stable foundation! But whosoever prefers, I do\nnot say his wife, with whom he lives for carnal pleasure, but any of\nthose relatives who afford no delight of such a kind, and whom it is\nright to love,--whosoever prefers these to Christ, and loves them\nafter a human and carnal fashion, has not Christ as a foundation,\nand will therefore not be saved by fire, nor indeed at all; for he\nshall not possibly dwell with the Saviour, who says very explicitly\nconcerning this very matter, \"He that loveth father or mother more\nthan me is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more\nthan me is not worthy of me.\"[939] But he who loves his relations\ncarnally, and yet so that he does not prefer them to Christ, but\nwould rather want them than Christ if he were put to the proof,\nshall be saved by fire, because it is necessary that by the loss of\nthese relations he suffer pain in proportion to his love. And he who\nloves father, mother, sons, daughters, according to Christ, so that\nhe aids them in obtaining His kingdom and cleaving to Him, or loves\nthem because they are members of Christ, God forbid that this love\nshould be consumed as wood, hay, stubble, and not rather be reckoned\na structure of gold, silver, precious stones. For how can a man love\nthose more than Christ whom he loves only for Christ's sake?\n\n\n    27. _Against the belief of those who think that the sins which\n     have been accompanied with almsgiving will do them no harm._\n\nIt remains to reply to those who maintain that those only shall\nburn in eternal fire who neglect alms-deeds proportioned to their\nsins, resting this opinion on the words of the Apostle James, \"He\nshall have judgment without mercy that hath showed no mercy.\"[940]\nTherefore, they say, he that hath showed mercy, though he has\nnot reformed his dissolute conduct, but has lived wickedly and\niniquitously even while abounding in alms, shall have a merciful\njudgment, so that he shall either be not condemned at all, or shall\nbe delivered from final judgment after a time. And for the same\nreason they suppose that Christ will discriminate between those\non the right hand and those on the left, and will send the one\nparty into His kingdom, the other into eternal punishment, on the\nsole ground of their attention to or neglect of works of charity.\nMoreover, they endeavour to use the prayer which the Lord Himself\ntaught as a proof and bulwark of their opinion, that daily sins which\nare never abandoned can be expiated through alms-deeds, no matter\nhow offensive or of what sort they be. For, say they, as there is no\nday on which Christians ought not to use this prayer, so there is no\nsin of any kind which, though committed every day, is not remitted\nwhen we say, \"Forgive us our debts,\" if we take care to fulfil what\nfollows, \"as we forgive our debtors.\"[941] For, they go on to say,\nthe Lord does not say, \"If ye forgive men their trespasses, your\nheavenly Father will forgive you your little daily sins,\" but \"will\nforgive you your sins.\" Therefore, be they of any kind or magnitude\nwhatever, be they perpetrated daily and never abandoned or subdued in\nthis life, they can be pardoned, they presume, through alms-deeds.\n\nBut they are right to inculcate the giving of alms proportioned\nto past sins; for if they said that any kind of alms could obtain\nthe divine pardon of great sins committed daily and with habitual\nenormity, if they said that such sins could thus be daily remitted,\nthey would see that their doctrine was absurd and ridiculous. For\nthey would thus be driven to acknowledge that it were possible for a\nvery wealthy man to buy absolution from murders, adulteries, and all\nmanner of wickedness, by paying a daily alms of ten paltry coins.\nAnd if it be most absurd and insane to make such an acknowledgment,\nand if we still ask what are those fitting alms of which even the\nforerunner of Christ said, \"Bring forth therefore fruits meet for\nrepentance,\"[942] undoubtedly it will be found that they are not such\nas are done by men who undermine their life by daily enormities even\nto the very end. For they suppose that by giving to the poor a small\nfraction of the wealth they acquire by extortion and spoliation they\ncan propitiate Christ, so that they may with impunity commit the most\ndamnable sins, in the persuasion that they have bought from Him a\nlicence to transgress, or rather do buy a daily indulgence. And if\nthey for one crime have distributed all their goods to Christ's needy\nmembers, that could profit them nothing unless they desisted from\nall similar actions, and attained charity which worketh no evil. He\ntherefore who does alms-deeds proportioned to his sins must first\nbegin with himself. For it is not reasonable that a man who exercises\ncharity towards his neighbour should not do so towards himself,\nsince he hears the Lord saying, \"Thou shalt love thy neighbour as\nthyself,\"[943] and again, \"Have compassion on thy soul, and please\nGod.\"[944] He then who has not compassion on his own soul that he may\nplease God, how can he be said to do alms-deeds proportioned to his\nsins? To the same purpose is that written, \"He who is bad to himself,\nto whom can he be good?\"[945] We ought therefore to do alms that we\nmay be heard when we pray that our past sins may be forgiven, not\nthat while we continue in them we may think to provide ourselves with\na licence for wickedness by alms-deeds.\n\nThe reason, therefore, of our predicting that He will impute to those\non His right hand the alms-deeds they have done, and charge those\non His left with omitting the same, is that He may thus show the\nefficacy of charity for the deletion of past sins, not for impunity\nin their perpetual commission. And such persons, indeed, as decline\nto abandon their evil habits of life for a better course cannot be\nsaid to do charitable deeds. For this is the purport of the saying,\n\"Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it\nnot to me.\"[946] He shows them that they do not perform charitable\nactions even when they think they are doing so. For if they gave\nbread to a hungering Christian because he is a Christian, assuredly\nthey would not deny to themselves the bread of righteousness, that\nis, Christ Himself; for God considers not the person to whom the\ngift is made, but the spirit in which it is made. He therefore who\nloves Christ in a Christian extends alms to him in the same spirit\nin which he draws near to Christ, not in that spirit which would\nabandon Christ if it could do so with impunity. For in proportion as\na man loves what Christ disapproves does he himself abandon Christ.\nFor what does it profit a man that he is baptized, if he is not\njustified? Did not He who said, \"Except a man be born of water and\nof the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God,\"[947] say\nalso, \"Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of\nthe scribes and Pharisees, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of\nheaven?\"[948] Why do many through fear of the first saying run to\nbaptism, while few through fear of the second seek to be justified?\nAs therefore it is not to his brother a man says, \"Thou fool,\" if\nwhen he says it he is indignant not at the brotherhood, but at\nthe sin of the offender,--for otherwise he were guilty of hell\nfire,--so he who extends charity to a Christian does not extend it\nto a Christian if he does not love Christ in him. Now he does not\nlove Christ who refuses to be justified in Him. Or, again, if a man\nhas been guilty of this sin of calling his brother Fool, unjustly\nreviling him without any desire to remove his sin, his alms-deeds\ngo a small way towards expiating this fault, unless he adds to this\nthe remedy of reconciliation which the same passage enjoins. For it\nis there said, \"Therefore, if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and\nthere rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee; leave\nthere thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled\nto thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.\"[949] Just so it is\na small matter to do alms-deeds, no matter how great they be, for any\nsin, so long as the offender continues in the practice of sin.\n\nThen as to the daily prayer which the Lord Himself taught, and which\nis therefore called the Lord's prayer, it obliterates indeed the\nsins of the day, when day by day we say, \"Forgive us our debts,\" and\nwhen we not only say but act out that which follows, \"as we forgive\nour debtors;\"[950] but we utter this petition because sins have been\ncommitted, and not that they may be. For by it our Saviour designed to\nteach us that, however righteously we live in this life of infirmity\nand darkness, we still commit sins for the remission of which we\nought to pray, while we must pardon those who sin against us that we\nourselves also may be pardoned. The Lord then did not utter the words,\n\"If ye forgive men their trespasses, your Father will also forgive\nyou your trespasses,\"[951] in order that we might contract from this\npetition such confidence as should enable us to sin securely from day\nto day, either putting ourselves above the fear of human laws, or\ncraftily deceiving men concerning our conduct, but in order that we\nmight thus learn not to suppose that we are without sins, even though\nwe should be free from crimes; as also God admonished the priests of\nthe old law to this same effect regarding their sacrifices, which He\ncommanded them to offer first for their own sins, and then for the sins\nof the people. For even the very words of so great a Master and Lord\nare to be intently considered. For He does not say, If ye forgive men\ntheir sins, your Father will also forgive you your sins, no matter of\nwhat sort they be, but He says, your sins; for it was a daily prayer\nHe was teaching, and it was certainly to disciples already justified\nHe was speaking. What, then, does He mean by \"your sins,\" but those\nsins from which not even you who are justified and sanctified can\nbe free? While, then, those who seek occasion from this petition to\nindulge in habitual sin maintain that the Lord meant to include great\nsins, because He did not say, He will forgive you your small sins, but\n\"your sins,\" we, on the other hand, taking into account the character\nof the persons He was addressing, cannot see our way to interpret the\nexpression \"your sins\" of anything but small sins, because such persons\nare no longer guilty of great sins. Nevertheless not even great sins\nthemselves--sins from which we must flee with a total reformation of\nlife--are forgiven to those who pray, unless they observe the appended\nprecept, \"as ye also forgive your debtors.\" For if the very small sins\nwhich attach even to the life of the righteous be not remitted without\nthat condition, how much further from obtaining indulgence shall those\nbe who are involved in many great crimes, if, while they cease from\nperpetrating such enormities, they still inexorably refuse to remit\nany debt incurred to themselves, since the Lord says, \"But if ye\nforgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your\ntrespasses?\"[952] For this is the purport of the saying of the Apostle\nJames also, \"He shall have judgment without mercy that hath showed no\nmercy.\"[953] For we should remember that servant whose debt of ten\nthousand talents his lord cancelled, but afterwards ordered him to pay\nup, because the servant himself had no pity for his fellow-servant\nwho owed him an hundred pence.[954] The words which the Apostle James\nsubjoins, \"And mercy rejoiceth against judgment,\"[955] find their\napplication among those who are the children of the promise and vessels\nof mercy. For even those righteous men, who have lived with such\nholiness that they receive into the eternal habitations others also\nwho have won their friendship with the mammon of unrighteousness,[956]\nbecame such only through the merciful deliverance of Him who justifies\nthe ungodly, imputing to him a reward according to grace, not according\nto debt. For among this number is the apostle, who says, \"I obtained\nmercy to be faithful.\"[957]\n\nBut it must be admitted, that those who are thus received into the\neternal habitations are not of such a character that their own life\nwould suffice to rescue them without the aid of the saints, and\nconsequently in their case especially does mercy rejoice against\njudgment. And yet we are not on this account to suppose that every\nabandoned profligate, who has made no amendment of his life, is to\nbe received into the eternal habitations if only he has assisted the\nsaints with the mammon of unrighteousness,--that is to say, with\nmoney or wealth which has been unjustly acquired, or, if rightfully\nacquired, is yet not the true riches, but only what iniquity counts\nriches, because it knows not the true riches in which those persons\nabound, who even receive others also into eternal habitations. There\nis then a certain kind of life, which is neither, on the one hand,\nso bad that those who adopt it are not helped towards the kingdom\nof heaven by any bountiful almsgiving by which they may relieve the\nwants of the saints, and make friends who could receive them into\neternal habitations, nor, on the other hand, so good that it of\nitself suffices to win for them that great blessedness, if they do\nnot obtain mercy through the merits of those whom they have made\ntheir friends. And I frequently wonder that even Virgil should give\nexpression to this sentence of the Lord, in which He says, \"Make to\nyourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness, that they may\nreceive you into everlasting habitations;\"[958] and this very similar\nsaying, \"He that receiveth a prophet, in the name of a prophet,\nshall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous\nman, in the name of a righteous man, shall receive a righteous man's\nreward.\"[959] For when that poet described the Elysian fields, in\nwhich they suppose that the souls of the blessed dwell, he placed\nthere not only those who had been able by their own merit to reach\nthat abode, but added,--\n\n          \"And they who grateful memory won\n           By services to others done;\"[960]\n\nthat is, they who had served others, and thereby merited to be\nremembered by them. Just as if they used the expression so common\nin Christian lips, where some humble person commends himself to one\nof the saints, and says, Remember me, and secures that he do so\nby deserving well at his hand. But what that kind of life we have\nbeen speaking of is, and what those sins are which prevent a man\nfrom winning the kingdom of God by himself, but yet permit him to\navail himself of the merits of the saints, it is very difficult to\nascertain, very perilous to define. For my own part, in spite of all\ninvestigation, I have been up to the present hour unable to discover\nthis. And possibly it is hidden from us, lest we should become\ncareless in avoiding such sins, and so cease to make progress. For\nif it were known what these sins are, which, though they continue,\nand be not abandoned for a higher life, do yet not prevent us from\nseeking and hoping for the intercession of the saints, human sloth\nwould presumptuously wrap itself in these sins, and would take no\nsteps to be disentangled from such wrappings by the deft energy of\nany virtue, but would only desire to be rescued by the merits of\nother people, whose friendship had been won by a bountiful use of the\nmammon of unrighteousness. But now that we are left in ignorance of\nthe precise nature of that iniquity which is venial, even though it\nbe persevered in, certainly we are both more vigilant in our prayers\nand efforts for progress, and more careful to secure with the mammon\nof unrighteousness friends for ourselves among the saints.\n\nBut this deliverance, which is effected by one's own prayers, or the\nintercession of holy men, secures that a man be not cast into eternal\nfire, but not that, when once he has been cast into it, he should after\na time be rescued from it. For even those who fancy that what is said\nof the good ground bringing forth abundant fruit, some thirty, some\nsixty, some an hundred fold, is to be referred to the saints, so that\nin proportion to their merits some of them shall deliver thirty men,\nsome sixty, some an hundred,--even those who maintain this are yet\ncommonly inclined to suppose that this deliverance will take place\nat, and not after the day of judgment. Under this impression, some\none who observed the unseemly folly with which men promise themselves\nimpunity on the ground that all will be included in this method of\ndeliverance, is reported to have very happily remarked, that we should\nrather endeavour to live so well that we shall be all found among the\nnumber of those who are to intercede for the liberation of others, lest\nthese should be so few in number, that, after they have delivered, one\nthirty, another sixty, another a hundred, there should still remain\nmany who could not be delivered from punishment by their intercessions,\nand among them every one who has vainly and rashly promised himself\nthe fruit of another's labour. But enough has been said in reply to\nthose who acknowledge the authority of the same sacred Scriptures as\nourselves, but who, by a mistaken interpretation of them, conceive\nof the future rather as they themselves wish, than as the Scriptures\nteach. And having given this reply, I now, according to promise, close\nthis book.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[852] John v. 29.\n\n[853] Matt. xiii. 41-43.\n\n[854] Matt. xxv. 46.\n\n[855] Luke xvi. 24.\n\n[856] _\u00c6neid_, vi. 733.\n\n[857] Ch. 3, 5, 6.\n\n[858] Aristotle does not affirm it as a fact observed by himself,\nbut as a popular tradition (_Hist. anim._ v. 19). Pliny is equally\ncautious (_Hist. nat._ xxix. 23). Dioscorides declared the thing\nimpossible (ii. 68).--SAISSET.\n\n[859] So Lucretius, ii. 1025:\n\n          \"Sed neque tam facilis res ulla 'st, quin ea primum\n           Difficilis magis ad credendum constet: itemque\n           Nil adeo magnum, nec tam mirabile quicquam\n           Principis, quod non minuant mirarier omnes\n           Paulatim.\"\n\n[860] Alluded to by Moore in his _Melodies_:\n\n                    \"The fount that played\n          In times of old through Ammon's shade,\n          Though icy cold by day it ran,\n          Yet still, like souls of mirth, began\n          To burn when night was near.\"\n\n[861] _\u00c6neid_, iv. 487-491.\n\n[862] See the same collocation of words in Cic. _Nat. deor._ ii. 3.\n\n[863] The etymologies given here by Augustine are, \"monstra,\" a\nmonstrando; \"ostenta,\" ab ostendendo; \"portenta,\" a portendendo,\n_i.e._ pr\u00e6ostendendo; \"prodigia,\" quod porro dicant, _i.e._ futura\npr\u00e6dicant.\n\n[864] Isa. lxvi. 24.\n\n[865] Mark ix. 43-48.\n\n[866] 2 Cor. xi. 29.\n\n[867] Isa. li. 8.\n\n[868] Ecclus. vii. 17.\n\n[869] Rom. viii. 13.\n\n[870] 1 Cor. xiii. 9, 10.\n\n[871] Matt. xxv. 41.\n\n[872] Luke xvi. 24.\n\n[873] Rev. xx. 10.\n\n[874] \"Talio,\" _i.e._ the rendering of like for like, the punishment\nbeing exactly similar to the injury sustained.\n\n[875] Ex. xxi. 24.\n\n[876] Luke vi. 38.\n\n[877] Remanerent. But Augustine constantly uses the imp. for the\nplup. subjunctive.\n\n[878] Plato's own theory was that punishment had a twofold purpose,\nto reform and to deter. \"No one punishes an offender on account\nof the past offence, and simply because he has done wrong, but\nfor the sake of the future, that the offence may not be again\ncommitted, either by the same person or by any one who has seen him\npunished.\"--See the _Protagoras_, 324, b, and Grote's _Plato_, ii. 41.\n\n[879] _\u00c6neid_, vi. 733.\n\n[880] Job vii. 1.\n\n[881] Compare Goldsmith's saying, \"We begin life in tears, and every\nday tells us why.\"\n\n[882] Ecclus. xl. 1.\n\n[883] 2 Tim. ii. 19.\n\n[884] Rom. viii. 14.\n\n[885] Gal. v. 17.\n\n[886] \"Fari.\"\n\n[887] See Aug. _Ep._ 98, _ad Bonifacium_.\n\n[888] On the heresy of Origen, see Epiphanius (_Epistola ad\nJoannem Hierosol._); Jerome (_Epistola_ 61, _ad Pammachium_); and\nAugustine (_De H\u00e6res._ 43). Origen's opinion was condemned by\nAnastasius (Jerome, _Apologia adv. Ruffinum_, and _Epistola_ 78, _ad\nPammachium_), and after Augustine's death by Vigilius and the Emperor\nJustinian, in the Fifth \u0152cumenical Council (Nicephorus Callistus,\nxvii. 27, and the _Acts of the Council_, iv. 11).--COQU\u00c6US.\n\n[889] Ps. lxxvii. 9.\n\n[890] Ps. xxxi. 19.\n\n[891] Rom. xi. 32.\n\n[892] John vi. 50, 51.\n\n[893] 1 Cor. x. 17.\n\n[894] Matt. xxiv. 13.\n\n[895] 1 Cor. iii. 11-15.\n\n[896] Jas. ii. 13.\n\n[897] Matt. xxv. 33.\n\n[898] Matt. vi. 12.\n\n[899] Matt. vi. 14, 15.\n\n[900] Matt. xxv. 41.\n\n[901] Rev. xx. 10.\n\n[902] 2 Pet. ii. 4.\n\n[903] Matt. xxv. 41.\n\n[904] Matt. xxv. 46.\n\n[905] 2 Tim. ii. 25, 26.\n\n[906] Matt. xii. 32.\n\n[907] Matt. xxv. 34, 41, 46.\n\n[908] Ps. lxxvii. 9.\n\n[909] Ps. lxxvii. 10.\n\n[910] Ps. cxliv. 4.\n\n[911] Matt. v. 45.\n\n[912] It is the theory which Chrysostom adopts.\n\n[913] Matt. xxv. 41, 46.\n\n[914] Rev. xx. 10.\n\n[915] Isa. lxvi. 24.\n\n[916] Ps. xxxi. 19.\n\n[917] 1 John iv. 18.\n\n[918] 1 Cor. i. 30, 31.\n\n[919] Rom. x. 3.\n\n[920] Ps. xxxiv. 8.\n\n[921] Ps. xvii. 15.\n\n[922] Rom. xi. 32.\n\n[923] Gal. v. 19-21.\n\n[924] John vi. 50, 51.\n\n[925] 1 Cor. x. 17.\n\n[926] Gal. v. 6.\n\n[927] Rom. xiii. 10.\n\n[928] John vi. 56.\n\n[929] Jas. ii. 14.\n\n[930] 1 Cor. iii. 15.\n\n[931] 1 Cor. vii. 32.\n\n[932] 1 Cor. vii. 33.\n\n[933] 1 Cor. iii. 13.\n\n[934] Ecclus. xxvii. 5.\n\n[935] 1 Cor. iii. 14, 15.\n\n[936] Matt. xxv. 41.\n\n[937] Matt. xxv. 34.\n\n[938] 1 Cor. iii. 13.\n\n[939] Matt. x. 37.\n\n[940] Jas. ii. 13.\n\n[941] Matt. vi. 12.\n\n[942] Matt. iii. 8.\n\n[943] Matt. xxii. 39.\n\n[944] Ecclus. xxx. 24.\n\n[945] Ecclus. xxi. 1.\n\n[946] Matt. xxv. 45.\n\n[947] John iii. 5.\n\n[948] Matt. v. 20.\n\n[949] Matt. v. 23, 24.\n\n[950] Matt. vi. 12.\n\n[951] Matt. vi. 14.\n\n[952] Matt. vi. 15.\n\n[953] Jas. ii. 13.\n\n[954] Matt. xviii. 23.\n\n[955] Jas. ii. 13.\n\n[956] Luke xvi. 9.\n\n[957] 1 Cor. vii. 25.\n\n[958] Luke xvi. 9.\n\n[959] Matt. x. 41.\n\n[960] _\u00c6n._ vi. 664.\n\n\n\n\n                          BOOK TWENTY-SECOND.\n\n                               ARGUMENT.\n\n  THIS BOOK TREATS OF THE END OF THE CITY OF GOD, THAT IS TO SAY,\n      OF THE ETERNAL HAPPINESS OF THE SAINTS; THE FAITH OF THE\n      RESURRECTION OF THE BODY IS ESTABLISHED AND EXPLAINED; AND THE\n      WORK CONCLUDES BY SHOWING HOW THE SAINTS, CLOTHED IN IMMORTAL\n      AND SPIRITUAL BODIES, SHALL BE EMPLOYED.\n\n\n                1. _Of the creation of angels and men._\n\nAs we promised in the immediately preceding book, this, the last of\nthe whole work, shall contain a discussion of the eternal blessedness\nof the city of God. This blessedness is named eternal, not because\nit shall endure for many ages, though at last it shall come to an\nend, but because, according to the words of the gospel, \"of His\nkingdom there shall be no end.\"[961] Neither shall it enjoy the mere\nappearance of perpetuity which is maintained by the rise of fresh\ngenerations to occupy the place of those that have died out, as in an\nevergreen the same freshness seems to continue permanently, and the\nsame appearance of dense foliage is preserved by the growth of fresh\nleaves in the room of those that have withered and fallen; but in\nthat city all the citizens shall be immortal, men now for the first\ntime enjoying what the holy angels have never lost. And this shall be\naccomplished by God, the most almighty Founder of the city. For He\nhas promised it, and cannot lie, and has already performed many of\nHis promises, and has done many unpromised kindnesses to those whom\nHe now asks to believe that He will do this also.\n\nFor it is He who in the beginning created the world full of all\nvisible and intelligible beings, among which He created nothing\nbetter than those spirits whom He endowed with intelligence, and\nmade capable of contemplating and enjoying Him, and united in our\nsociety, which we call the holy and heavenly city, and in which the\nmaterial of their sustenance and blessedness is God Himself, as it\nwere their common food and nourishment. It is He who gave to this\nintellectual nature free-will of such a kind, that if he wished to\nforsake God his blessedness, misery should forthwith result. It is\nHe who, when He foreknew that certain angels would in their pride\ndesire to suffice for their own blessedness, and would forsake their\ngreat good, did not deprive them of this power, deeming it to be\nmore befitting His power and goodness to bring good out of evil than\nto prevent the evil from coming into existence. And indeed evil had\nnever been, had not the mutable nature--mutable, though good, and\ncreated by the most high God and immutable Good, who created all\nthings good--brought evil upon itself by sin. And this its sin is\nitself proof that its nature was originally good. For had it not\nbeen very good, though not equal to its Creator, the desertion of\nGod as its light could not have been an evil to it. For as blindness\nis a vice of the eye, and this very fact indicates that the eye was\ncreated to see the light, and as, consequently, vice itself proves\nthat the eye is more excellent than the other members, because it\nis capable of light (for on no other supposition would it be a vice\nof the eye to want light), so the nature which once enjoyed God\nteaches, even by its very vice, that it was created the best of\nall, since it is now miserable because it does not enjoy God. It is\nHe who with very just punishment doomed the angels who voluntarily\nfell to everlasting misery, and rewarded those who continued in\ntheir attachment to the supreme good with the assurance of endless\nstability as the meed of their fidelity. It is He who made also man\nhimself upright, with the same freedom of will,--an earthly animal,\nindeed, but fit for heaven if he remained faithful to his Creator,\nbut destined to the misery appropriate to such a nature if he forsook\nHim. It is He who, when He foreknew that man would in his turn sin\nby abandoning God and breaking His law, did not deprive him of the\npower of free-will, because He at the same time foresaw what good He\nHimself would bring out of the evil, and how from this mortal race,\ndeservedly and justly condemned, He would by His grace collect, as\nnow He does, a people so numerous, that He thus fills up and repairs\nthe blank made by the fallen angels, and that thus that beloved and\nheavenly city is not defrauded of the full number of its citizens,\nbut perhaps may even rejoice in a still more overflowing population.\n\n\n           2. _Of the eternal and unchangeable will of God._\n\nIt is true that wicked men do many things contrary to God's will; but\nso great is His wisdom and power, that all things which seem adverse\nto His purpose do still tend towards those just and good ends and\nissues which He Himself has foreknown. And consequently, when God is\nsaid to change His will, as when, _e.g._, He becomes angry with those\nto whom He was gentle, it is rather they than He who are changed, and\nthey find Him changed in so far as their experience of suffering at\nHis hand is new, as the sun is changed to injured eyes, and becomes\nas it were fierce from being mild, and hurtful from being delightful,\nthough in itself it remains the same as it was. That also is called\nthe will of God which He does in the hearts of those who obey His\ncommandments; and of this the apostle says, \"For it is God that\nworketh in you both to will.\"[962] As God's \"righteousness\" is used\nnot only of the righteousness wherewith He Himself is righteous, but\nalso of that which He produces in the man whom He justifies, so also\nthat is called His law, which, though given by God, is rather the\nlaw of men. For certainly they were men to whom Jesus said, \"It is\nwritten in your law,\"[963] though in another place we read, \"The law\nof his God is in his heart.\"[964] According to this will which God\nworks in men, He is said also to will what He Himself does not will,\nbut causes His people to will; as He is said to know what He has\ncaused those to know who were ignorant of it. For when the apostle\nsays, \"But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of\nGod,\"[965] we cannot suppose that God there for the first time knew\nthose who were foreknown by Him before the foundation of the world;\nbut He is said to have known them then, because then He caused them\nto know. But I remember that I discussed these modes of expression\nin the preceding books. According to this will, then, by which we say\nthat God wills what He causes to be willed by others, from whom the\nfuture is hidden, He wills many things which He does not perform.\n\nThus His saints, inspired by His holy will, desire many things which\nnever happen. They pray, _e.g._, for certain individuals--they\npray in a pious and holy manner--but what they request He does not\nperform, though He Himself by His own Holy Spirit has wrought in them\nthis will to pray. And consequently, when the saints, in conformity\nwith God's mind, will and pray that all men be saved, we can use this\nmode of expression: God wills and does not perform,--meaning that\nHe who causes them to will these things Himself wills them. But if\nwe speak of that will of His which is eternal as His foreknowledge,\ncertainly He has already done all things in heaven and on earth that\nHe has willed,--not only past and present things, but even things\nstill future. But before the arrival of that time in which He has\nwilled the occurrence of what He foreknew and arranged before all\ntime, we say, It will happen when God wills. But if we are ignorant\nnot only of the time in which it is to be, but even whether it shall\nbe at all, we say, It will happen if God wills,--not because God will\nthen have a new will which He had not before, but because that event,\nwhich from eternity has been prepared in His unchangeable will, shall\nthen come to pass.\n\n\n     3. _Of the promise of eternal blessedness to the saints, and\n                everlasting punishment to the wicked._\n\nWherefore, not to mention many other instances besides, as we now see\nin Christ the fulfilment of that which God promised to Abraham when\nHe said, \"In thy seed shall all nations be blessed,\"[966] so this\nalso shall be fulfilled which He promised to the same race, when He\nsaid by the prophet, \"They that are in their sepulchres shall rise\nagain;\"[967] and also, \"There shall be a new heaven and a new earth:\nand the former shall not be mentioned, nor come into mind; but they\nshall find joy and rejoicing in it: for I will make Jerusalem a\nrejoicing, and my people a joy. And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and\njoy in my people, and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard\nin her.\"[968] And by another prophet He uttered the same prediction:\n\"At that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall\nbe found written in the book. And many of them that sleep in the\ndust\" (or, as some interpret it, \"in the mound\") \"of the earth shall\nawake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting\ncontempt.\"[969] And in another place by the same prophet: \"The saints\nof the Most High shall take the kingdom, and shall possess the\nkingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.\"[970] And a little after he\nsays, \"His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom.\"[971] Other prophecies\nreferring to the same subject I have advanced in the twentieth book,\nand others still which I have not advanced are found written in the\nsame Scriptures; and these predictions shall be fulfilled, as those\nalso have been which unbelieving men supposed would be frustrate. For\nit is the same God who promised both, and predicted that both would\ncome to pass,--the God whom the pagan deities tremble before, as even\nPorphyry, the noblest of pagan philosophers, testifies.\n\n\n   4. _Against the wise men of the world, who fancy that the earthly\n    bodies of men cannot be transferred to a heavenly habitation._\n\nBut men who use their learning and intellectual ability to resist the\nforce of that great authority which, in fulfilment of what was so\nlong before predicted, has converted all races of men to faith and\nhope in its promises, seem to themselves to argue acutely against\nthe resurrection of the body while they cite what Cicero mentions\nin the third book _De Republica_. For when he was asserting the\napotheosis of Hercules and Romulus, he says: \"Whose bodies were\nnot taken up into heaven; for nature would not permit a body of\nearth to exist anywhere except upon earth.\" This, forsooth, is the\nprofound reasoning of the wise men, whose thoughts God knows that\nthey are vain. For if we were only souls, that is, spirits without\nany body, and if we dwelt in heaven and had no knowledge of earthly\nanimals, and were told that we should be bound to earthly bodies by\nsome wonderful bond of union, and should animate them, should we\nnot much more vigorously refuse to believe this, and maintain that\nnature would not permit an incorporeal substance to be held by a\ncorporeal bond? And yet the earth is full of living spirits, to which\nterrestrial bodies are bound, and with which they are in a wonderful\nway implicated. If, then, the same God who has created such beings\nwills this also, what is to hinder the earthly body from being raised\nto a heavenly body, since a spirit, which is more excellent than all\nbodies, and consequently than even a heavenly body, has been tied to\nan earthly body? If so small an earthly particle has been able to\nhold in union with itself something better than a heavenly body, so\nas to receive sensation and life, will heaven disdain to receive, or\nat least to retain, this sentient and living particle, which derives\nits life and sensation from a substance more excellent than any\nheavenly body? If this does not happen now, it is because the time\nis not yet come which has been determined by Him who has already\ndone a much more marvellous thing than that which these men refuse\nto believe. For why do we not more intensely wonder that incorporeal\nsouls, which are of higher rank than heavenly bodies, are bound\nto earthly bodies, rather than that bodies, although earthly, are\nexalted to an abode which, though heavenly, is yet corporeal, except\nbecause we have been accustomed to see this, and indeed are this,\nwhile we are not as yet that other marvel, nor have as yet ever seen\nit? Certainly, if we consult sober reason, the more wonderful of the\ntwo divine works is found to be to attach somehow corporeal things to\nincorporeal, and not to connect earthly things with heavenly, which,\nthough diverse, are yet both of them corporeal.\n\n\n  5. _Of the resurrection of the flesh, which some refuse to believe,\n                though the world at large believes it._\n\nBut granting that this was once incredible, behold, now, the world\nhas come to the belief that the earthly body of Christ was received\nup into heaven. Already both the learned and unlearned have believed\nin the resurrection of the flesh and its ascension to the heavenly\nplaces, while only a very few either of the educated or uneducated\nare still staggered by it. If this is a credible thing which is\nbelieved, then let those who do not believe see how stolid they are;\nand if it is incredible, then this also is an incredible thing,\nthat what is incredible should have received such credit. Here then\nwe have two incredibles,--to wit, the resurrection of our body to\neternity, and that the world should believe so incredible a thing;\nand both these incredibles the same God predicted should come to\npass before either had as yet occurred. We see that already one\nof the two has come to pass, for the world has believed what was\nincredible; why should we despair that the remaining one shall also\ncome to pass, and that this which the world believed, though it was\nincredible, shall itself occur? For already that which was equally\nincredible has come to pass, in the world's believing an incredible\nthing. Both were incredible: the one we see accomplished, the other\nwe believe shall be; for both were predicted in those same Scriptures\nby means of which the world believed. And the very manner in which\nthe world's faith was won is found to be even more incredible, if we\nconsider it. Men uninstructed in any branch of a liberal education,\nwithout any of the refinement of heathen learning, unskilled in\ngrammar, not armed with dialectic, not adorned with rhetoric, but\nplain fishermen, and very few in number,--these were the men whom\nChrist sent with the nets of faith to the sea of this world, and thus\ntook out of every race so many fishes, and even the philosophers\nthemselves, wonderful as they are rare. Let us add, if you please, or\nbecause you ought to be pleased, this third incredible thing to the\ntwo former. And now we have three incredibles, all of which have yet\ncome to pass. It is incredible that Jesus Christ should have risen\nin the flesh and ascended with flesh into heaven; it is incredible\nthat the world should have believed so incredible a thing; it is\nincredible that a very few men, of mean birth and the lowest rank,\nand no education, should have been able so effectually to persuade\nthe world, and even its learned men, of so incredible a thing. Of\nthese three incredibles, the parties with whom we are debating refuse\nto believe the first; they cannot refuse to see the second, which\nthey are unable to account for if they do not believe the third. It\nis indubitable that the resurrection of Christ, and His ascension\ninto heaven with the flesh in which He rose, is already preached and\nbelieved in the whole world. If it is not credible, how is it that\nit has already received credence in the whole world? If a number of\nnoble, exalted, and learned men had said that they had witnessed\nit, and had been at pains to publish what they had witnessed, it\nwere not wonderful that the world should have believed it, but it\nwere very stubborn to refuse credence; but if, as is true, the world\nhas believed a few obscure, inconsiderable, uneducated persons, who\nstate and write that they witnessed it, is it not unreasonable that\na handful of wrong-headed men should oppose themselves to the creed\nof the whole world, and refuse their belief? And if the world has put\nfaith in a small number of men, of mean birth and the lowest rank,\nand no education, it is because the divinity of the thing itself\nappeared all the more manifestly in such contemptible witnesses. The\neloquence, indeed, which lent persuasion to their message, consisted\nof wonderful works, not words. For they who had not seen Christ\nrisen in the flesh, nor ascending into heaven with His risen body,\nbelieved those who related how they had seen these things, and who\ntestified not only with words but wonderful signs. For men whom they\nknew to be acquainted with only one, or at most two languages, they\nmarvelled to hear speaking in the tongues of all nations. They saw a\nman, lame from his mother's womb, after forty years stand up sound\nat their word in the name of Christ; that handkerchiefs taken from\ntheir bodies had virtue to heal the sick; that countless persons,\nsick of various diseases, were laid in a row in the road where they\nwere to pass, that their shadow might fall on them as they walked,\nand that they forthwith received health; that many other stupendous\nmiracles were wrought by them in the name of Christ; and, finally,\nthat they even raised the dead. If it be admitted that these things\noccurred as they are related, then we have a multitude of incredible\nthings to add to those three incredibles. That the one incredibility\nof the resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ may be believed,\nwe accumulate the testimonies of countless incredible miracles, but\neven so we do not bend the frightful obstinacy of these sceptics. But\nif they do not believe that these miracles were wrought by Christ's\napostles to gain credence to their preaching of His resurrection and\nascension, this one grand miracle suffices for us, that the whole\nworld has believed without any miracles.\n\n\n  6. _That Rome made its founder Romulus a god because it loved him;\n      but the Church loved Christ because it believed Him to be God._\n\nLet us here recite the passage in which Tully expresses his\nastonishment that the apotheosis of Romulus should have been\ncredited. I shall insert his words as they stand: \"It is most worthy\nof remark in Romulus, that other men who are said to have become gods\nlived in less educated ages, when there was a greater propensity to\nthe fabulous, and when the uninstructed were easily persuaded to\nbelieve anything. But the age of Romulus was barely six hundred years\nago, and already literature and science had dispelled the errors that\nattach to an uncultured age.\" And a little after he says of the same\nRomulus words to this effect: \"From this we may perceive that Homer\nhad flourished long before Romulus, and that there was now so much\nlearning in individuals, and so generally diffused an enlightenment,\nthat scarcely any room was left for fable. For antiquity admitted\nfables, and sometimes even very clumsy ones; but this age [of\nRomulus] was sufficiently enlightened to reject whatever had not\nthe air of truth.\" Thus one of the most learned men, and certainly\nthe most eloquent, M. Tullius Cicero, says that it is surprising\nthat the divinity of Romulus was believed in, because the times\nwere already so enlightened that they would not accept a fabulous\nfiction. But who believed that Romulus was a god except Rome, which\nwas itself small and in its infancy? Then afterwards it was necessary\nthat succeeding generations should preserve the tradition of their\nancestors; that, drinking in this superstition with their mother's\nmilk, the state might grow and come to such power that it might\ndictate this belief, as from a point of vantage, to all the nations\nover whom its sway extended. And these nations, though they might not\nbelieve that Romulus was a god, at least said so, that they might\nnot give offence to their sovereign state by refusing to give its\nfounder that title which was given him by Rome, which had adopted\nthis belief, not by a love of error, but an error of love. But though\nChrist is the founder of the heavenly and eternal city, yet it did\nnot believe Him to be God because it was founded by Him, but rather\nit is founded by Him, in virtue of its belief. Rome, after it had\nbeen built and dedicated, worshipped its founder in a temple as a\ngod; but this Jerusalem laid Christ, its God, as its foundation, that\nthe building and dedication might proceed. The former city loved its\nfounder, and therefore believed him to be a god; the latter believed\nChrist to be God, and therefore loved Him. There was an antecedent\ncause for the love of the former city, and for its believing that\neven a false dignity attached to the object of its love; so there\nwas an antecedent cause for the belief of the latter, and for its\nloving the true dignity which a proper faith, not a rash surmise,\nascribed to its object. For, not to mention the multitude of very\nstriking miracles which proved that Christ is God, there were also\ndivine prophecies heralding Him, prophecies most worthy of belief,\nwhich being already accomplished, we have not, like the fathers, to\nwait for their verification. Of Romulus, on the other hand, and of\nhis building Rome and reigning in it, we read or hear the narrative\nof what did take place, not prediction which beforehand said that\nsuch things should be. And so far as his reception among the gods\nis concerned, history only records that this was believed, and does\nnot state it as a fact; for no miraculous signs testified to the\ntruth of this. For as to that wolf which is said to have nursed the\ntwin-brothers, and which is considered a great marvel, how does this\nprove him to have been divine? For even supposing that this nurse was\na real wolf and not a mere courtezan, yet she nursed both brothers,\nand Remus is not reckoned a god. Besides, what was there to hinder\nany one from asserting that Romulus or Hercules, or any such man, was\na god? Or who would rather choose to die than profess belief in his\ndivinity? And did a single nation worship Romulus among its gods,\nunless it were forced through fear of the Roman name? But who can\nnumber the multitudes who have chosen death in the most cruel shapes\nrather than deny the divinity of Christ? And thus the dread of some\nslight indignation, which it was supposed, perhaps groundlessly,\nmight exist in the minds of the Romans, constrained some states who\nwere subject to Rome to worship Romulus as a god; whereas the dread,\nnot of a slight mental shock, but of severe and various punishments,\nand of death itself, the most formidable of all, could not prevent\nan immense multitude of martyrs throughout the world from not merely\nworshipping but also confessing Christ as God. The city of Christ,\nwhich, although as yet a stranger upon earth, had countless hosts\nof citizens, did not make war upon its godless persecutors for the\nsake of temporal security, but preferred to win eternal salvation by\nabstaining from war. They were bound, imprisoned, beaten, tortured,\nburned, torn in pieces, massacred, and yet they multiplied. It was\nnot given to them to fight for their eternal salvation except by\ndespising their temporal salvation for their Saviour's sake.\n\nI am aware that Cicero, in the third book of his _De Republica_, if\nI mistake not, argues that a first-rate power will not engage in war\nexcept either for honour or for safety. What he has to say about\nthe question of safety, and what he means by safety, he explains in\nanother place, saying, \"Private persons frequently evade, by a speedy\ndeath, destitution, exile, bonds, the scourge, and the other pains\nwhich even the most insensible feel. But to states, death, which\nseems to emancipate individuals from all punishments, is itself a\npunishment; for a state should be so constituted as to be eternal. And\nthus death is not natural to a republic as to a man, to whom death\nis not only necessary, but often even desirable. But when a state is\ndestroyed, obliterated, annihilated, it is as if (to compare great\nthings with small) this whole world perished and collapsed.\" Cicero\nsaid this because he, with the Platonists, believed that the world\nwould not perish. It is therefore agreed that, according to Cicero, a\nstate should engage in war for the safety which preserves the state\npermanently in existence, though its citizens change; as the foliage\nof an olive or laurel, or any tree of this kind, is perennial, the\nold leaves being replaced by fresh ones. For death, as he says, is no\npunishment to individuals, but rather delivers them from all other\npunishments, but it is a punishment to the state. And therefore it is\nreasonably asked whether the Saguntines did right when they chose that\ntheir whole state should perish rather than that they should break\nfaith with the Roman republic; for this deed of theirs is applauded\nby the citizens of the earthly republic. But I do not see how they\ncould follow the advice of Cicero, who tells us that no war is to be\nundertaken save for safety or for honour; neither does he say which of\nthese two is to be preferred, if a case should occur in which the one\ncould not be preserved without the loss of the other. For manifestly,\nif the Saguntines chose safety, they must break faith; if they kept\nfaith, they must reject safety; as also it fell out. But the safety of\nthe city of God is such that it can be retained, or rather acquired, by\nfaith and with faith; but if faith be abandoned, no one can attain it.\nIt is this thought of a most stedfast and patient spirit that has made\nso many noble martyrs, while Romulus has not had, and could not have,\nso much as one to die for his divinity.\n\n\n     7. _That the world's belief in Christ is the result of divine\n                   power, not of human persuasion._\n\nBut it is thoroughly ridiculous to make mention of the false divinity\nof Romulus as any way comparable to that of Christ. Nevertheless, if\nRomulus lived about six hundred years before Cicero, in an age which\nalready was so enlightened that it rejected all impossibilities, how\nmuch more, in an age which certainly was more enlightened, being six\nhundred years later, the age of Cicero himself, and of the emperors\nAugustus and Tiberius, would the human mind have refused to listen to\nor believe in the resurrection of Christ's body and its ascension into\nheaven, and have scouted it as an impossibility, had not the divinity\nof the truth itself, or the truth of the divinity, and corroborating\nmiraculous signs, proved that it could happen and had happened? Through\nvirtue of these testimonies, and notwithstanding the opposition and\nterror of so many cruel persecutions, the resurrection and immortality\nof the flesh, first in Christ, and subsequently in all in the new\nworld, was believed, was intrepidly proclaimed, and was sown over the\nwhole world, to be fertilized richly with the blood of the martyrs.\nFor the predictions of the prophets that had preceded the events were\nread, they were corroborated by powerful signs, and the truth was seen\nto be not contradictory to reason, but only different from customary\nideas, so that at length the world embraced the faith it had furiously\npersecuted.\n\n\n    8. _Of miracles which were wrought that the world might believe\n    in Christ, and which have not ceased since the world believed._\n\nWhy, they say, are those miracles, which you affirm were wrought\nformerly, wrought no longer? I might, indeed, reply that miracles\nwere necessary before the world believed, in order that it might\nbelieve. And whoever now-a-days demands to see prodigies that he may\nbelieve, is himself a great prodigy, because he does not believe,\nthough the whole world does. But they make these objections for the\nsole purpose of insinuating that even those former miracles were\nnever wrought. How, then, is it that everywhere Christ is celebrated\nwith such firm belief in His resurrection and ascension? How is it\nthat in enlightened times, in which every impossibility is rejected,\nthe world has, without any miracles, believed things marvellously\nincredible? Or will they say that these things were credible, and\ntherefore were credited? Why then do they themselves not believe?\nOur argument, therefore, is a summary one--either incredible things\nwhich were not witnessed have caused the world to believe other\nincredible things which both occurred and were witnessed, or this\nmatter was so credible that it needed no miracles in proof of it, and\ntherefore convicts these unbelievers of unpardonable scepticism. This\nI might say for the sake of refuting these most frivolous objectors.\nBut we cannot deny that many miracles were wrought to confirm that\none grand and health-giving miracle of Christ's ascension to heaven\nwith the flesh in which He rose. For these most trustworthy books of\nours contain in one narrative both the miracles that were wrought\nand the creed which they were wrought to confirm. The miracles were\npublished that they might produce faith, and the faith which they\nproduced brought them into greater prominence. For they are read in\ncongregations that they may be believed, and yet they would not be so\nread unless they were believed. For even now miracles are wrought in\nthe name of Christ, whether by His sacraments or by the prayers or\nrelics of His saints; but they are not so brilliant and conspicuous\nas to cause them to be published with such glory as accompanied the\nformer miracles. For the canon of the sacred writings, which behoved\nto be closed,[972] causes those to be everywhere recited, and to sink\ninto the memory of all the congregations; but these modern miracles\nare scarcely known even to the whole population in the midst of\nwhich they are wrought, and at the best are confined to one spot.\nFor frequently they are known only to a very few persons, while all\nthe rest are ignorant of them, especially if the state is a large\none; and when they are reported to other persons in other localities,\nthere is no sufficient authority to give them prompt and unwavering\ncredence, although they are reported to the faithful by the faithful.\n\nThe miracle which was wrought at Milan when I was there, and by which\na blind man was restored to sight, could come to the knowledge of\nmany; for not only is the city a large one, but also the emperor was\nthere at the time, and the occurrence was witnessed by an immense\nconcourse of people that had gathered to the bodies of the martyrs\nProtasius and Gervasius, which had long lain concealed and unknown,\nbut were now made known to the bishop Ambrose in a dream, and\ndiscovered by him. By virtue of these remains the darkness of that\nblind man was scattered, and he saw the light of day.[973]\n\nBut who but a very small number are aware of the cure which was wrought\nupon Innocentius, ex-advocate of the deputy prefecture, a cure wrought\nat Carthage, in my presence, and under my own eyes? For when I and my\nbrother Alypius,[974] who were not yet clergymen,[975] though already\nservants of God, came from abroad, this man received us, and made us\nlive with him, for he and all his household were devotedly pious. He\nwas being treated by medical men for fistul\u00e6, of which he had a large\nnumber intricately seated in the rectum. He had already undergone an\noperation, and the surgeons were using every means at their command\nfor his relief. In that operation he had suffered long-continued and\nacute pain; yet, among the many folds of the gut, one had escaped the\noperators so entirely, that, though they ought to have laid it open\nwith the knife, they never touched it. And thus, though all those that\nhad been opened were cured, this one remained as it was, and frustrated\nall their labour. The patient, having his suspicions awakened by the\ndelay thus occasioned, and fearing greatly a second operation, which\nanother medical man--one of his own domestics--had told him he must\nundergo, though this man had not even been allowed to witness the first\noperation, and had been banished from the house, and with difficulty\nallowed to come back to his enraged master's presence,--the patient,\nI say, broke out to the surgeons, saying, \"Are you going to cut me\nagain? Are you, after all, to fulfil the prediction of that man whom\nyou would not allow even to be present?\" The surgeons laughed at the\nunskilful doctor, and soothed their patient's fears with fair words\nand promises. So several days passed, and yet nothing they tried did\nhim good. Still they persisted in promising that they would cure that\nfistula by drugs, without the knife. They called in also another old\npractitioner of great repute in that department, Ammonius (for he was\nstill alive at that time); and he, after examining the part, promised\nthe same result as themselves from their care and skill. On this great\nauthority, the patient became confident, and, as if already well,\nvented his good spirits in facetious remarks at the expense of his\ndomestic physician, who had predicted a second operation. To make a\nlong story short, after a number of days had thus uselessly elapsed,\nthe surgeons, wearied and confused, had at last to confess that he\ncould only be cured by the knife. Agitated with excessive fear, he was\nterrified, and grew pale with dread; and when he collected himself and\nwas able to speak, he ordered them to go away and never to return. Worn\nout with weeping, and driven by necessity, it occurred to him to call\nin an Alexandrian, who was at that time esteemed a wonderfully skilful\noperator, that he might perform the operation his rage would not suffer\nthem to do. But when he had come, and examined with a professional eye\nthe traces of their careful work, he acted the part of a good man, and\npersuaded his patient to allow those same hands the satisfaction of\nfinishing his cure which had begun it with a skill that excited his\nadmiration, adding that there was no doubt his only hope of a cure\nwas by an operation, but that it was thoroughly inconsistent with his\nnature to win the credit of the cure by doing the little that remained\nto be done, and rob of their reward men whose consummate skill, care,\nand diligence he could not but admire when he saw the traces of their\nwork. They were therefore again received to favour; and it was agreed\nthat, in the presence of the Alexandrian, they should operate on the\nfistula, which, by the consent of all, could now only be cured by the\nknife. The operation was deferred till the following day. But when\nthey had left, there arose in the house such a wailing, in sympathy\nwith the excessive despondency of the master, that it seemed to us\nlike the mourning at a funeral, and we could scarcely repress it. Holy\nmen were in the habit of visiting him daily; Saturninus of blessed\nmemory, at that time bishop of Uzali, and the presbyter Gelosus, and\nthe deacons of the church of Carthage; and among these was the bishop\nAurelius, who alone of them all survives,--a man to be named by us with\ndue reverence,--and with him I have often spoken of this affair, as we\nconversed together about the wonderful works of God, and I have found\nthat he distinctly remembers what I am now relating. When these persons\nvisited him that evening according to their custom, he besought them,\nwith pitiable tears, that they would do him the honour of being present\nnext day at what he judged his funeral rather than his suffering. For\nsuch was the terror his former pains had produced, that he made no\ndoubt he would die in the hands of the surgeons. They comforted him,\nand exhorted him to put his trust in God, and nerve his will like a\nman. Then we went to prayer; but while we, in the usual way, were\nkneeling and bending to the ground, he cast himself down, as if some\none were hurling him violently to the earth, and began to pray; but\nin what a manner, with what earnestness and emotion, with what a flood\nof tears, with what groans and sobs, that shook his whole body, and\nalmost prevented him speaking, who can describe! Whether the others\nprayed, and had not their attention wholly diverted by this conduct, I\ndo not know. For myself, I could not pray at all. This only I briefly\nsaid in my heart: \"O Lord, what prayers of Thy people dost Thou hear\nif Thou hearest not these?\" For it seemed to me that nothing could be\nadded to this prayer, unless he expired in praying. We rose from our\nknees, and, receiving the blessing of the bishop, departed, the patient\nbeseeching his visitors to be present next morning, they exhorting\nhim to keep up his heart. The dreaded day dawned. The servants of God\nwere present, as they had promised to be; the surgeons arrived; all\nthat the circumstances required was ready; the frightful instruments\nare produced; all look on in wonder and suspense. While those who have\nmost influence with the patient are cheering his fainting spirit, his\nlimbs are arranged on the couch so as to suit the hand of the operator;\nthe knots of the bandages are untied; the part is bared; the surgeon\nexamines it, and, with knife in hand, eagerly looks for the sinus that\nis to be cut. He searches for it with his eyes; he feels for it with\nhis finger; he applies every kind of scrutiny: he finds a perfectly\nfirm cicatrix! No words of mine can describe the joy, and praise, and\nthanksgiving to the merciful and almighty God which was poured from the\nlips of all, with tears of gladness. Let the scene be imagined rather\nthan described!\n\nIn the same city of Carthage lived Innocentia, a very devout woman of\nthe highest rank in the state. She had cancer in one of her breasts,\na disease which, as physicians say, is incurable. Ordinarily,\ntherefore, they either amputate, and so separate from the body the\nmember on which the disease has seized, or, that the patient's\nlife may be prolonged a little, though death is inevitable even if\nsomewhat delayed, they abandon all remedies, following, as they\nsay, the advice of Hippocrates. This the lady we speak of had been\nadvised to by a skilful physician, who was intimate with her family;\nand she betook herself to God alone by prayer. On the approach of\nEaster, she was instructed in a dream to wait for the first woman\nthat came out from the baptistery[976] after being baptized, and to\nask her to make the sign of Christ upon her sore. She did so, and\nwas immediately cured. The physician who had advised her to apply no\nremedy if she wished to live a little longer, when he had examined\nher after this, and found that she who, on his former examination,\nwas afflicted with that disease was now perfectly cured, eagerly\nasked her what remedy she had used, anxious, as we may well believe,\nto discover the drug which should defeat the decision of Hippocrates.\nBut when she told him what had happened, he is said to have replied,\nwith religious politeness, though with a contemptuous tone, and an\nexpression which made her fear he would utter some blasphemy against\nChrist, \"I thought you would make some great discovery to me.\" She,\nshuddering at his indifference, quickly replied, \"What great thing\nwas it for Christ to heal a cancer, who raised one who had been\nfour days dead?\" When, therefore, I had heard this, I was extremely\nindignant that so great a miracle, wrought in that well-known\ncity, and on a person who was certainly not obscure, should not be\ndivulged, and I considered that she should be spoken to, if not\nreprimanded on this score. And when she replied to me that she had\nnot kept silence on the subject, I asked the women with whom she was\nbest acquainted whether they had ever heard of this before. They told\nme they knew nothing of it. \"See,\" I said, \"what your not keeping\nsilence amounts to, since not even those who are so familiar with you\nknow of it.\" And as I had only briefly heard the story, I made her\ntell how the whole thing happened, from beginning to end, while the\nother women listened in great astonishment, and glorified God.\n\nA gouty doctor of the same city, when he had given in his name for\nbaptism, and had been prohibited the day before his baptism from\nbeing baptized that year, by black woolly-haired boys who appeared to\nhim in his dreams, and whom he understood to be devils, and when,\nthough they trod on his feet, and inflicted the acutest pain he had\never yet experienced, he refused to obey them, but overcame them,\nand would not defer being washed in the laver of regeneration, was\nrelieved in the very act of baptism, not only of the extraordinary\npain he was tortured with, but also of the disease itself, so that,\nthough he lived a long time afterwards, he never suffered from gout;\nand yet who knows of this miracle? We, however, do know it, and so,\ntoo, do the small number of brethren who were in the neighbourhood,\nand to whose ears it might come.\n\nAn old comedian of Curubis[977] was cured at baptism not only of\nparalysis, but also of hernia, and, being delivered from both\nafflictions, came up out of the font of regeneration as if he had had\nnothing wrong with his body. Who outside of Curubis knows of this,\nor who but a very few who might hear it elsewhere? But we, when we\nheard of it, made the man come to Carthage, by order of the holy\nbishop Aurelius, although we had already ascertained the fact on the\ninformation of persons whose word we could not doubt.\n\nHesperius, of a tribunitian family, and a neighbour of our own,[978]\nhas a farm called Zubedi in the Fussalian district;[979] and, finding\nthat his family, his cattle, and his servants were suffering from\nthe malice of evil spirits, he asked our presbyters, during my\nabsence, that one of them would go with him and banish the spirits\nby his prayers. One went, offered there the sacrifice of the body of\nChrist, praying with all his might that that vexation might cease.\nIt did cease forthwith, through God's mercy. Now he had received\nfrom a friend of his own some holy earth brought from Jerusalem,\nwhere Christ, having been buried, rose again the third day. This\nearth he had hung up in his bedroom to preserve himself from harm.\nBut when his house was purged of that demoniacal invasion, he began\nto consider what should be done with the earth; for his reverence\nfor it made him unwilling to have it any longer in his bedroom. It\nso happened that I and Maximinus bishop of Synita, and then my\ncolleague, were in the neighbourhood. Hesperius asked us to visit\nhim, and we did so. When he had related all the circumstances, he\nbegged that the earth might be buried somewhere, and that the spot\nshould be made a place of prayer where Christians might assemble for\nthe worship of God. We made no objection: it was done as he desired.\nThere was in that neighbourhood a young countryman who was paralytic,\nwho, when he heard of this, begged his parents to take him without\ndelay to that holy place. When he had been brought there, he prayed,\nand forthwith went away on his own feet perfectly cured.\n\nThere is a country-seat called Victoriana, less than thirty miles\nfrom Hippo-regius. At it there is a monument to the Milanese martyrs,\nProtasius and Gervasius. Thither a young man was carried, who, when\nhe was watering his horse one summer day at noon in a pool of a\nriver, had been taken possession of by a devil. As he lay at the\nmonument, near death, or even quite like a dead person, the lady of\nthe manor, with her maids and religious attendants, entered the place\nfor evening prayer and praise, as her custom was, and they began\nto sing hymns. At this sound the young man, as if electrified, was\nthoroughly aroused, and with frightful screaming seized the altar,\nand held it as if he did not dare or were not able to let it go, and\nas if he were fixed or tied to it; and the devil in him, with loud\nlamentation, besought that he might be spared, and confessed where\nand when and how he took possession of the youth. At last, declaring\nthat he would go out of him, he named one by one the parts of his\nbody which he threatened to mutilate as he went out; and with these\nwords he departed from the man. But his eye, falling out on his\ncheek, hung by a slender vein as by a root, and the whole of the\npupil which had been black became white. When this was witnessed by\nthose present (others too had now gathered to his cries, and had\nall joined in prayer for him), although they were delighted that he\nhad recovered his sanity of mind, yet, on the other hand, they were\ngrieved about his eye, and said he should seek medical advice. But\nhis sister's husband, who had brought him there, said, \"God, who has\nbanished the devil, is able to restore his eye at the prayers of\nHis saints.\" Therewith he replaced the eye that was fallen out and\nhanging, and bound it in its place with his handkerchief as well as\nhe could, and advised him not to loose the bandage for seven days.\nWhen he did so, he found it quite healthy. Others also were cured\nthere, but of them it were tedious to speak.\n\nI know that a young woman of Hippo was immediately dispossessed of\na devil, on anointing herself with oil mixed with the tears of the\npresbyter who had been praying for her. I know also that a bishop\nonce prayed for a demoniac young man whom he never saw, and that he\nwas cured on the spot.\n\nThere was a fellow-townsman of ours at Hippo, Florentius, an old man,\nreligious and poor, who supported himself as a tailor. Having lost his\ncoat, and not having means to buy another, he prayed to the Twenty\nMartyrs,[980] who have a very celebrated memorial shrine in our town,\nbegging in a distinct voice that he might be clothed. Some scoffing\nyoung men, who happened to be present, heard him, and followed him with\ntheir sarcasm as he went away, as if he had asked the martyrs for fifty\npence to buy a coat. But he, walking on in silence, saw on the shore a\ngreat fish, gasping as if just cast up, and having secured it with the\ngood-natured assistance of the youths, he sold it for curing to a cook\nof the name of Catosus, a good Christian man, telling him how he had\ncome by it, and receiving for it three hundred pence, which he laid out\nin wool, that his wife might exercise her skill upon, and make into a\ncoat for him. But, on cutting up the fish, the cook found a gold ring\nin its belly; and forthwith, moved with compassion, and influenced,\ntoo, by religious fear, gave it up to the man, saying, \"See how the\nTwenty Martyrs have clothed you.\"\n\nWhen the bishop Projectus was bringing the relics of the most\nglorious martyr Stephen to the waters of Tibilis, a great concourse\nof people came to meet him at the shrine. There a blind woman\nentreated that she might be led to the bishop who was carrying the\nrelics. He gave her the flowers he was carrying. She took them,\napplied them to her eyes, and forthwith saw. Those who were present\nwere astounded, while she, with every expression of joy, preceded\nthem, pursuing her way without further need of a guide.\n\nLucillus bishop of Sinita, in the neighbourhood of the colonial\ntown of Hippo, was carrying in procession some relics of the same\nmartyr, which had been deposited in the castle of Sinita. A fistula\nunder which he had long laboured, and which his private physician\nwas watching an opportunity to cut, was suddenly cured by the mere\ncarrying of that sacred fardel,[981]--at least, afterwards there was\nno trace of it in his body.\n\nEucharius, a Spanish priest, residing at Calama, was for a long\ntime a sufferer from stone. By the relics of the same martyr, which\nthe bishop Possidius brought him, he was cured. Afterwards the same\npriest, sinking under another disease, was lying dead, and already\nthey were binding his hands. By the succour of the same martyr he\nwas raised to life, the priest's cloak having been brought from the\noratory and laid upon the corpse.\n\nThere was there an old nobleman named Martial, who had a great\naversion to the Christian religion, but whose daughter was a\nChristian, while her husband had been baptized that same year. When\nhe was ill, they besought him with tears and prayers to become a\nChristian, but he positively refused, and dismissed them from his\npresence in a storm of indignation. It occurred to the son-in-law to\ngo to the oratory of St. Stephen, and there pray for him with all\nearnestness that God might give him a right mind, so that he should\nnot delay believing in Christ. This he did with great groaning and\ntears, and the burning fervour of sincere piety; then, as he left the\nplace, he took some of the flowers that were lying there, and, as it\nwas already night, laid them by his father's head, who so slept. And\nlo! before dawn, he cries out for some one to run for the bishop; but\nhe happened at that time to be with me at Hippo. So when he had heard\nthat he was from home, he asked the presbyters to come. They came. To\nthe joy and amazement of all, he declared that he believed, and he\nwas baptized. As long as he remained in life, these words were ever\non his lips: \"Christ, receive my spirit,\" though he was not aware\nthat these were the last words of the most blessed Stephen when he\nwas stoned by the Jews. They were his last words also, for not long\nafter he himself also gave up the ghost.\n\nThere, too, by the same martyr, two men, one a citizen, the other a\nstranger, were cured of gout; but while the citizen was absolutely\ncured, the stranger was only informed what he should apply when the\npain returned; and when he followed this advice, the pain was at once\nrelieved.\n\nAudurus is the name of an estate, where there is a church that contains\na memorial shrine of the martyr Stephen. It happened that, as a little\nboy was playing in the court, the oxen drawing a waggon went out of the\ntrack and crushed him with the wheel, so that immediately he seemed at\nhis last gasp. His mother snatched him up, and laid him at the shrine,\nand not only did he revive, but also appeared uninjured.\n\nA religious female, who lived at Caspalium, a neighbouring estate,\nwhen she was so ill as to be despaired of, had her dress brought to\nthis shrine, but before it was brought back she was gone. However,\nher parents wrapped her corpse in the dress, and, her breath\nreturning, she became quite well.\n\nAt Hippo a Syrian called Bassus was praying at the relics of the same\nmartyr for his daughter, who was dangerously ill. He too had brought\nher dress with him to the shrine. But as he prayed, behold, his\nservants ran from the house to tell him she was dead. His friends,\nhowever, intercepted them, and forbade them to tell him, lest he should\nbewail her in public. And when he had returned to his house, which was\nalready ringing with the lamentations of his family, and had thrown on\nhis daughter's body the dress he was carrying, she was restored to life.\n\nThere, too, the son of a man, Iren\u00e6us, one of our tax-gatherers, took\nill and died. And while his body was lying lifeless, and the last rites\nwere being prepared, amidst the weeping and mourning of all, one of the\nfriends who were consoling the father suggested that the body should be\nanointed with the oil of the same martyr. It was done, and he revived.\n\nLikewise Eleusinus, a man of tribunitian rank among us, laid his\ninfant son, who had died, on the shrine of the martyr, which is in\nthe suburb where he lived, and, after prayer, which he poured out\nthere with many tears, he took up his child alive.\n\nWhat am I to do? I am so pressed by the promise of finishing this work,\nthat I cannot record all the miracles I know; and doubtless several of\nour adherents, when they read what I have narrated, will regret that\nI have omitted so many which they, as well as I, certainly know. Even\nnow I beg these persons to excuse me, and to consider how long it would\ntake me to relate all those miracles, which the necessity of finishing\nthe work I have undertaken forces me to omit. For were I to be silent\nof all others, and to record exclusively the miracles of healing which\nwere wrought in the district of Calama and of Hippo by means of this\nmartyr--I mean the most glorious Stephen--they would fill many volumes;\nand yet all even of these could not be collected, but only those of\nwhich narratives have been written for public recital. For when I saw,\nin our own times, frequent signs of the presence of divine powers\nsimilar to those which had been given of old, I desired that narratives\nmight be written, judging that the multitude should not remain ignorant\nof these things. It is not yet two years since these relics were\nfirst brought to Hippo-regius, and though many of the miracles which\nhave been wrought by it have not, as I have the most certain means\nof knowing, been recorded, those which have been published amount to\nalmost seventy at the hour at which I write. But at Calama, where these\nrelics have been for a longer time, and where more of the miracles were\nnarrated for public information, there are incomparably more.\n\nAt Uzali, too, a colony near Utica, many signal miracles were, to my\nknowledge, wrought by the same martyr, whose relics had found a place\nthere by direction of the bishop Evodius, long before we had them at\nHippo. But there the custom of publishing narratives does not obtain,\nor, I should say, did not obtain, for possibly it may now have been\nbegun. For, when I was there recently, a woman of rank, Petronia,\nhad been miraculously cured of a serious illness of long standing,\nin which all medical appliances had failed, and, with the consent of\nthe above-named bishop of the place, I exhorted her to publish an\naccount of it that might be read to the people. She most promptly\nobeyed, and inserted in her narrative a circumstance which I cannot\nomit to mention, though I am compelled to hasten on to the subjects\nwhich this work requires me to treat. She said that she had been\npersuaded by a Jew to wear next her skin, under all her clothes, a\nhair girdle, and on this girdle a ring, which, instead of a gem, had\na stone which had been found in the kidneys of an ox. Girt with this\ncharm, she was making her way to the threshold of the holy martyr.\nBut, after leaving Carthage, and when she had been lodging in her\nown demesne on the river Bagrada, and was now rising to continue her\njourney, she saw her ring lying before her feet. In great surprise\nshe examined the hair girdle, and when she found it bound, as it had\nbeen, quite firmly with knots, she conjectured that the ring had been\nworn through and dropped off; but when she found that the ring was\nitself also perfectly whole, she presumed that by this great miracle\nshe had received somehow a pledge of her cure, whereupon she untied\nthe girdle, and cast it into the river, and the ring along with it.\nThis is not credited by those who do not believe either that the Lord\nJesus Christ came forth from His mother's womb without destroying her\nvirginity, and entered among His disciples when the doors were shut;\nbut let them make strict inquiry into this miracle, and if they find\nit true, let them believe those others. The lady is of distinction,\nnobly born, married to a nobleman. She resides at Carthage. The city\nis distinguished, the person is distinguished, so that they who make\ninquiries cannot fail to find satisfaction. Certainly the martyr\nhimself, by whose prayers she was healed, believed on the Son of her\nwho remained a virgin; on Him who came in among the disciples when\nthe doors were shut; in fine,--and to this tends all that we have\nbeen retailing,--on Him who ascended into heaven with the flesh in\nwhich He had risen; and it is because he laid down his life for this\nfaith that such miracles were done by his means.\n\nEven now, therefore, many miracles are wrought, the same God who\nwrought those we read of still performing them, by whom He will and as\nHe will; but they are not as well known, nor are they beaten into the\nmemory, like gravel, by frequent reading, so that they cannot fall out\nof mind. For even where, as is now done among ourselves, care is taken\nthat the pamphlets of those who receive benefit be read publicly, yet\nthose who are present hear the narrative but once, and many are absent;\nand so it comes to pass that even those who are present forget in a few\ndays what they heard, and scarcely one of them can be found who will\ntell what he heard to one who he knows was not present.\n\nOne miracle was wrought among ourselves, which, though no greater\nthan those I have mentioned, was yet so signal and conspicuous, that\nI suppose there is no inhabitant of Hippo who did not either see\nor hear of it, none who could possibly forget it. There were seven\nbrothers and three sisters of a noble family of the Cappadocian\nC\u00e6sarea, who were cursed by their mother, a new-made widow, on\naccount of some wrong they had done her, and which she bitterly\nresented, and who were visited with so severe a punishment from\nHeaven, that all of them were seized with a hideous shaking in all\ntheir limbs. Unable, while presenting this loathsome appearance, to\nendure the eyes of their fellow-citizens, they wandered over almost\nthe whole Roman world, each following his own direction. Two of them\ncame to Hippo, a brother and a sister, Paulus and Palladia, already\nknown in many other places by the fame of their wretched lot. Now it\nwas about fifteen days before Easter when they came, and they came\ndaily to church, and specially to the relics of the most glorious\nStephen, praying that God might now be appeased, and restore their\nformer health. There, and wherever they went, they attracted the\nattention of every one. Some who had seen them elsewhere, and knew\nthe cause of their trembling, told others as occasion offered. Easter\narrived, and on the Lord's day, in the morning, when there was now\na large crowd present, and the young man was holding the bars of\nthe holy place where the relics were, and praying, suddenly he fell\ndown, and lay precisely as if asleep, but not trembling as he was\nwont to do even in sleep. All present were astonished. Some were\nalarmed, some were moved with pity; and while some were for lifting\nhim up, others prevented them, and said they should rather wait\nand see what would result. And behold! he rose up, and trembled no\nmore, for he was healed, and stood quite well, scanning those who\nwere scanning him. Who then refrained himself from praising God? The\nwhole church was filled with the voices of those who were shouting\nand congratulating him. Then they came running to me, where I was\nsitting ready to come into the church. One after another they throng\nin, the last comer telling me as news what the first had told me\nalready; and while I rejoiced and inwardly gave God thanks, the young\nman himself also enters, with a number of others, falls at my knees,\nis raised up to receive my kiss. We go in to the congregation: the\nchurch was full, and ringing with the shouts of joy, \"Thanks to God!\nPraised be God!\" every one joining and shouting on all sides, \"I\nhave healed the people,\" and then with still louder voice shouting\nagain. Silence being at last obtained, the customary lessons of the\ndivine Scriptures were read. And when I came to my sermon, I made\na few remarks suitable to the occasion and the happy and joyful\nfeeling, not desiring them to listen to me, but rather to consider\nthe eloquence of God in this divine work. The man dined with us, and\ngave us a careful account of his own, his mother's, and his family's\ncalamity. Accordingly, on the following day, after delivering my\nsermon, I promised that next day I would read his narrative to the\npeople.[982] And when I did so, the third day after Easter Sunday,\nI made the brother and sister both stand on the steps of the raised\nplace from which I used to speak; and while they stood there their\npamphlet was read.[983] The whole congregation, men and women alike,\nsaw the one standing without any unnatural movement, the other\ntrembling in all her limbs; so that those who had not before seen the\nman himself saw in his sister what the divine compassion had removed\nfrom him. In him they saw matter of congratulation, in her subject\nfor prayer. Meanwhile, their pamphlet being finished, I instructed\nthem to withdraw from the gaze of the people; and I had begun to\ndiscuss the whole matter somewhat more carefully, when lo! as I\nwas proceeding, other voices are heard from the tomb of the martyr,\nshouting new congratulations. My audience turned round, and began to\nrun to the tomb. The young woman, when she had come down from the\nsteps where she had been standing, went to pray at the holy relics,\nand no sooner had she touched the bars than she, in the same way as\nher brother, collapsed, as if falling asleep, and rose up cured.\nWhile, then, we were asking what had happened, and what occasioned\nthis noise of joy, they came into the basilica where we were,\nleading her from the martyr's tomb in perfect health. Then, indeed,\nsuch a shout of wonder rose from men and women together, that the\nexclamations and the tears seemed like never to come to an end. She\nwas led to the place where she had a little before stood trembling.\nThey now rejoiced that she was like her brother, as before they had\nmourned that she remained unlike him; and as they had not yet uttered\ntheir prayers in her behalf, they perceived that their intention of\ndoing so had been speedily heard. They shouted God's praises without\nwords, but with such a noise that our ears could scarcely bear it.\nWhat was there in the hearts of these exultant people but the faith\nof Christ, for which Stephen had shed his blood?\n\n\n  9. _That all the miracles which are done by means of the martyrs\n      in the name of Christ testify to that faith which the martyrs\n      had in Christ._\n\nTo what do these miracles witness, but to this faith which preaches\nChrist risen in the flesh, and ascended with the same into heaven? For\nthe martyrs themselves were martyrs, that is to say, witnesses of this\nfaith, drawing upon themselves by their testimony the hatred of the\nworld, and conquering the world not by resisting it, but by dying. For\nthis faith they died, and can now ask these benefits from the Lord in\nwhose name they were slain. For this faith their marvellous constancy\nwas exercised, so that in these miracles great power was manifested\nas the result. For if the resurrection of the flesh to eternal life\nhad not taken place in Christ, and were not to be accomplished in His\npeople, as predicted by Christ, or by the prophets who foretold that\nChrist was to come, why do the martyrs who were slain for this faith\nwhich proclaims the resurrection possess such power? For whether God\nHimself wrought these miracles by that wonderful manner of working\nby which, though Himself eternal, He produces effects in time; or\nwhether He wrought them by servants, and if so, whether He made use\nof the spirits of martyrs as He uses men who are still in the body,\nor effects all these marvels by means of angels, over whom He exerts\nan invisible, immutable, incorporeal sway, so that what is said to\nbe done by the martyrs is done not by their operation, but only by\ntheir prayer and request; or whether, finally, some things are done in\none way, others in another, and so that man cannot at all comprehend\nthem,--nevertheless these miracles attest this faith which preaches the\nresurrection of the flesh to eternal life.\n\n\n  10. _That the martyrs who obtain many miracles in order that the\n      true God may be worshipped, are worthy of much greater honour\n      than the demons, who do some marvels that they themselves may\n      be supposed to be God._\n\nHere perhaps our adversaries will say that their gods also have done\nsome wonderful things, if now they begin to compare their gods to\nour dead men. Or will they also say that they have gods taken from\namong dead men, such as Hercules, Romulus, and many others whom\nthey fancy to have been received into the number of the gods? But\nour martyrs are not our gods; for we know that the martyrs and we\nhave both but one God, and that the same. Nor yet are the miracles\nwhich they maintain to have been done by means of their temples at\nall comparable to those which are done by the tombs of our martyrs.\nIf they seem similar, their gods have been defeated by our martyrs\nas Pharaoh's magi were by Moses. In reality, the demons wrought\nthese marvels with the same impure pride with which they aspired to\nbe the gods of the nations; but the martyrs do these wonders, or\nrather God does them while they pray and assist, in order that an\nimpulse may be given to the faith by which we believe that they are\nnot our gods, but have, together with ourselves, one God. In fine,\nthey built temples to these gods of theirs, and set up altars, and\nordained priests, and appointed sacrifices; but to our martyrs we\nbuild, not temples as if they were gods, but monuments as to dead\nmen whose spirits live with God. Neither do we erect altars at these\nmonuments that we may sacrifice to the martyrs, but to the one God\nof the martyrs and of ourselves; and in this sacrifice they are\nnamed in their own place and rank as men of God who conquered the\nworld by confessing Him, but they are not invoked by the sacrificing\npriest. For it is to God, not to them, he sacrifices, though he\nsacrifices at their monument; for he is God's priest, not theirs. The\nsacrifice itself, too, is the body of Christ, which is not offered\nto them, because they themselves are this body. Which then can more\nreadily be believed to work miracles? They who wish themselves to be\nreckoned gods by those on whom they work miracles, or those whose\nsole object in working any miracle is to induce faith in God, and in\nChrist also as God? They who wished to turn even their crimes into\nsacred rites, or those who are unwilling that even their own praises\nbe consecrated, and seek that everything for which they are justly\npraised be ascribed to the glory of Him in whom they are praised?\nFor in the Lord their souls are praised. Let us therefore believe\nthose who both speak the truth and work wonders. For by speaking the\ntruth they suffered, and so won the power of working wonders. And the\nleading truth they professed is that Christ rose from the dead, and\nfirst showed in His own flesh the immortality of the resurrection\nwhich He promised should be ours, either in the beginning of the\nworld to come, or in the end of this world.\n\n\n  11. _Against the Platonists, who argue from the physical weight of\n       the elements that an earthly body cannot inhabit heaven._\n\nBut against this great gift of God, these reasoners, \"whose thoughts\nthe Lord knows that they are vain,\"[984] bring arguments from\nthe weights of the elements; for they have been taught by their\nmaster Plato that the two greatest elements of the world, and the\nfurthest removed from one another, are coupled and united by the\ntwo intermediate, air and water. And consequently they say, since\nthe earth is the first of the elements, beginning from the base of\nthe series, the second the water above the earth, the third the air\nabove the water, the fourth the heaven above the air, it follows\nthat a body of earth cannot live in the heaven; for each element is\npoised by its own weight so as to preserve its own place and rank.\nBehold with what arguments human infirmity, possessed with vanity,\ncontradicts the omnipotence of God! What, then, do so many earthly\nbodies do in the air, since the air is the third element from the\nearth? Unless perhaps He who has granted to the earthly bodies of\nbirds that they be carried through the air by the lightness of\nfeathers and wings, has not been able to confer upon the bodies of\nmen made immortal the power to abide in the highest heaven. The\nearthly animals, too, which cannot fly, among which are men, ought on\nthese terms to live under the earth, as fishes, which are the animals\nof the water, live under the water. Why, then, can an animal of earth\nnot live in the second element, that is, in water, while it can in\nthe third? Why, though it belongs to the earth, is it forthwith\nsuffocated if it is forced to live in the second element next above\nearth, while it lives in the third, and cannot live out of it? Is\nthere a mistake here in the order of the elements, or is not the\nmistake rather in their reasonings, and not in the nature of things?\nI will not repeat what I said in the thirteenth book,[985] that many\nearthly bodies, though heavy like lead, receive from the workman's\nhand a form which enables them to swim in water; and yet it is denied\nthat the omnipotent Worker can confer on the human body a property\nwhich shall enable it to pass into heaven and dwell there.\n\nBut against what I have formerly said they can find nothing to say,\neven though they introduce and make the most of this order of the\nelements in which they confide. For if the order be that the earth\nis first, the water second, the air third, the heaven fourth, then\nthe soul is above all. For Aristotle said that the soul was a fifth\nbody, while Plato denied that it was a body at all. If it were a\nfifth body, then certainly it would be above the rest; and if it is\nnot a body at all, so much the more does it rise above all. What,\nthen, does it do in an earthly body? What does this soul, which is\nfiner than all else, do in such a mass of matter as this? What does\nthe lightest of substances do in this ponderosity? this swiftest\nsubstance in such sluggishness? Will not the body be raised to\nheaven by virtue of so excellent a nature as this? and if now earthly\nbodies can retain the souls below, shall not the souls be one day\nable to raise the earthly bodies above?\n\nIf we pass now to their miracles which they oppose to our martyrs as\nwrought by their gods, shall not even these be found to make for us,\nand help out our argument? For if any of the miracles of their gods\nare great, certainly that is a great one which Varro mentions of a\nvestal virgin, who, when she was endangered by a false accusation of\nunchastity, filled a sieve with water from the Tiber, and carried it\nto her judges without any part of it leaking. Who kept the weight\nof water in the sieve? Who prevented any drop from falling from it\nthrough so many open holes? They will answer, Some god or some demon.\nIf a god, is he greater than the God who made the world? If a demon,\nis he mightier than an angel who serves the God by whom the world\nwas made? If, then, a lesser god, angel, or demon could so sustain\nthe weight of this liquid element that the water might seem to have\nchanged its nature, shall not Almighty God, who Himself created\nall the elements, be able to eliminate from the earthly body its\nheaviness, so that the quickened body shall dwell in whatever element\nthe quickening spirit pleases?\n\nThen, again, since they give the air a middle place between the fire\nabove and the water beneath, how is it that we often find it between\nwater and water, and between the water and the earth? For what do\nthey make of those watery clouds, between which and the seas air is\nconstantly found intervening? I should like to know by what weight\nand order of the elements it comes to pass that very violent and\nstormy torrents are suspended in the clouds above the earth before\nthey rush along upon the earth under the air? In fine, why is it that\nthroughout the whole globe the air is between the highest heaven and\nthe earth, if its place is between the sky and the water, as the\nplace of the water is between the sky and the earth?\n\nFinally, if the order of the elements is so disposed that, as Plato\nthinks, the two extremes, fire and earth, are united by the two\nmeans, air and water, and that the fire occupies the highest part of\nthe sky, and the earth the lowest part, or as it were the foundation\nof the world, and that therefore earth cannot be in the heavens, how\nis fire in the earth? For, according to this reasoning, these two\nelements, earth and fire, ought to be so restricted to their own\nplaces, the highest and the lowest, that neither the lowest can rise\nto the place of the highest, nor the highest sink to that of the\nlowest. Thus, as they think that no particle of earth is or shall\never be in the sky, so we ought to see no particle of fire on the\nearth. But the fact is that it exists to such an extent, not only on\nbut even under the earth, that the tops of mountains vomit it forth;\nbesides that we see it to exist on earth for human uses, and even to\nbe produced from the earth, since it is kindled from wood and stones,\nwhich are without doubt earthly bodies. But that [upper] fire, they\nsay, is tranquil, pure, harmless, eternal; but this [earthly] fire is\nturbid, smoky, corruptible, and corrupting. But it does not corrupt\nthe mountains and caverns of the earth in which it rages continually.\nBut grant that the earthly fire is so unlike the other as to suit its\nearthly position, why then do they object to our believing that the\nnature of earthly bodies shall some day be made incorruptible and fit\nfor the sky, even as now fire is corruptible and suited to the earth?\nThey therefore adduce from their weights and order of the elements\nnothing from which they can prove that it is impossible for Almighty\nGod to make our bodies such that they can dwell in the skies.\n\n\n   12. _Against the calumnies with which unbelievers throw ridicule\n      upon the Christian faith in the resurrection of the flesh._\n\nBut their way is to feign a scrupulous anxiety in investigating this\nquestion, and to cast ridicule on our faith in the resurrection of the\nbody, by asking, Whether abortions shall rise? And as the Lord says,\n\"Verily I say unto you, not a hair of your head shall perish,\"[986]\nshall all bodies have an equal stature and strength, or shall there be\ndifferences in size? For if there is to be equality, where shall those\nabortions, supposing that they rise again, get that bulk which they\nhad not here? Or if they shall not rise because they were not born but\ncast out, they raise the same question about children who have died\nin childhood, asking us whence they get the stature which we see they\nhad not here; for we will not say that those who have been not only\nborn, but born again, shall not rise again. Then, further, they ask of\nwhat size these equal bodies shall be. For if all shall be as tall and\nlarge as were the tallest and largest in this world, they ask us how\nit is that not only children but many full-grown persons shall receive\nwhat they here did not possess, if each one is to receive what he had\nhere. And if the saying of the apostle, that we are all to come to\nthe \"measure of the age of the fulness of Christ,\"[987] or that other\nsaying, \"Whom He predestinated to be conformed to the image of His\nSon,\"[988] is to be understood to mean that the stature and size of\nChrist's body shall be the measure of the bodies of all those who shall\nbe in His kingdom, then, say they, the size and height of many must be\ndiminished; and if so much of the bodily frame itself be lost, what\nbecomes of the saying, \"Not a hair of your head shall perish?\" Besides,\nit might be asked regarding the hair itself, whether all that the\nbarber has cut off shall be restored? And if it is to be restored, who\nwould not shrink from such deformity? For as the same restoration will\nbe made of what has been pared off the nails, much will be replaced\non the body which a regard for its appearance had cut off. And where,\nthen, will be its beauty, which assuredly ought to be much greater in\nthat immortal condition than it could be in this corruptible state?\nOn the other hand, if such things are not restored to the body, they\nmust perish; how, then, they say, shall not a hair of the head perish?\nIn like manner they reason about fatness and leanness; for if all are\nto be equal, then certainly there shall not be some fat, others lean.\nSome, therefore, shall gain, others lose something. Consequently there\nwill not be a simple restoration of what formerly existed, but, on the\none hand, an addition of what had no existence, and, on the other, a\nloss of what did before exist.\n\nThe difficulties, too, about the corruption and dissolution of dead\nbodies,--that one is turned into dust, while another evaporates into\nthe air; that some are devoured by beasts, some by fire, while some\nperish by shipwreck or by drowning in one shape or other, so that their\nbodies decay into liquid,--these difficulties give them immoderate\nalarm, and they believe that all those dissolved elements cannot be\ngathered again and reconstructed into a body. They also make eager\nuse of all the deformities and blemishes which either accident or\nbirth has produced, and accordingly, with horror and derision, cite\nmonstrous births, and ask if every deformity will be preserved in the\nresurrection. For if we say that no such thing shall be reproduced\nin the body of a man, they suppose that they confute us by citing\nthe marks of the wounds which we assert were found in the risen body\nof the Lord Christ. But of all these, the most difficult question\nis, into whose body that flesh shall return which has been eaten and\nassimilated by another man constrained by hunger to use it so; for\nit has been converted into the flesh of the man who used it as his\nnutriment, and it filled up those losses of flesh which famine had\nproduced. For the sake, then, of ridiculing the resurrection, they ask,\nShall this return to the man whose flesh it first was, or to him whose\nflesh it afterwards became? And thus, too, they seek to give promise\nto the human soul of alternations of true misery and false happiness,\nin accordance with Plato's theory; or, in accordance with Porphyry's,\nthat, after many transmigrations into different bodies, it ends its\nmiseries, and never more returns to them, not, however, by obtaining an\nimmortal body, but by escaping from every kind of body.\n\n\n     13. _Whether abortions, if they are numbered among the dead,\n           shall not also have a part in the resurrection._\n\nTo these objections, then, of our adversaries which I have thus\ndetailed, I will now reply, trusting that God will mercifully assist\nmy endeavours. That abortions, which, even supposing they were alive\nin the womb, did also die there, shall rise again, I make bold\nneither to affirm nor to deny, although I fail to see why, if they\nare not excluded from the number of the dead, they should not attain\nto the resurrection of the dead. For either all the dead shall not\nrise, and there will be to all eternity some souls without bodies,\nthough they once had them,--only in their mother's womb, indeed; or,\nif all human souls shall receive again the bodies which they had\nwherever they lived, and which they left when they died, then I do\nnot see how I can say that even those who died in their mother's womb\nshall have no resurrection. But whichever of these opinions any one\nmay adopt concerning them, we must at least apply to them, if they\nrise again, all that we have to say of infants who have been born.\n\n\n     14. _Whether infants shall rise in that body which they would\n                     have had had they grown up._\n\nWhat, then, are we to say of infants, if not that they will not\nrise in that diminutive body in which they died, but shall receive\nby the marvellous and rapid operation of God that body which time\nby a slower process would have given them? For in the Lord's words,\nwhere He says, \"Not a hair of your head shall perish,\"[989] it is\nasserted that nothing which was possessed shall be wanting; but it\nis not said that nothing which was not possessed shall be given. To\nthe dead infant there was wanting the perfect stature of its body;\nfor even the perfect infant lacks the perfection of bodily size,\nbeing capable of further growth. This perfect stature is, in a sense,\nso possessed by all that they are conceived and born with it,--that\nis, they have it potentially, though not yet in actual bulk; just\nas all the members of the body are potentially in the seed, though,\neven after the child is born, some of them, the teeth for example,\nmay be wanting. In this seminal principle of every substance, there\nseems to be, as it were, the beginning of everything which does not\nyet exist, or rather does not appear, but which in process of time\nwill come into being, or rather into sight. In this, therefore, the\nchild who is to be tall or short is already tall or short. And in\nthe resurrection of the body, we need, for the same reason, fear\nno bodily loss; for though all should be of equal size, and reach\ngigantic proportions, lest the men who were largest here should lose\nanything of their bulk and it should perish, in contradiction to\nthe words of Christ, who said that not a hair of their head should\nperish, yet why should there lack the means by which that wonderful\nWorker should make such additions, seeing that He is the Creator, who\nHimself created all things out of nothing?\n\n\n   15. _Whether the bodies of all the dead shall rise the same size\n                         as the Lord's body._\n\nIt is certain that Christ rose in the same bodily stature in which He\ndied, and that it is wrong to say that, when the general resurrection\nshall have arrived, His body shall, for the sake of equalling the\ntallest, assume proportions which it had not when He appeared to the\ndisciples in the figure with which they were familiar. But if we say\nthat even the bodies of taller men are to be reduced to the size of\nthe Lord's body, there will be a great loss in many bodies, though\nHe promised that not a hair of their head should perish. It remains,\ntherefore, that we conclude that every man shall receive his own size\nwhich he had in youth, though he died an old man, or which he would\nhave had, supposing he died before his prime. As for what the apostle\nsaid of the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ, we must\neither understand him to refer to something else, viz. to the fact\nthat the measure of Christ will be completed when all the members\namong the Christian communities are added to the Head; or if we are\nto refer it to the resurrection of the body, the meaning is that all\nshall rise neither beyond nor under youth, but in that vigour and age\nto which we know that Christ had arrived. For even the world's wisest\nmen have fixed the bloom of youth at about the age of thirty; and\nwhen this period has been passed, the man begins to decline towards\nthe defective and duller period of old age. And therefore the apostle\ndid not speak of the measure of the body, nor of the measure of the\nstature, but of \"the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ.\"\n\n\n    16. _What is meant by the conforming of the saints to the image\n                          of the Son of God._\n\nThen, again, these words, \"Predestinate to be conformed to the image\nof the Son of God,\"[990] may be understood of the inner man. So in\nanother place He says to us, \"Be not conformed to this world, but\nbe ye transformed in the renewing of your mind.\"[991] In so far,\nthen, as we are transformed so as not to be conformed to the world,\nwe are conformed to the Son of God. It may also be understood thus,\nthat as He was conformed to us by assuming mortality, we shall be\nconformed to Him by immortality; and this indeed is connected with\nthe resurrection of the body. But if we are also taught in these\nwords what form our bodies shall rise in, as the measure we spoke\nof before, so also this conformity is to be understood not of size,\nbut of age. Accordingly all shall rise in the stature they either\nhad attained or would have attained had they lived to their prime,\nalthough it will be no great disadvantage even if the form of the\nbody be infantine or aged, while no infirmity shall remain in the\nmind nor in the body itself. So that even if any one contends that\nevery person will rise again in the same bodily form in which he\ndied, we need not spend much labour in disputing with him.\n\n\n    17. _Whether the bodies of women shall retain their own sex in\n                          the resurrection._\n\nFrom the words, \"Till we all come to a perfect man, to the measure of\nthe age of the fulness of Christ,\"[992] and from the words, \"Conformed\nto the image of the Son of God,\"[993] some conclude that women shall\nnot rise women, but that all shall be men, because God made man only\nof earth, and woman of the man. For my part, they seem to be wiser who\nmake no doubt that both sexes shall rise. For there shall be no lust,\nwhich is now the cause of confusion. For before they sinned, the man\nand the woman were naked, and were not ashamed. From those bodies,\nthen, vice shall be withdrawn, while nature shall be preserved. And\nthe sex of woman is not a vice, but nature. It shall then indeed be\nsuperior to carnal intercourse and child-bearing; nevertheless the\nfemale members shall remain adapted not to the old uses, but to a new\nbeauty, which, so far from provoking lust, now extinct, shall excite\npraise to the wisdom and clemency of God, who both made what was not\nand delivered from corruption what He made. For at the beginning of\nthe human race the woman was made of a rib taken from the side of the\nman while he slept; for it seemed fit that even then Christ and His\nChurch should be foreshadowed in this event. For that sleep of the\nman was the death of Christ, whose side, as He hung lifeless upon the\ncross, was pierced with a spear, and there flowed from it blood and\nwater, and these we know to be the sacraments by which the Church is\n\"built up.\" For Scripture used this very word, not saying \"He formed\"\nor \"framed,\" but \"built her up into a woman;\"[994] whence also the\napostle speaks of the _edification_ of the body of Christ,[995] which\nis the Church. The woman, therefore, is a creature of God even as the\nman; but by her creation from man unity is commended; and the manner\nof her creation prefigured, as has been said, Christ and the Church.\nHe, then, who created both sexes will restore both. Jesus Himself also,\nwhen asked by the Sadducees, who denied the resurrection, which of the\nseven brothers should have to wife the woman whom all in succession had\ntaken to raise up seed to their brother, as the law enjoined, says,\n\"Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God.\"[996] And\nthough it was a fit opportunity for His saying, She about whom you make\ninquiries shall herself be a man, and not a woman, He said nothing of\nthe kind; but \"In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in\nmarriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.\"[997] They shall be\nequal to the angels in immortality and happiness, not in flesh, nor in\nresurrection, which the angels did not need, because they could not\ndie. The Lord then denied that there would be in the resurrection,\nnot women, but marriages; and He uttered this denial in circumstances\nin which the question mooted would have been more easily and speedily\nsolved by denying that the female sex would exist, if this had in truth\nbeen foreknown by Him. But, indeed, He even affirmed that the sex\nshould exist by saying, \"They shall not be given in marriage,\" which\ncan only apply to females; \"Neither shall they marry,\" which applies to\nmales. There shall therefore be those who are in this world accustomed\nto marry and be given in marriage, only they shall there make no such\nmarriages.\n\n\n  18. _Of the perfect Man, that is, Christ; and of His body, that is,\n                  the Church, which is His fulness._\n\nTo understand what the apostle means when he says that we shall all\ncome to a perfect man, we must consider the connection of the whole\npassage, which runs thus: \"He that descended is the same also that\nascended up far above all heavens, that He might fill all things. And\nHe gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists;\nand some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for\nthe work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:\ntill we all come to the unity of the faith and knowledge of the Son\nof God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the age of the fulness of\nChrist: that we henceforth be no more children, tossed and carried\nabout with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning\ncraftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; but, speaking the\ntruth in love, may grow up in Him in all things, which is the Head,\neven Christ: from whom the whole body fitly joined together and\ncompacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the\neffectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of\nthe body, unto the edifying of itself in love.\"[998] Behold what\nthe perfect man is--the head and the body, which is made up of all\nthe members, which in their own time shall be perfected. But new\nadditions are daily being made to this body while the Church is being\nbuilt up, to which it is said, \"Ye are the body of Christ and His\nmembers;\"[999] and again, \"For His body's sake,\" he says, \"which\nis the Church;\"[1000] and again, \"We being many are one head, one\nbody.\"[1001] It is of the edification of this body that it is here,\ntoo, said, \"For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the\nministry, for the edification of the body of Christ;\" and then that\npassage of which we are now speaking is added, \"Till we all come to\nthe unity of the faith and knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect\nman, to the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ,\" and so\non. And he shows of what body we are to understand this to be the\nmeasure, when he says, \"That we may grow up into Him in all things,\nwhich is the Head, even Christ: from whom the whole body fitly\njoined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth,\naccording to the effectual working in the measure of every part.\" As,\ntherefore, there is a measure of every part, so there is a measure of\nthe fulness of the whole body which is made up of all its parts, and\nit is of this measure it is said, \"To the measure of the age of the\nfulness of Christ.\" This fulness he spoke of also in the place where\nhe says of Christ, \"And gave Him to be the Head over all things to\nthe Church,[1002] which is His body, the fulness of Him that filleth\nall in all.\"[1003] But even if this should be referred to the form\nin which each one shall rise, what should hinder us from applying to\nthe woman what is expressly said of the man, understanding both sexes\nto be included under the general term \"man?\" For certainly in the\nsaying, \"Blessed is he who feareth the Lord,\"[1004] women also who\nfear the Lord are included.\n\n\n  19. _That all bodily blemishes which mar human beauty in this life\n      shall be removed in the resurrection, the natural substance of\n      the body remaining, but the quality and quantity of it being\n      altered so as to produce beauty._\n\nWhat am I to say now about the hair and nails? Once it is understood\nthat no part of the body shall so perish as to produce deformity in\nthe body, it is at the same time understood that such things as would\nhave produced a deformity by their excessive proportions shall be\nadded to the total bulk of the body, not to parts in which the beauty\nof the proportion would thus be marred. Just as if, after making a\nvessel of clay, one wished to make it over again of the same clay, it\nwould not be necessary that the same portion of the clay which had\nformed the handle should again form the new handle, or that what had\nformed the bottom should again do so, but only that the whole clay\nshould go to make up the whole new vessel, and that no part of it\nshould be left unused. Wherefore, if the hair that has been cropped\nand the nails that have been cut would cause a deformity were they\nto be restored to their places, they shall not be restored; and yet\nno one will lose these parts at the resurrection, for they shall be\nchanged into the same flesh, their substance being so altered as to\npreserve the proportion of the various parts of the body. However,\nwhat our Lord said, \"Not a hair of your head shall perish,\" might\nmore suitably be interpreted of the number, and not of the length\nof the hairs, as He elsewhere says, \"The hairs of your head are all\nnumbered.\"[1005] Nor would I say this because I suppose that any\npart naturally belonging to the body can perish, but that whatever\ndeformity was in it, and served to exhibit the penal condition in\nwhich we mortals are, should be restored in such a way that, while\nthe substance is entirely preserved, the deformity shall perish.\nFor if even a human workman, who has, for some reason, made a\ndeformed statue, can recast it and make it very beautiful, and this\nwithout suffering any part of the substance, but only the deformity\nto be lost,--if he can, for example, remove some unbecoming or\ndisproportionate part, not by cutting off and separating this part\nfrom the whole, but by so breaking down and mixing up the whole as\nto get rid of the blemish without diminishing the quantity of his\nmaterial,--shall we not think as highly of the almighty Worker? Shall\nHe not be able to remove and abolish all deformities of the human\nbody, whether common ones or rare and monstrous, which, though in\nkeeping with this miserable life, are yet not to be thought of in\nconnection with that future blessedness; and shall He not be able so\nto remove them that, while the natural but unseemly blemishes are put\nan end to, the natural substance shall suffer no diminution?\n\nAnd consequently overgrown and emaciated persons need not fear that\nthey shall be in heaven of such a figure as they would not be even in\nthis world if they could help it. For all bodily beauty consists in\nthe proportion of the parts, together with a certain agreeableness\nof colour. Where there is no proportion, the eye is offended, either\nbecause there is something awanting, or too small, or too large. And\nthus there shall be no deformity resulting from want of proportion\nin that state in which all that is wrong is corrected, and all that\nis defective supplied from resources the Creator wots of, and all\nthat is excessive removed without destroying the integrity of the\nsubstance. And as for the pleasant colour, how conspicuous shall it\nbe where \"the just shall shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of\ntheir Father!\"[1006] This brightness we must rather believe to have\nbeen concealed from the eyes of the disciples when Christ rose, than\nto have been awanting. For weak human eyesight could not bear it,\nand it was necessary that they should so look upon Him as to be able\nto recognise Him. For this purpose also He allowed them to touch the\nmarks of His wounds, and also ate and drank,--not because He needed\nnourishment, but because He could take it if He wished. Now, when an\nobject, though present, is invisible to persons who see other things\nwhich are present, as we say that that brightness was present but\ninvisible by those who saw other things, this is called in Greek\n\u1f00\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1; and our Latin translators, for want of a better word, have\nrendered this _c\u00e6citas_ (blindness) in the book of Genesis. This\nblindness the men of Sodom suffered when they sought the just Lot's\ngate and could not find it. But if it had been blindness, that is\nto say, if they could see nothing, then they would not have asked\nfor the gate by which they might enter the house, but for guides who\nmight lead them away.\n\nBut the love we bear to the blessed martyrs causes us, I know not\nhow, to desire to see in the heavenly kingdom the marks of the wounds\nwhich they received for the name of Christ, and possibly we shall\nsee them. For this will not be a deformity, but a mark of honour,\nand will add lustre to their appearance, and a spiritual, if not a\nbodily beauty. And yet we need not believe that they to whom it has\nbeen said, \"Not a hair of your head shall perish,\" shall, in the\nresurrection, want such of their members as they have been deprived\nof in their martyrdom. But if it will be seemly in that new kingdom\nto have some marks of these wounds still visible in that immortal\nflesh, the places where they have been wounded or mutilated shall\nretain the scars without any of the members being lost. While,\ntherefore, it is quite true that no blemishes which the body has\nsustained shall appear in the resurrection, yet we are not to reckon\nor name these marks of virtue blemishes.\n\n\n     20. _That, in the resurrection, the substance of our bodies,\n          however disintegrated, shall be entirely reunited._\n\nFar be it from us to fear that the omnipotence of the Creator cannot,\nfor the resuscitation and reanimation of our bodies, recall all the\nportions which have been consumed by beasts or fire, or have been\ndissolved into dust or ashes, or have decomposed into water, or\nevaporated into the air. Far from us be the thought, that anything\nwhich escapes our observation in any most hidden recess of nature\neither evades the knowledge or transcends the power of the Creator of\nall things. Cicero, the great authority of our adversaries, wishing\nto define God as accurately as possible, says, \"God is a mind free\nand independent, without materiality, perceiving and moving all\nthings, and itself endowed with eternal movement.\"[1007] This he\nfound in the systems of the greatest philosophers. Let me ask, then,\nin their own language, how anything can either lie hid from Him who\nperceives all things, or irrevocably escape Him who moves all things?\n\nThis leads me to reply to that question which seems the most difficult\nof all,--To whom, in the resurrection, will belong the flesh of a\ndead man which has become the flesh of a living man? For if some\none, famishing for want and pressed with hunger, use human flesh\nas food,--an extremity not unknown, as both ancient history and\nthe unhappy experience of our own days have taught us,--can it be\ncontended, with any show of reason, that all the flesh eaten has been\nevacuated, and that none of it has been assimilated to the substance\nof the eater, though the very emaciation which existed before, and has\nnow disappeared, sufficiently indicates what large deficiencies have\nbeen filled up with this food? But I have already made some remarks\nwhich will suffice for the solution of this difficulty also. For all\nthe flesh which hunger has consumed finds its way into the air by\nevaporation, whence, as we have said, God Almighty can recall it.\nThat flesh, therefore, shall be restored to the man in whom it first\nbecame human flesh. For it must be looked upon as borrowed by the other\nperson, and, like a pecuniary loan, must be returned to the lender. His\nown flesh, however, which he lost by famine, shall be restored to him\nby Him who can recover even what has evaporated. And though it had been\nabsolutely annihilated, so that no part of its substance remained in\nany secret spot of nature, the Almighty could restore it by such means\nas He saw fit. For this sentence, uttered by the Truth, \"Not a hair of\nyour head shall perish,\" forbids us to suppose that, though no hair of\na man's head can perish, yet the large portions of his flesh eaten and\nconsumed by the famishing can perish.\n\nFrom all that we have thus considered, and discussed with such\npoor ability as we can command, we gather this conclusion, that in\nthe resurrection of the flesh the body shall be of that size which\nit either had attained or should have attained in the flower of\nits youth, and shall enjoy the beauty that arises from preserving\nsymmetry and proportion in all its members. And it is reasonable\nto suppose that, for the preservation of this beauty, any part of\nthe body's substance, which, if placed in one spot, would produce\na deformity, shall be distributed through the whole of it, so that\nneither any part, nor the symmetry of the whole, may be lost, but\nonly the general stature of the body somewhat increased by the\ndistribution in all the parts of that which, in one place, would have\nbeen unsightly. Or if it is contended that each will rise with the\nsame stature as that of the body he died in, we shall not obstinately\ndispute this, provided only there be no deformity, no infirmity, no\nlanguor, no corruption,--nothing of any kind which would ill become\nthat kingdom in which the children of the resurrection and of the\npromise shall be equal to the angels of God, if not in body and age,\nat least in happiness.\n\n\n   21. _Of the new spiritual body into which the flesh of the saints\n                        shall be transformed._\n\nWhatever, therefore, has been taken from the body, either during life\nor after death, shall be restored to it, and, in conjunction with what\nhas remained in the grave, shall rise again, transformed from the\noldness of the animal body into the newness of the spiritual body, and\nclothed in incorruption and immortality. But even though the body has\nbeen all quite ground to powder by some severe accident, or by the\nruthlessness of enemies, and though it has been so diligently scattered\nto the winds, or into the water, that there is no trace of it left,\nyet it shall not be beyond the omnipotence of the Creator,--no, not\na hair of its head shall perish. The flesh shall then be spiritual,\nand subject to the spirit, but still flesh, not spirit, as the spirit\nitself, when subject to the flesh, was fleshly, but still spirit and\nnot flesh. And of this we have experimental proof in the deformity of\nour penal condition. For those persons were carnal, not in a fleshly,\nbut in a spiritual way, to whom the apostle said, \"I could not speak to\nyou as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal.\"[1008] And a man is in this\nlife spiritual in such a way, that he is yet carnal with respect to\nhis body, and sees another law in his members warring against the law\nof his mind; but even in his body he will be spiritual when the same\nflesh shall have had that resurrection of which these words speak, \"It\nis sown an animal body, it shall rise a spiritual body.\"[1009] But what\nthis spiritual body shall be, and how great its grace, I fear it were\nbut rash to pronounce, seeing that we have as yet no experience of it.\nNevertheless, since it is fit that the joyfulness of our hope should\nutter itself, and so show forth God's praise, and since it was from the\nprofoundest sentiment of ardent and holy love that the Psalmist cried,\n\"O Lord, I have loved the beauty of Thy house,\"[1010] we may, with\nGod's help, speak of the gifts He lavishes on men, good and bad alike,\nin this most wretched life, and may do our best to conjecture the\ngreat glory of that state which we cannot worthily speak of, because\nwe have not yet experienced it. For I say nothing of the time when God\nmade man upright; I say nothing of the happy life of \"the man and his\nwife\" in the fruitful garden, since it was so short that none of their\nchildren experienced it: I speak only of this life which we know, and\nin which we now are, from the temptations of which we cannot escape so\nlong as we are in it, no matter what progress we make, for it is all\ntemptation, and I ask, Who can describe the tokens of God's goodness\nthat are extended to the human race even in this life?\n\n\n  22. _Of the miseries and ills to which the human race is justly\n      exposed through the first sin, and from which none can be\n      delivered save by Christ's grace._\n\nThat the whole human race has been condemned in its first origin,\nthis life itself, if life it is to be called, bears witness by the\nhost of cruel ills with which it is filled. Is not this proved by\nthe profound and dreadful ignorance which produces all the errors\nthat enfold the children of Adam, and from which no man can be\ndelivered without toil, pain, and fear? Is it not proved by his love\nof so many vain and hurtful things, which produces gnawing cares,\ndisquiet, griefs, fears, wild joys, quarrels, law-suits, wars,\ntreasons, angers, hatreds, deceit, flattery, fraud, theft, robbery,\nperfidy, pride, ambition, envy, murders, parricides, cruelty,\nferocity, wickedness, luxury, insolence, impudence, shamelessness,\nfornications, adulteries, incests, and the numberless uncleannesses\nand unnatural acts of both sexes, which it is shameful so much as to\nmention; sacrileges, heresies, blasphemies, perjuries, oppression\nof the innocent, calumnies, plots, falsehoods, false witnessings,\nunrighteous judgments, violent deeds, plunderings, and whatever\nsimilar wickedness has found its way into the lives of men, though\nit cannot find its way into the conception of pure minds? These are\nindeed the crimes of wicked men, yet they spring from that root of\nerror and misplaced love which is born with every son of Adam. For\nwho is there that has not observed with what profound ignorance,\nmanifesting itself even in infancy, and with what superfluity of\nfoolish desires, beginning to appear in boyhood, man comes into this\nlife, so that, were he left to live as he pleased, and to do whatever\nhe pleased, he would plunge into all, or certainly into many of those\ncrimes and iniquities which I mentioned, and could not mention?\n\nBut because God does not wholly desert those whom He condemns,\nnor shuts up in His anger His tender mercies, the human race is\nrestrained by law and instruction, which keep guard against the\nignorance that besets us, and oppose the assaults of vice, but\nare themselves full of labour and sorrow. For what mean those\nmultifarious threats which are used to restrain the folly of\nchildren? What mean pedagogues, masters, the birch, the strap, the\ncane, the schooling which Scripture says must be given a child,\n\"beating him on the sides lest he wax stubborn,\"[1011] and it be\nhardly possible or not possible at all to subdue him? Why all\nthese punishments, save to overcome ignorance and bridle evil\ndesires--these evils with which we come into the world? For why is\nit that we remember with difficulty, and without difficulty forget?\nlearn with difficulty, and without difficulty remain ignorant? are\ndiligent with difficulty, and without difficulty are indolent? Does\nnot this show what vitiated nature inclines and tends to by its\nown weight, and what succour it needs if it is to be delivered?\nInactivity, sloth, laziness, negligence, are vices which shun labour,\nsince labour, though useful, is itself a punishment.\n\nBut, besides the punishments of childhood, without which there\nwould be no learning of what the parents wish,--and the parents\nrarely wish anything useful to be taught,--who can describe, who can\nconceive the number and severity of the punishments which afflict\nthe human race,--pains which are not only the accompaniment of the\nwickedness of godless men, but are a part of the human condition\nand the common misery,--what fear and what grief are caused by\nbereavement and mourning, by losses and condemnations, by fraud\nand falsehood, by false suspicions, and all the crimes and wicked\ndeeds of other men? For at their hands we suffer robbery, captivity,\nchains, imprisonment, exile, torture, mutilation, loss of sight,\nthe violation of chastity to satisfy the lust of the oppressor, and\nmany other dreadful evils. What numberless casualties threaten our\nbodies from without,--extremes of heat and cold, storms, floods,\ninundations, lightning, thunder, hail, earthquakes, houses falling;\nor from the stumbling, or shying, or vice of horses; from countless\npoisons in fruits, water, air, animals; from the painful or even\ndeadly bites of wild animals; from the madness which a mad dog\ncommunicates, so that even the animal which of all others is most\ngentle and friendly to its own master, becomes an object of intenser\nfear than a lion or dragon, and the man whom it has by chance\ninfected with this pestilential contagion becomes so rabid, that his\nparents, wife, children, dread him more than any wild beast! What\ndisasters are suffered by those who travel by land or sea! What man\ncan go out of his own house without being exposed on all hands to\nunforeseen accidents? Returning home sound in limb, he slips on his\nown door-step, breaks his leg, and never recovers. What can seem\nsafer than a man sitting in his chair? Eli the priest fell from his,\nand broke his neck. How many accidents do farmers, or rather all men,\nfear that the crops may suffer from the weather, or the soil, or the\nravages of destructive animals? Commonly they feel safe when the\ncrops are gathered and housed. Yet, to my certain knowledge, sudden\nfloods have driven the labourers away, and swept the barns clean of\nthe finest harvest. Is innocence a sufficient protection against the\nvarious assaults of demons? That no man might think so, even baptized\ninfants, who are certainly unsurpassed in innocence, are sometimes\nso tormented, that God, who permits it, teaches us hereby to bewail\nthe calamities of this life, and to desire the felicity of the life\nto come. As to bodily diseases, they are so numerous that they cannot\nall be contained even in medical books. And in very many, or almost\nall of them, the cures and remedies are themselves tortures, so that\nmen are delivered from a pain that destroys by a cure that pains. Has\nnot the madness of thirst driven men to drink human urine, and even\ntheir own? Has not hunger driven men to eat human flesh, and that the\nflesh not of bodies found dead, but of bodies slain for the purpose?\nHave not the fierce pangs of famine driven mothers to eat their own\nchildren, incredibly savage as it seems? In line, sleep itself, which\nis justly called repose, how little of repose there sometimes is in\nit when disturbed with dreams and visions; and with what terror is\nthe wretched mind overwhelmed by the appearances of things which are\nso presented, and which, as it were, so stand out before the senses,\nthat we cannot distinguish them from realities! How wretchedly\ndo false appearances distract men in certain diseases! With what\nastonishing variety of appearances are even healthy men sometimes\ndeceived by evil spirits, who produce these delusions for the sake\nof perplexing the senses of their victims, if they cannot succeed in\nseducing them to their side!\n\nFrom this hell upon earth there is no escape, save through the grace\nof the Saviour Christ, our God and Lord. The very name Jesus shows\nthis, for it means Saviour; and He saves us especially from passing\nout of this life into a more wretched and eternal state, which is\nrather a death than a life. For in this life, though holy men and\nholy pursuits afford us great consolations, yet the blessings which\nmen crave are not invariably bestowed upon them, lest religion should\nbe cultivated for the sake of these temporal advantages, while it\nought rather to be cultivated for the sake of that other life from\nwhich all evil is excluded. Therefore, also, does grace aid good\nmen in the midst of present calamities, so that they are enabled to\nendure them with a constancy proportioned to their faith. The world's\nsages affirm that philosophy contributes something to this,--that\nphilosophy which, according to Cicero, the gods have bestowed in its\npurity only on a few men. They have never given, he says, nor can\never give, a greater gift to men. So that even those against whom we\nare disputing have been compelled to acknowledge, in some fashion,\nthat the grace of God is necessary for the acquisition, not, indeed,\nof any philosophy, but of the true philosophy. And if the true\nphilosophy--this sole support against the miseries of this life--has\nbeen given by Heaven only to a few, it sufficiently appears from\nthis that the human race has been condemned to pay this penalty of\nwretchedness. And as, according to their acknowledgment, no greater\ngift has been bestowed by God, so it must be believed that it could\nbe given only by that God whom they themselves recognise as greater\nthan all the gods they worship.\n\n\n  23. _Of the miseries of this life which attach peculiarly to the\n      toil of good men, irrespective of those which are common to the\n      good and bad._\n\nBut, irrespective of the miseries which in this life are common\nto the good and bad, the righteous undergo labours peculiar to\nthemselves, in so far as they make war upon their vices, and are\ninvolved in the temptations and perils of such a contest. For though\nsometimes more violent and at other times slacker, yet without\nintermission does the flesh lust against the spirit and the spirit\nagainst the flesh, so that we cannot do the things we would,[1012]\nand extirpate all lust, but can only refuse consent to it, as God\ngives us ability, and so keep it under, vigilantly keeping watch\nlest a semblance of truth deceive us, lest a subtle discourse blind\nus, lest error involve us in darkness, lest we should take good for\nevil or evil for good, lest fear should hinder us from doing what we\nought, or desire precipitate us into doing what we ought not, lest\nthe sun go down upon our wrath, lest hatred provoke us to render\nevil for evil, lest unseemly or immoderate grief consume us, lest an\nungrateful disposition make us slow to recognise benefits received,\nlest calumnies fret our conscience, lest rash suspicion on our part\ndeceive us regarding a friend, or false suspicion of us on the part\nof others give us too much uneasiness, lest sin reign in our mortal\nbody to obey its desires, lest our members be used as the instruments\nof unrighteousness, lest the eye follow lust, lest thirst for revenge\ncarry us away, lest sight or thought dwell too long on some evil\nthing which gives us pleasure, lest wicked or indecent language be\nwillingly listened to, lest we do what is pleasant but unlawful, and\nlest in this warfare, filled so abundantly with toil and peril, we\neither hope to secure victory by our own strength, or attribute it\nwhen secured to our own strength, and not to His grace of whom the\napostle says, \"Thanks be unto God, who giveth us the victory through\nour Lord Jesus Christ;\"[1013] and in another place he says, \"In all\nthese things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved\nus.\"[1014] But yet we are to know this, that however valorously we\nresist our vices, and however successful we are in overcoming them,\nyet as long as we are in this body we have always reason to say to\nGod, \"Forgive us our debts.\"[1015] But in that kingdom where we shall\ndwell for ever, clothed in immortal bodies, we shall no longer have\neither conflicts or debts,--as indeed we should not have had at any\ntime or in any condition, had our nature continued upright as it was\ncreated. Consequently even this our conflict, in which we are exposed\nto peril, and from which we hope to be delivered by a final victory,\nbelongs to the ills of this life, which is proved by the witness of\nso many grave evils to be a life under condemnation.\n\n\n  24. _Of the blessings with which the Creator has filled this life,\n                 obnoxious though it be to the curse._\n\nBut we must now contemplate the rich and countless blessings with\nwhich the goodness of God, who cares for all He has created, has filled\nthis very misery of the human race, which reflects His retributive\njustice. That first blessing which He pronounced before the fall, when\nHe said, \"Increase, and multiply, and replenish the earth,\"[1016] He\ndid not inhibit after man had sinned, but the fecundity originally\nbestowed remained in the condemned stock; and the vice of sin, which\nhas involved us in the necessity of dying, has yet not deprived us of\nthat wonderful power of seed, or rather of that still more marvellous\npower by which seed is produced, and which seems to be as it were\ninwrought and inwoven in the human body. But in this river, as I may\ncall it, or torrent of the human race, both elements are carried along\ntogether,--both the evil which is derived from him who begets, and\nthe good which is bestowed by Him who creates us. In the original\nevil there are two things, sin and punishment; in the original good,\nthere are two other things, propagation and conformation. But of the\nevils, of which the one, sin, arose from our audacity, and the other,\npunishment, from God's judgment, we have already said as much as suits\nour present purpose. I mean now to speak of the blessings which God has\nconferred or still confers upon our nature, vitiated and condemned as\nit is. For in condemning it He did not withdraw all that He had given\nit, else it had been annihilated; neither did He, in penally subjecting\nit to the devil, remove it beyond His own power; for not even the\ndevil himself is outside of God's government, since the devil's nature\nsubsists only by the supreme Creator, who gives being to all that in\nany form exists.\n\nOf these two blessings, then, which we have said flow from God's\ngoodness, as from a fountain, towards our nature, vitiated by sin\nand condemned to punishment, the one, propagation, was conferred\nby God's benediction when He made those first works, from which He\nrested on the seventh day. But the other, conformation, is conferred\nin that work of His wherein \"He worketh hitherto.\"[1017] For were He\nto withdraw His efficacious power from things, they should neither\nbe able to go on and complete the periods assigned to their measured\nmovements, nor should they even continue in possession of that\nnature they were created in. God, then, so created man that He gave\nhim what we may call fertility, whereby he might propagate other\nmen, giving them a congenital capacity to propagate their kind,\nbut not imposing on them any necessity to do so. This capacity God\nwithdraws at pleasure from individuals, making them barren; but from\nthe whole race He has not withdrawn the blessing of propagation once\nconferred. But though not withdrawn on account of sin, this power\nof propagation is not what it would have been had there been no\nsin. For since \"man placed in honour fell, he has become like the\nbeasts,\"[1018] and generates as they do, though the little spark\nof reason, which was the image of God in him, has not been quite\nquenched. But if conformation were not added to propagation, there\nwould be no reproduction of one's kind. For even though there were no\nsuch thing as copulation, and God wished to fill the earth with human\ninhabitants, He might create all these as He created one without\nthe help of human generation. And, indeed, even as it is, those who\ncopulate can generate nothing save by the creative energy of God.\nAs, therefore, in respect of that spiritual growth whereby a man is\nformed to piety and righteousness, the apostle says, \"Neither is\nhe that planteth anything, neither he that watereth, but God that\ngiveth the increase,\"[1019] so also it must be said that it is not he\nthat generates that is anything, but God that giveth the essential\nform; that it is not the mother who carries and nurses the fruit of\nher womb that is anything, but God that giveth the increase. For He\nalone, by that energy wherewith \"He worketh hitherto,\" causes the\nseed to develope, and to evolve from certain secret and invisible\nfolds into the visible forms of beauty which we see. He alone,\ncoupling and connecting in some wonderful fashion the spiritual and\ncorporeal natures, the one to command, the other to obey, makes\na living being. And this work of His is so great and wonderful,\nthat not only man, who is a rational animal, and consequently\nmore excellent than all other animals of the earth, but even the\nmost diminutive insect, cannot be considered attentively without\nastonishment and without praising the Creator.\n\nIt is He, then, who has given to the human soul a mind, in which\nreason and understanding lie as it were asleep during infancy, and as\nif they were not, destined, however, to be awakened and exercised as\nyears increase, so as to become capable of knowledge and of receiving\ninstruction, fit to understand what is true and to love what is good.\nIt is by this capacity the soul drinks in wisdom, and becomes endowed\nwith those virtues by which, in prudence, fortitude, temperance,\nand righteousness, it makes war upon error and the other inborn\nvices, and conquers them by fixing its desires upon no other object\nthan the supreme and unchangeable Good. And even though this be not\nuniformly the result, yet who can competently utter or even conceive\nthe grandeur of this work of the Almighty, and the unspeakable boon\nHe has conferred upon our rational nature, by giving us even the\ncapacity of such attainment? For over and above those arts which\nare called virtues, and which teach us how we may spend our life\nwell, and attain to endless happiness,--arts which are given to the\nchildren of the promise and the kingdom by the sole grace of God\nwhich is in Christ,--has not the genius of man invented and applied\ncountless astonishing arts, partly the result of necessity, partly\nthe result of exuberant invention, so that this vigour of mind, which\nis so active in the discovery not merely of superfluous but even of\ndangerous and destructive things, betokens an inexhaustible wealth\nin the nature which can invent, learn, or employ such arts? What\nwonderful--one might say stupefying--advances has human industry made\nin the arts of weaving and building, of agriculture and navigation!\nWith what endless variety are designs in pottery, painting, and\nsculpture produced, and with what skill executed! What wonderful\nspectacles are exhibited in the theatres, which those who have not\nseen them cannot credit! How skilful the contrivances for catching,\nkilling, or taming wild beasts! And for the injury of men, also,\nhow many kinds of poisons, weapons, engines of destruction, have\nbeen invented, while for the preservation or restoration of health\nthe appliances and remedies are infinite! To provoke appetite and\nplease the palate, what a variety of seasonings have been concocted!\nTo express and gain entrance for thoughts, what a multitude and\nvariety of signs there are, among which speaking and writing hold the\nfirst place! what ornaments has eloquence at command to delight the\nmind! what wealth of song is there to captivate the ear! how many\nmusical instruments and strains of harmony have been devised! What\nskill has been attained in measures and numbers! with what sagacity\nhave the movements and connections of the stars been discovered!\nWho could tell the thought that has been spent upon nature, even\nthough, despairing of recounting it in detail, he endeavoured only\nto give a general view of it? In fine, even the defence of errors\nand misapprehensions, which has illustrated the genius of heretics\nand philosophers, cannot be sufficiently declared. For at present\nit is the nature of the human mind which adorns this mortal life\nwhich we are extolling, and not the faith and the way of truth which\nlead to immortality. And since this great nature has certainly been\ncreated by the true and supreme God, who administers all things\nHe has made with absolute power and justice, it could never have\nfallen into these miseries, nor have gone out of them to miseries\neternal,--saving only those who are redeemed,--had not an exceeding\ngreat sin been found in the first man from whom the rest have sprung.\n\nMoreover, even in the body, though it dies like that of the beasts,\nand is in many ways weaker than theirs, what goodness of God, what\nprovidence of the great Creator, is apparent! The organs of sense and\nthe rest of the members, are not they so placed, the appearance, and\nform, and stature of the body as a whole, is it not so fashioned,\nas to indicate that it was made for the service of a reasonable\nsoul? Man has not been created stooping towards the earth, like\nthe irrational animals; but his bodily form, erect and looking\nheavenwards, admonishes him to mind the things that are above. Then\nthe marvellous nimbleness which has been given to the tongue and the\nhands, fitting them to speak, and write, and execute so many duties,\nand practise so many arts, does it not prove the excellence of the\nsoul for which such an assistant was provided? And even apart from\nits adaptation to the work required of it, there is such a symmetry\nin its various parts, and so beautiful a proportion maintained, that\none is at a loss to decide whether, in creating the body, greater\nregard was paid to utility or to beauty. Assuredly no part of the\nbody has been created for the sake of utility which does not also\ncontribute something to its beauty. And this would be all the more\napparent, if we knew more precisely how all its parts are connected\nand adapted to one another, and were not limited in our observations\nto what appears on the surface; for as to what is covered up and\nhidden from our view, the intricate web of veins and nerves, the\nvital parts of all that lies under the skin, no one can discover\nit. For although, with a cruel zeal for science, some medical men,\nwho are called anatomists, have dissected the bodies of the dead,\nand sometimes even of sick persons who died under their knives, and\nhave inhumanly pried into the secrets of the human body to learn\nthe nature of the disease and its exact seat, and how it might be\ncured, yet those relations of which I speak, and which form the\nconcord,[1020] or, as the Greeks call it, \"harmony,\" of the whole\nbody outside and in, as of some instrument, no one has been able to\ndiscover, because no one has been audacious enough to seek for them.\nBut if these could be known, then even the inward parts, which seem\nto have no beauty, would so delight us with their exquisite fitness,\nas to afford a profounder satisfaction to the mind--and the eyes are\nbut its ministers--than the obvious beauty which gratifies the eye.\nThere are some things, too, which have such a place in the body, that\nthey obviously serve no useful purpose, but are solely for beauty,\nas _e.g._ the teats on a man's breast, or the beard on his face; for\nthat this is for ornament, and not for protection, is proved by the\nbare faces of women, who ought rather, as the weaker sex, to enjoy\nsuch a defence. If, therefore, of all those members which are exposed\nto our view, there is certainly not one in which beauty is sacrificed\nto utility, while there are some which serve no purpose but only\nbeauty, I think it can readily be concluded that in the creation of\nthe human body comeliness was more regarded than necessity. In truth,\nnecessity is a transitory thing; and the time is coming when we shall\nenjoy one another's beauty without any lust,--a condition which will\nspecially redound to the praise of the Creator, who, as it is said in\nthe psalm, has \"put on praise and comeliness.\"[1021]\n\nHow can I tell of the rest of creation, with all its beauty and\nutility, which the divine goodness has given to man to please his\neye and serve his purposes, condemned though he is, and hurled into\nthese labours and miseries? Shall I speak of the manifold and various\nloveliness of sky, and earth, and sea; of the plentiful supply\nand wonderful qualities of the light; of sun, moon, and stars; of\nthe shade of trees; of the colours and perfume of flowers; of the\nmultitude of birds, all differing in plumage and in song; of the\nvariety of animals, of which the smallest in size are often the\nmost wonderful,--the works of ants and bees astonishing us more\nthan the huge bodies of whales? Shall I speak of the sea, which\nitself is so grand a spectacle, when it arrays itself as it were\nin vestures of various colours, now running through every shade of\ngreen, and again becoming purple or blue? Is it not delightful to\nlook at it in storm, and experience the soothing complacency which\nit inspires, by suggesting that we ourselves are not tossed and\nshipwrecked?[1022] What shall I say of the numberless kinds of food\nto alleviate hunger, and the variety of seasonings to stimulate\nappetite which are scattered everywhere by nature, and for which we\nare not indebted to the art of cookery? How many natural appliances\nare there for preserving and restoring health! How grateful is the\nalternation of day and night! how pleasant the breezes that cool the\nair! how abundant the supply of clothing furnished us by trees and\nanimals! Who can enumerate all the blessings we enjoy? If I were to\nattempt to detail and unfold only these few which I have indicated\nin the mass, such an enumeration would fill a volume. And all these\nare but the solace of the wretched and condemned, not the rewards\nof the blessed. What then shall these rewards be, if such be the\nblessings of a condemned state? What will He give to those whom He\nhas predestined to life, who has given such things even to those whom\nHe has predestined to death? What blessings will He in the blessed\nlife shower upon those for whom, even in this state of misery, He has\nbeen willing that His only-begotten Son should endure such sufferings\neven to death? Thus the apostle reasons concerning those who are\npredestined to that kingdom: \"He that spared not His own Son, but\ndelivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also give us\nall things?\"[1023] When this promise is fulfilled, what shall we be?\nWhat blessings shall we receive in that kingdom, since already we\nhave received as the pledge of them Christ's dying? In what condition\nshall the spirit of man be, when it has no longer any vice at all;\nwhen it neither yields to any, nor is in bondage to any, nor has to\nmake war against any, but is perfected, and enjoys undisturbed peace\nwith itself? Shall it not then know all things with certainty, and\nwithout any labour or error, when unhindered and joyfully it drinks\nthe wisdom of God at the fountainhead? What shall the body be, when\nit is in every respect subject to the spirit, from which it shall\ndraw a life so sufficient, as to stand in need of no other nutriment?\nFor it shall no longer be animal, but spiritual, having indeed the\nsubstance of flesh, but without any fleshly corruption.\n\n\n  25. _Of the obstinacy of those individuals who impugn the\n      resurrection of the body, though, as was predicted, the whole\n      world believes it._\n\nThe foremost of the philosophers agree with us about the spiritual\nfelicity enjoyed by the blessed in the life to come; it is only\nthe resurrection of the flesh they call in question, and with all\ntheir might deny. But the mass of men, learned and unlearned, the\nworld's wise men and its fools, have believed, and have left in\nmeagre isolation the unbelievers, and have turned to Christ, who in\nHis own resurrection demonstrated the reality of that which seems to\nour adversaries absurd. For the world has believed this which God\npredicted, as it was also predicted that the world would believe,--a\nprediction not due to the sorceries of Peter,[1024] since it was\nuttered so long before. He who has predicted these things, as I have\nalready said, and am not ashamed to repeat, is the God before whom\nall other divinities tremble, as Porphyry himself owns, and seeks to\nprove, by testimonies from the oracles of these gods, and goes so far\nas to call Him God the Father and King. Far be it from us to interpret\nthese predictions as they do who have not believed, along with the\nwhole world, in that which it was predicted the world would believe in.\nFor why should we not rather understand them as the world does, whose\nbelief was predicted, and leave that handful of unbelievers to their\nidle talk and obstinate and solitary infidelity? For if they maintain\nthat they interpret them differently only to avoid charging Scripture\nwith folly, and so doing an injury to that God to whom they bear so\nnotable a testimony, is it not a much greater injury they do Him when\nthey say that His predictions must be understood otherwise than the\nworld believed them, though He Himself praised, promised, accomplished\nthis belief on the world's part? And why cannot He cause the body to\nrise again, and live for ever? or is it not to be believed that He\nwill do this, because it is an undesirable thing, and unworthy of God?\nOf His omnipotence, which effects so many great miracles, we have\nalready said enough. If they wish to know what the Almighty cannot do,\nI shall tell them He cannot lie. Let us therefore believe what He can\ndo, by refusing to believe what He cannot do. Refusing to believe that\nHe can lie, let them believe that He will do what He has promised to\ndo; and let them believe it as the world has believed it, whose faith\nHe predicted, whose faith He praised, whose faith He promised, whose\nfaith He now points to. But how do they prove that the resurrection is\nan undesirable thing? There shall then be no corruption, which is the\nonly evil thing about the body. I have already said enough about the\norder of the elements, and the other fanciful objections men raise;\nand in the thirteenth book I have, in my own judgment, sufficiently\nillustrated the facility of movement which the incorruptible body shall\nenjoy, judging from the ease and vigour we experience even now, when\nthe body is in good health. Those who have either not read the former\nbooks, or wish to refresh their memory, may read them for themselves.\n\n\n  26. _That the opinion of Porphyry, that the soul, in order to\n      be blessed, must be separated from every kind of body, is\n      demolished by Plato, who says that the supreme God promised the\n      gods that they should never be ousted from their bodies._\n\nBut, say they, Porphyry tells us that the soul, in order to be\nblessed, must escape connection with every kind of body. It does not\navail, therefore, to say that the future body shall be incorruptible,\nif the soul cannot be blessed till delivered from every kind of\nbody. But in the book above mentioned I have already sufficiently\ndiscussed this. This one thing only will I repeat,--let Plato, their\nmaster, correct his writings, and say that their gods, in order to be\nblessed, must quit their bodies, or, in other words, die; for he said\nthat they were shut up in celestial bodies, and that, nevertheless,\nthe God who made them promised them immortality,--that is to say, an\neternal tenure of these same bodies, such as was not provided for\nthem naturally, but only by the further intervention of His will,\nthat thus they might be assured of felicity. In this he obviously\noverturns their assertion that the resurrection of the body cannot be\nbelieved because it is impossible; for, according to him, when the\nuncreated God promised immortality to the created gods, He expressly\nsaid that He would do what was impossible. For Plato tells us that\nHe said, \"As ye have had a beginning, so you cannot be immortal and\nincorruptible; yet ye shall not decay, nor shall any fate destroy\nyou or prove stronger than my will, which more effectually binds\nyou to immortality than the bond of your nature keeps you from it.\"\nIf they who hear these words have, we do not say understanding, but\nears, they cannot doubt that Plato believed that God promised to the\ngods He had made that He would effect an impossibility. For He who\nsays, \"Ye cannot be immortal, but by my will ye shall be immortal,\"\nwhat else does He say than this, \"I shall make you what ye cannot\nbe?\" The body, therefore, shall be raised incorruptible, immortal,\nspiritual, by Him who, according to Plato, has promised to do that\nwhich is impossible. Why then do they still exclaim that this which\nGod has promised, which the world has believed on God's promise as\nwas predicted, is an impossibility? For what we say is, that the God\nwho, even according to Plato, does impossible things, will do this.\nIt is not, then, necessary to the blessedness of the soul that it be\ndetached from a body of any kind whatever, but that it receive an\nincorruptible body. And in what incorruptible body will they more\nsuitably rejoice than in that in which they groaned when it was\ncorruptible? For thus they shall not feel that dire craving which\nVirgil, in imitation of Plato, has ascribed to them when he says that\nthey wish to return again to their bodies.[1025] They shall not, I\nsay, feel this desire to return to their bodies, since they shall\nhave those bodies to which a return was desired, and shall, indeed,\nbe in such thorough possession of them, that they shall never lose\nthem even for the briefest moment, nor ever lay them down in death.\n\n\n  27. _Of the apparently conflicting opinions of Plato and Porphyry,\n      which would have conducted them both to the truth if they could\n      have yielded to one another._\n\nStatements were made by Plato and Porphyry singly, which if they\ncould have seen their way to hold in common, they might possibly\nhave become Christians. Plato said that souls could not exist\neternally without bodies; for it was on this account, he said, that\nthe souls even of wise men must some time or other return to their\nbodies. Porphyry, again, said that the purified soul, when it has\nreturned to the Father, shall never return to the ills of this\nworld. Consequently, if Plato had communicated to Porphyry that\nwhich he saw to be true, that souls, though perfectly purified, and\nbelonging to the wise and righteous, must return to human bodies; and\nif Porphyry, again, had imparted to Plato the truth which he saw,\nthat holy souls shall never return to the miseries of a corruptible\nbody, so that they should not have each held only his own opinion,\nbut should both have held both truths, I think they would have seen\nthat it follows that the souls return to their bodies, and also that\nthese bodies shall be such as to afford them a blessed and immortal\nlife. For, according to Plato, even holy souls shall return to the\nbody; according to Porphyry, holy souls shall not return to the ills\nof this world. Let Porphyry then say with Plato, they shall return\nto the body; let Plato say with Porphyry, they shall not return to\ntheir old misery: and they will agree that they return to bodies in\nwhich they shall suffer no more. And this is nothing else than what\nGod has promised,--that He will give eternal felicity to souls joined\nto their own bodies. For this, I presume, both of them would readily\nconcede, that if the souls of the saints are to be reunited to\nbodies, it shall be to their own bodies, in which they have endured\nthe miseries of this life, and in which, to escape these miseries,\nthey served God with piety and fidelity.\n\n\n  28. _What Plato or Labeo, or even Varro, might have contributed to\n      the true faith of the resurrection, if they had adopted one\n      another's opinions into one scheme._\n\nSome Christians, who have a liking for Plato on account of his\nmagnificent style and the truths which he now and then uttered,\nsay that he even held an opinion similar to our own regarding the\nresurrection of the dead. Cicero, however, alluding to this in his\n_Republic_, asserts that Plato meant it rather as a playful fancy\nthan as a reality; for he introduces a man[1026] who had come to\nlife again, and gave a narrative of his experience in corroboration\nof the doctrines of Plato. Labeo, too, says that two men died on one\nday, and met at a cross-road, and that, being afterwards ordered to\nreturn to their bodies, they agreed to be friends for life, and were\nso till they died again. But the resurrection which these writers\ninstance resembles that of those persons whom we have ourselves known\nto rise again, and who came back indeed to this life, but not so as\nnever to die again. Marcus Varro, however, in his work _On the Origin\nof the Roman People_, records something more remarkable; I think his\nown words should be given. \"Certain astrologers,\" he says, \"have\nwritten that men are destined to a new birth, which the Greeks call\n_palingenesy_. This will take place after four hundred and forty\nyears have elapsed; and then the same soul and the same body, which\nwere formerly united in the person, shall again be reunited.\" This\nVarro, indeed, or those nameless astrologers,--for he does not give\nus the names of the men whose statement he cites,--have affirmed\nwhat is indeed not altogether true; for once the souls have returned\nto the bodies they wore, they shall never afterwards leave them. Yet\nwhat they say upsets and demolishes much of that idle talk of our\nadversaries about the impossibility of the resurrection. For those\nwho have been or are of this opinion, have not thought it possible\nthat bodies which have dissolved into air, or dust, or ashes, or\nwater, or into the bodies of the beasts or even of the men that fed\non them, should be restored again to that which they formerly were.\nAnd therefore, if Plato and Porphyry, or rather, if their disciples\nnow living, agree with us that holy souls shall return to the body,\nas Plato says, and that, nevertheless, they shall not return to\nmisery, as Porphyry maintains,--if they accept the consequence of\nthese two propositions which is taught by the Christian faith, that\nthey shall receive bodies in which they may live eternally without\nsuffering any misery,--let them also adopt from Varro the opinion\nthat they shall return to the same bodies as they were formerly in,\nand thus the whole question of the eternal resurrection of the body\nshall be resolved out of their own mouths.\n\n\n                     29. _Of the beatific vision._\n\nAnd now let us consider, with such ability as God may vouchsafe, how\nthe saints shall be employed when they are clothed in immortal and\nspiritual bodies, and when the flesh shall live no longer in a fleshly\nbut a spiritual fashion. And indeed, to tell the truth, I am at a\nloss to understand the nature of that employment, or, shall I rather\nsay, repose and ease, for it has never come within the range of my\nbodily senses. And if I should speak of my mind or understanding,\nwhat is our understanding in comparison of its excellence? For then\nshall be that \"peace of God which,\" as the apostle says, \"passeth all\nunderstanding,\"[1027]--that is to say, all human, and perhaps all\nangelic understanding, but certainly not the divine. That it passeth\nours there is no doubt; but if it passeth that of the angels,--and he\nwho says \"_all_ understanding\" seems to make no exception in their\nfavour,--then we must understand him to mean that neither we nor the\nangels can understand, as God understands, the peace which God Himself\nenjoys. Doubtless this passeth all understanding but His own. But as\nwe shall one day be made to participate, according to our slender\ncapacity, in His peace, both in ourselves, and with our neighbour, and\nwith God our chief good, in this respect the angels understand the\npeace of God in their own measure, and men too, though now far behind\nthem, whatever spiritual advance they have made. For we must remember\nhow great a man he was who said, \"We know in part, and we prophesy\nin part, until that which is perfect is come;\"[1028] and \"Now we see\nthrough a glass, darkly; but then face to face.\"[1029] Such also is now\nthe vision of the holy angels, who are also called our angels, because\nwe, being rescued out of the power of darkness, and receiving the\nearnest of the Spirit, are translated into the kingdom of Christ, and\nalready begin to belong to those angels with whom we shall enjoy that\nholy and most delightful city of God of which we have now written so\nmuch. Thus, then, the angels of God are our angels, as Christ is God's\nand also ours. They are God's, because they have not abandoned Him;\nthey are ours, because we are their fellow-citizens. The Lord Jesus\nalso said, \"See that ye despise not one of these little ones: for I\nsay unto you, That in heaven their angels do always see the face of my\nFather which is in heaven.\"[1030] As, then, they see, so shall we also\nsee; but not yet do we thus see. Wherefore the apostle uses the words\ncited a little ago, \"Now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face\nto face.\" This vision is reserved as the reward of our faith; and of\nit the Apostle John also says, \"When He shall appear, we shall be like\nHim, for we shall see Him as He is.\"[1031] By \"the face\" of God we are\nto understand His manifestation, and not a part of the body similar to\nthat which in our bodies we call by that name.\n\nAnd so, when I am asked how the saints shall be employed in that\nspiritual body, I do not say what I see, but I say what I believe,\naccording to that which I read in the psalm, \"I believed, therefore\nhave I spoken.\"[1032] I say, then, they shall in the body see God;\nbut whether they shall see Him by means of the body, as now we see\nthe sun, moon, stars, sea, earth, and all that is in it, that is a\ndifficult question. For it is hard to say that the saints shall then\nhave such bodies that they shall not be able to shut and open their\neyes as they please; while it is harder still to say that every\none who shuts his eyes shall lose the vision of God. For if the\nprophet Elisha, though at a distance, saw his servant Gehazi, who\nthought that his wickedness would escape his master's observation\nand accepted gifts from Naaman the Syrian, whom the prophet had\ncleansed from his foul leprosy, how much more shall the saints in the\nspiritual body see all things, not only though their eyes be shut,\nbut though they themselves be at a great distance? For then shall\nbe \"that which is perfect,\" of which the apostle says, \"We know in\npart, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is\ncome, then that which is in part shall be done away.\" Then, that he\nmay illustrate as well as possible, by a simile, how superior the\nfuture life is to the life now lived, not only by ordinary men, but\neven by the foremost of the saints, he says, \"When I was a child,\nI understood as a child, I spake as a child, I thought as a child;\nbut when I became a man, I put away childish things. Now we see\nthrough a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part;\nbut then shall I know even as also I am known.\"[1033] If, then, even\nin this life, in which the prophetic power of remarkable men is no\nmore worthy to be compared to the vision of the future life than\nchildhood is to manhood, Elisha, though distant from his servant, saw\nhim accepting gifts, shall we say that when that which is perfect\nis come, and the corruptible body no longer oppresses the soul, but\nis incorruptible and offers no impediment to it, the saints shall\nneed bodily eyes to see, though Elisha had no need of them to see\nhis servant? For, following the Septuagint version, these are the\nprophet's words: \"Did not my heart go with thee, when the man came\nout of his chariot to meet thee, and thou tookedst his gifts?\"[1034]\nOr, as the presbyter Jerome rendered it from the Hebrew, \"Was not my\nheart present when the man turned from his chariot to meet thee?\" The\nprophet said that he saw this with his heart, miraculously aided\nby God, as no one can doubt. But how much more abundantly shall the\nsaints enjoy this gift when God shall be all in all? Nevertheless the\nbodily eyes also shall have their office and their place, and shall\nbe used by the spirit through the spiritual body. For the prophet\ndid not forego the use of his eyes for seeing what was before them,\nthough he did not need them to see his absent servant, and though he\ncould have seen these present objects in spirit, and with his eyes\nshut, as he saw things far distant in a place where he himself was\nnot. Far be it, then, from us to say that in the life to come the\nsaints shall not see God when their eyes are shut, since they shall\nalways see Him with the spirit.\n\nBut the question arises, whether, when their eyes are open, they\nshall see Him with the bodily eye? If the eyes of the spiritual body\nhave no more power than the eyes which we now possess, manifestly\nGod cannot be seen with them. They must be of a very different power\nif they can look upon that incorporeal nature which is not contained\nin any place, but is all in every place. For though we say that God\nis in heaven and on earth, as He Himself says by the prophet, \"I\nfill heaven and earth,\"[1035] we do not mean that there is one part\nof God in heaven and another part on earth; but He is all in heaven\nand all on earth, not at alternate intervals of time, but both at\nonce, as no bodily nature can be. The eye, then, shall have a vastly\nsuperior power,--the power not of keen sight, such as is ascribed\nto serpents or eagles, for however keenly these animals see, they\ncan discern nothing but bodily substances,--but the power of seeing\nthings incorporeal. Possibly it was this great power of vision which\nwas temporarily communicated to the eyes of the holy Job while yet\nin this mortal body, when he says to God, \"I have heard of Thee by\nthe hearing of the ear; but now mine eye seeth Thee: wherefore I\nabhor myself, and melt away, and count myself dust and ashes;\"[1036]\nalthough there is no reason why we should not understand this of the\neye of the heart, of which the apostle says, \"Having the eyes of your\nheart illuminated.\"[1037] But that God shall be seen with these eyes\nno Christian doubts who believingly accepts what our God and Master\nsays, \"Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.\"[1038]\nBut whether in the future life God shall also be seen with the bodily\neye, this is now our question.\n\nThe expression of Scripture, \"And all flesh shall see the salvation\nof God,\"[1039] may without difficulty be understood as if it were\nsaid, \"And every man shall see the Christ of God.\" And He certainly\nwas seen in the body, and shall be seen in the body when He judges\nquick and dead. And that Christ is the salvation of God, many\nother passages of Scripture witness, but especially the words of\nthe venerable Simeon, who, when he had received into his hands the\ninfant Christ, said, \"Now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace,\naccording to Thy word: for mine eyes have seen Thy salvation.\"[1040]\nAs for the words of the above-mentioned Job, as they are found in the\nHebrew manuscripts, \"And in my flesh I shall see God,\"[1041] no doubt\nthey were a prophecy of the resurrection of the flesh; yet he does\nnot say \"_by_ the flesh.\" And indeed, if he had said this, it would\nstill be possible that Christ was meant by \"God;\" for Christ shall be\nseen by the flesh in the flesh. But even understanding it of God, it\nis only equivalent to saying, I shall be in the flesh when I see God.\nThen the apostle's expression, \"face to face,\"[1042] does not oblige\nus to believe that we shall see God by the bodily face in which are\nthe eyes of the body, for we shall see Him without intermission in\nspirit. And if the apostle had not referred to the face of the inner\nman, he would not have said, \"But we, with unveiled face beholding\nas in a glass the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same\nimage, from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord.\"[1043] In\nthe same sense we understand what the Psalmist sings, \"Draw near unto\nHim, and be enlightened; and your faces shall not be ashamed.\"[1044]\nFor it is by faith we draw near to God, and faith is an act of\nthe spirit, not of the body. But as we do not know what degree of\nperfection the spiritual body shall attain,--for here we speak of a\nmatter of which we have no experience, and upon which the authority\nof Scripture does not definitely pronounce,--it is necessary that\nthe words of the Book of Wisdom be illustrated in us: \"The thoughts\nof mortal men are timid, and our forecastings uncertain.\"[1045]\n\nFor if that reasoning of the philosophers, by which they attempt\nto make out that intelligible or mental objects are so seen by the\nmind, and sensible or bodily objects so seen by the body, that the\nformer cannot be discerned by the mind through the body, nor the\nlatter by the mind itself without the body,--if this reasoning were\ntrustworthy, then it would certainly follow that God could not be\nseen by the eye even of a spiritual body. But this reasoning is\nexploded both by true reason and by prophetic authority. For who\nis so little acquainted with the truth as to say that God has no\ncognisance of sensible objects? Has He therefore a body, the eyes\nof which give Him this knowledge? Moreover, what we have just been\nrelating of the prophet Elisha, does this not sufficiently show that\nbodily things can be discerned by the spirit without the help of the\nbody? For when that servant received the gifts, certainly this was\na bodily or material transaction, yet the prophet saw it not by the\nbody, but by the spirit. As, therefore, it is agreed that bodies are\nseen by the spirit, what if the power of the spiritual body shall be\nso great that spirit also is seen by the body? For God is a spirit.\nBesides, each man recognises his own life--that life by which he\nnow lives in the body, and which vivifies these earthly members and\ncauses them to grow--by an interior sense, and not by his bodily eye;\nbut the life of other men, though it is invisible, he sees with the\nbodily eye. For how do we distinguish between living and dead bodies,\nexcept by seeing at once both the body and the life which we cannot\nsee save by the eye? But a life without a body we cannot see thus.\n\nWherefore it may very well be, and it is thoroughly credible, that\nwe shall in the future world see the material forms of the new\nheavens and the new earth in such a way that we shall most distinctly\nrecognise God everywhere present and governing all things, material\nas well as spiritual, and shall see Him, not as now we understand the\ninvisible things of God, by the things which are made,[1046] and see\nHim darkly, as in a mirror, and in part, and rather by faith than\nby bodily vision of material appearances, but by means of the bodies\nwe shall wear and which we shall see wherever we turn our eyes. As\nwe do not believe, but see that the living men around us who are\nexercising vital functions are alive, though we cannot see their life\nwithout their bodies, but see it most distinctly by means of their\nbodies, so, wherever we shall look with those spiritual eyes of our\nfuture bodies, we shall then, too, by means of bodily substances\nbehold God, though a spirit, ruling all things. Either, therefore,\nthe eyes shall possess some quality similar to that of the mind, by\nwhich they may be able to discern spiritual things, and among these\nGod,--a supposition for which it is difficult or even impossible to\nfind any support in Scripture,--or, which is more easy to comprehend,\nGod will be so known by us, and shall be so much before us, that we\nshall see Him by the spirit in ourselves, in one another, in Himself,\nin the new heavens and the new earth, in every created thing which\nshall then exist; and also by the body we shall see Him in every\nbody which the keen vision of the eye of the spiritual body shall\nreach. Our thoughts also shall be visible to all, for then shall be\nfulfilled the words of the apostle, \"Judge nothing before the time,\nuntil the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things\nof darkness, and will make manifest the thoughts of the heart, and\nthen shall every one have praise of God.\"[1047]\n\n\n      30. _Of the eternal felicity of the city of God, and of the\n                          perpetual Sabbath._\n\nHow great shall be that felicity, which shall be tainted with no evil,\nwhich shall lack no good, and which shall afford leisure for the\npraises of God, who shall be all in all! For I know not what other\nemployment there can be where no lassitude shall slacken activity, nor\nany want stimulate to labour. I am admonished also by the sacred song,\nin which I read or hear the words, \"Blessed are they that dwell in Thy\nhouse, O Lord; they will be still praising Thee.\"[1048] All the members\nand organs of the incorruptible body, which now we see to be suited to\nvarious necessary uses, shall contribute to the praises of God; for in\nthat life necessity shall have no place, but full, certain, secure,\neverlasting felicity. For all those parts[1049] of the bodily harmony,\nwhich are distributed through the whole body, within and without,\nand of which I have just been saying that they at present elude our\nobservation, shall then be discerned; and, along with the other great\nand marvellous discoveries which shall then kindle rational minds in\npraise of the great Artificer, there shall be the enjoyment of a beauty\nwhich appeals to the reason. What power of movement such bodies shall\npossess, I have not the audacity rashly to define, as I have not the\nability to conceive. Nevertheless I will say that in any case, both in\nmotion and at rest, they shall be, as in their appearance, seemly; for\ninto that state nothing which is unseemly shall be admitted. One thing\nis certain, the body shall forthwith be wherever the spirit wills, and\nthe spirit shall will nothing which is unbecoming either to the spirit\nor to the body. True honour shall be there, for it shall be denied\nto none who is worthy, nor yielded to any unworthy; neither shall\nany unworthy person so much as sue for it, for none but the worthy\nshall be there. True peace shall be there, where no one shall suffer\nopposition either from himself or any other. God Himself, who is the\nAuthor of virtue, shall there be its reward; for, as there is nothing\ngreater or better, He has promised Himself. What else was meant by\nHis word through the prophet, \"I will be your God, and ye shall be my\npeople,\"[1050] than, I shall be their satisfaction, I shall be all that\nmen honourably desire,--life, and health, and nourishment, and plenty,\nand glory, and honour, and peace, and all good things? This, too, is\nthe right interpretation of the saying of the apostle, \"That God may\nbe all in all.\"[1051] He shall be the end of our desires who shall\nbe seen without end, loved without cloy, praised without weariness.\nThis outgoing of affection, this employment, shall certainly be, like\neternal life itself, common to all.\n\nBut who can conceive, not to say describe, what degrees of honour\nand glory shall be awarded to the various degrees of merit? Yet it\ncannot be doubted that there shall be degrees. And in that blessed\ncity there shall be this great blessing, that no inferior shall envy\nany superior, as now the archangels are not envied by the angels,\nbecause no one will wish to be what he has not received, though\nbound in strictest concord with him who has received; as in the body\nthe finger does not seek to be the eye, though both members are\nharmoniously included in the complete structure of the body. And\nthus, along with his gift, greater or less, each shall receive this\nfurther gift of contentment to desire no more than he has.\n\nNeither are we to suppose that because sin shall have no power to\ndelight them, free will must be withdrawn. It will, on the contrary,\nbe all the more truly free, because set free from delight in sinning\nto take unfailing delight in not sinning. For the first freedom of\nwill which man received when he was created upright consisted in an\nability not to sin, but also in an ability to sin; whereas this last\nfreedom of will shall be superior, inasmuch as it shall not be able\nto sin. This, indeed, shall not be a natural ability, but the gift of\nGod. For it is one thing to be God, another thing to be a partaker\nof God. God by nature cannot sin, but the partaker of God receives\nthis inability from God. And in this divine gift there was to be\nobserved this gradation, that man should first receive a free will\nby which he was able not to sin, and at last a free will by which he\nwas not able to sin,--the former being adapted to the acquiring of\nmerit, the latter to the enjoying of the reward.[1052] But the nature\nthus constituted, having sinned when it had the ability to do so,\nit is by a more abundant grace that it is delivered so as to reach\nthat freedom in which it cannot sin. For as the first immortality\nwhich Adam lost by sinning consisted in his being able not to die,\nwhile the last shall consist in his not being able to die; so the\nfirst free will consisted in his being able not to sin, the last in\nhis not being able to sin. And thus piety and justice shall be as\nindefeasible as happiness. For certainly by sinning we lost both\npiety and happiness; but when we lost happiness, we did not lose the\nlove of it. Are we to say that God Himself is not free because He\ncannot sin? In that city, then, there shall be free will, one in all\nthe citizens, and indivisible in each, delivered from all ill, Filled\nwith all good, enjoying indefeasibly the delights of eternal joys,\noblivious of sins, oblivious of sufferings, and yet not so oblivious\nof its deliverance as to be ungrateful to its Deliverer.\n\nThe soul, then, shall have an intellectual remembrance of its past\nills; but, so far as regards sensible experience, they shall be quite\nforgotten. For a skilful physician knows, indeed, professionally\nalmost all diseases; but experimentally he is ignorant of a great\nnumber which he himself has never suffered from. As, therefore, there\nare two ways of knowing evil things,--one by mental insight, the\nother by sensible experience, for it is one thing to understand all\nvices by the wisdom of a cultivated mind, another to understand them\nby the foolishness of an abandoned life,--so also there are two ways\nof forgetting evils. For a well-instructed and learned man forgets\nthem one way, and he who has experimentally suffered from them\nforgets them another,--the former by neglecting what he has learned,\nthe latter by escaping what he has suffered. And in this latter way\nthe saints shall forget their past ills, for they shall have so\nthoroughly escaped them all, that they shall be quite blotted out of\ntheir experience. But their intellectual knowledge, which shall be\ngreat, shall keep them acquainted not only with their own past woes,\nbut with the eternal sufferings of the lost. For if they were not to\nknow that they had been miserable, how could they, as the Psalmist\nsays, for ever sing the mercies of God? Certainly that city shall\nhave no greater joy than the celebration of the grace of Christ, who\nredeemed us by His blood. There shall be accomplished the words of\nthe psalm, \"Be still, and know that I am God.\"[1053] There shall be\nthe great Sabbath which has no evening, which God celebrated among\nHis first works, as it is written, \"And God rested on the seventh day\nfrom all His works which He had made. And God blessed the seventh\nday, and sanctified it; because that in it He had rested from all\nHis work which God began to make.\"[1054] For we shall ourselves be\nthe seventh day, when we shall be filled and replenished with God's\nblessing and sanctification. There shall we be still, and know that\nHe is God; that He is that which we ourselves aspired to be when we\nfell away from Him, and listened to the voice of the seducer, \"Ye\nshall be as gods,\"[1055] and so abandoned God, who would have made\nus as gods, not by deserting Him, but by participating in Him. For\nwithout Him what have we accomplished, save to perish in His anger?\nBut when we are restored by Him, and perfected with greater grace,\nwe shall have eternal leisure to see that He is God, for we shall be\nfull of Him when He shall be all in all. For even our good works,\nwhen they are understood to be rather His than ours, are imputed to\nus that we may enjoy this Sabbath rest. For if we attribute them to\nourselves, they shall be servile; for it is said of the Sabbath, \"Ye\nshall do no servile work in it.\"[1056] Wherefore also it is said\nby Ezekiel the prophet, \"And I gave them my Sabbaths to be a sign\nbetween me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord who\nsanctify them.\"[1057] This knowledge shall be perfected when we shall\nbe perfectly at rest, and shall perfectly know that He is God.\n\nThis Sabbath shall appear still more clearly if we count the ages as\ndays, in accordance with the periods of time defined in Scripture,\nfor that period will be found to be the seventh. The first age, as\nthe first day, extends from Adam to the deluge; the second from the\ndeluge to Abraham, equalling the first, not in length of time, but in\nthe number of generations, there being ten in each. From Abraham to\nthe advent of Christ there are, as the evangelist Matthew calculates,\nthree periods, in each of which are fourteen generations,--one period\nfrom Abraham to David, a second from David to the captivity, a\nthird from the captivity to the birth of Christ in the flesh. There\nare thus five ages in all. The sixth is now passing, and cannot be\nmeasured by any number of generations, as it has been said, \"It is\nnot for you to know the times, which the Father hath put in His own\npower.\"[1058] After this period God shall rest as on the seventh\nday, when He shall give us (who shall be the seventh day) rest in\nHimself. But there is not now space to treat of these ages; suffice\nit to say that the seventh shall be our Sabbath, which shall be\nbrought to a close, not by an evening, but by the Lord's day, as an\neighth and eternal day, consecrated by the resurrection of Christ,\nand prefiguring the eternal repose not only of the spirit, but also\nof the body. There we shall rest and see, see and love, love and\npraise. This is what shall be in the end without end. For what other\nend do we propose to ourselves than to attain to the kingdom of which\nthere is no end?\n\nI think I have now, by God's help, discharged my obligation in writing\nthis large work. Let those who think I have said too little, or those\nwho think I have said too much, forgive me; and let those who think I\nhave said just enough join me in giving thanks to God. Amen.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[961] Luke i. 33.\n\n[962] Phil. ii. 13.\n\n[963] John viii. 17.\n\n[964] Ps. xxxvii. 31.\n\n[965] Gal. iv. 9.\n\n[966] Gen. xxii. 18.\n\n[967] Isa. xxvi. 19.\n\n[968] Isa. lxv. 17-19.\n\n[969] Dan. xii. 1, 2.\n\n[970] Dan. vii. 18.\n\n[971] Dan. vii. 27.\n\n[972] Another reading has _diffamatum_, \"published.\"\n\n[973] A somewhat fuller account of this miracle is given by Augustine\nin the _Confessions_, ix. 16. See also _Serm._ 286, and Ambrose,\n_Ep._. 22. A translation of this epistle in full is given in Isaac\nTaylor's _Ancient Christianity_, ii. 242, where this miracle is taken\nas a specimen of the so-called miracles of that age, and submitted\nto a detailed examination. The result arrived at will be gathered\nfrom the following sentence: \"In the Nicene Church, so lax were the\nnotions of common morality, and in so feeble a manner did the fear of\nGod influence the conduct of leading men, that, on occasions when the\nChurch was to be served, and her assailants to be confounded, they did\nnot scruple to take upon themselves the contrivance and execution of\nthe most degrading impostures.\"--P. 270. It is to be observed, however,\nthat Augustine was, at least in this instance, one of the deceived.\n\n[974] Alypius was a countryman of Augustine, and one of his most\nattached friends. See the _Confessions_, passim.\n\n[975] Cleros.\n\n[976] Easter and Whitsuntide were the common seasons for\nadministering baptism, though no rule was laid down till towards\nthe end of the sixth century. Tertullian thinks these the most\nappropriate times, but says that every time is suitable. See Tertull.\n_de Baptismo_, c. 19.\n\n[977] A town near Carthage.\n\n[978] This may possibly mean a Christian.\n\n[979] Near Hippo.\n\n[980] Augustine's 325th sermon is in honour of these martyrs.\n\n[981] See Isaac Taylor's _Ancient Christianity_, ii. 354.\n\n[982] See Augustine's _Sermons_, 321.\n\n[983] _Sermon_ 322.\n\n[984] Ps. xciv. 11.\n\n[985] C. 18.\n\n[986] Luke xxi. 18.\n\n[987] Eph. iv. 13.\n\n[988] Rom. viii. 29.\n\n[989] Luke xxi. 18.\n\n[990] Rom. viii. 29.\n\n[991] Rom. xii. 2.\n\n[992] Eph. iv. 13.\n\n[993] Rom. viii. 29.\n\n[994] Gen. ii. 22.\n\n[995] Eph. iv. 12.\n\n[996] Matt. xxii. 29.\n\n[997] Matt. xxii. 30.\n\n[998] Eph. iv. 10-16.\n\n[999] 1 Cor. xii. 27.\n\n[1000] Col. i. 24.\n\n[1001] 1 Cor. x. 17.\n\n[1002] Another reading is, \"Head over all the Church.\"\n\n[1003] Eph. i. 22, 23.\n\n[1004] Ps. cxii. 1.\n\n[1005] Luke xii. 7.\n\n[1006] Matt. xiii. 43.\n\n[1007] Cic. _Tusc. Qu\u00e6st._ i. 27.\n\n[1008] 1 Cor. iii. 1.\n\n[1009] 1 Cor. xv. 44.\n\n[1010] Ps. xxvi. 8.\n\n[1011] Ecclus. xxx. 12.\n\n[1012] Gal. v. 17.\n\n[1013] 1 Cor. xv. 57.\n\n[1014] Rom. viii. 37.\n\n[1015] Matt. vi. 12.\n\n[1016] Gen. i. 28.\n\n[1017] John v. 17.\n\n[1018] Ps. xlix. 20.\n\n[1019] 1 Cor. iii. 7.\n\n[1020] _Coaptatio_, a word coined by Augustine, and used by him again\nin the _De Trin._ iv. 2.\n\n[1021] Ps. civ. 1.\n\n[1022] He apparently has in view the celebrated passage in the\nopening of the second book of Lucretius. The uses made of this\npassage are referred to by Lecky, _Hist. of European Morals_, i. 74.\n\n[1023] Rom. viii. 32.\n\n[1024] _Vide_ Book xviii. c. 53.\n\n[1025] Virg. _\u00c6n._ vi. 751.\n\n[1026] In the _Republic_, x.\n\n[1027] Phil. iv. 7.\n\n[1028] 1 Cor. xiii. 9, 10.\n\n[1029] 1 Cor. xiii. 12.\n\n[1030] Matt. xviii. 10.\n\n[1031] 1 John iii. 2.\n\n[1032] Ps. cxvi. 10.\n\n[1033] 1 Cor. xiii. 11, 12.\n\n[1034] 2 Kings v. 26.\n\n[1035] Jer. xxiii. 24.\n\n[1036] Job xlii. 5, 6.\n\n[1037] Eph. i. 18.\n\n[1038] Matt. v. 8.\n\n[1039] Luke iii. 6.\n\n[1040] Luke ii. 29, 30.\n\n[1041] Job xix. 26.\n\n[1042] 1 Cor. xiii. 12.\n\n[1043] 2 Cor. iii. 18.\n\n[1044] Ps. xxxiv. 5.\n\n[1045] Wisd. ix. 14.\n\n[1046] Rom. i. 20.\n\n[1047] 1 Cor. iv. 5.\n\n[1048] Ps. lxxxiv. 4.\n\n[1049] Numbers.\n\n[1050] Lev. xxvi. 12.\n\n[1051] 1 Cor. xv. 28.\n\n[1052] Or, the former to a state of probation, the latter to a state\nof reward.\n\n[1053] Ps. xlvi. 10.\n\n[1054] Gen. ii. 2, 3.\n\n[1055] Gen. iii. 5.\n\n[1056] Deut. v. 14.\n\n[1057] Ezek. xx. 12.\n\n[1058] Acts i. 7.\n\n\n\n                               INDEXES.\n\n\n\n\n                   I.--INDEX OF TEXTS OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n\n                               GENESIS.\n\n                                VOL. PAGE\n  i. 1,                  i. 439, 446, 501\n\n  i. 1, 2,                         i. 322\n\n  i. 6,                            i. 479\n\n  i. 14,                           i. 502\n\n  i. 14-18,                        i. 458\n\n  i. 24,                  i. 544; ii. 116\n\n  i. 26,                     ii. 114, 323\n\n  i. 27, 28,                       ii. 38\n\n  i. 28,                  ii. 21, 37, 523\n\n  i. 31,                           i. 464\n\n  ii. 2, 3,                       ii. 543\n\n  ii. 6,                           i. 552\n\n  ii. 7,                           i. 549\n\n  ii. 17,       i. 533, 535, 548; ii. 142\n\n  ii. 22,                         ii. 510\n\n  ii. 25,                          ii. 32\n\n  iii. 5,                     ii. 27, 543\n\n  iii. 6,                          ii. 32\n\n  iii. 7,                      ii. 32, 33\n\n  iii. 9,                          i. 535\n\n  iii. 12,                         ii. 24\n\n  iii. 12, 13,                     ii. 28\n\n  iii. 16,                         ii. 60\n\n  iii. 19,           i. 535, 548; ii. 385\n\n  iv. 6, 7,                        ii. 57\n\n  iv. 17,                      ii. 51, 62\n\n  iv. 18-22,                       ii. 82\n\n  iv. 25,                          ii. 63\n\n  iv. 26,                          ii. 82\n\n  v. 1,                            ii. 89\n\n  v. 2,                            ii. 81\n\n  v. 6,                            ii. 77\n\n  v. 8,                            ii. 77\n\n  vi. 1-4,                         ii. 94\n\n  vi. 3,                          ii. 290\n\n  vi. 5-7,                         ii. 97\n\n  vi. 6,                           ii. 22\n\n  vi. 19, 20,                     ii. 103\n\n  vi. 10, 11,                      ii. 73\n\n  viii. 4, 5,                      ii. 73\n\n  ix. 25,                          i. 104\n\n  ix. 26, 27,                     ii. 104\n\n  x. 21,                          ii. 109\n\n  x. 25,                     ii. 119, 122\n\n  xi. 1,                          ii. 128\n\n  xi. 1-9,                        ii. 112\n\n  xi. 6,                          ii. 115\n\n  xi. 27-29,                      ii. 125\n\n  xi. 31,                         ii. 125\n\n  xi. 32,                    ii. 126, 138\n\n  xii. 1,               ii. 127, 128, 129\n\n  xii. 1, 2,                      ii. 166\n\n  xii. 1-3,                       ii. 130\n\n  xii. 3,                         ii. 166\n\n  xii. 4,                         ii. 127\n\n  xii. 7,                         ii. 132\n\n  xiii. 8, 9,                     ii. 133\n\n  xiii. 14-17,                    ii. 133\n\n  xv. 4,                          ii. 140\n\n  xv. 6,                          ii. 135\n\n  xv. 7,                          ii. 136\n\n  xv. 17,                          i. 392\n\n  xv. 19, 21,                     ii. 136\n\n  xvi. 3,                         ii. 150\n\n  xvi. 6,                         ii. 140\n\n  xvii. 1-22,                     ii. 140\n\n  xvii. 5,                        ii. 395\n\n  xvii. 5, 6, 16,                 ii. 143\n\n  xvii. 14,                       ii. 142\n\n  xvii. 17,                       ii. 149\n\n  xviii.,                          i. 393\n\n  xviii. 2, 3,                    ii. 145\n\n  xviii. 18,              i. 392; ii. 146\n\n  xix. 2,                         ii. 145\n\n  xix. 16-19,                     ii. 145\n\n  xix. 21,                        ii. 145\n\n  xx. 12,                         ii. 146\n\n  xxi. 6,                         ii. 147\n\n  xxi. 10,                        ii. 187\n\n  xxi. 12,                        ii. 155\n\n  xxi. 12, 13,                    ii. 147\n\n  xxii. 10, 12,                   ii. 148\n\n  xxii. 14,                       ii. 149\n\n  xxii. 15-18,                    ii. 149\n\n  xxii. 18,          i. 432; ii. 333, 395\n\n  xxiv. 2, 3,                     ii. 150\n\n  xxiv. 10,                       ii. 125\n\n  xxv. 1,                         ii. 150\n\n  xxv. 5, 6,                      ii. 150\n\n  xxv. 7,                         ii. 220\n\n  xxv. 9,                           i. 24\n\n  xxv. 23,                   ii. 151, 161\n\n  xxv. 27,                        ii. 154\n\n  xxvi. 1-5,                      ii. 152\n\n  xxvi. 24,                       ii. 153\n\n  xxvii. 27-29,                   ii. 154\n\n  xxvii. 33,                      ii. 155\n\n  xxviii. 1-4,                    ii. 155\n\n  xxviii. 10-19,                  ii. 156\n\n  xxxii. 28,                      ii. 157\n\n  xxxii. 28-30,                   ii. 199\n\n  xxxv. 29,                         i. 24\n\n  xlvi. 8,                        ii. 159\n\n  xlvi. 27,                         ii. 7\n\n  xlvii. 29,                        i. 21\n\n  xlviii. 19,                     ii. 161\n\n  xlix. 8-12,                     ii. 160\n\n  xlix. 10,                  ii. 223, 277\n\n  xlix. 12,                       ii. 161\n\n  l. 22, 23,                      ii. 159\n\n  l. 23,                          ii. 159\n\n  l. 24,                            i. 21\n\n\n                                EXODUS.\n\n  iii. 14,                    i. 323, 482\n\n  x.,                             ii. 112\n\n  xii. 37,                         ii. 63\n\n  xvii. 6,                        ii. 281\n\n  xxi. 24,                        ii. 436\n\n  xxii. 20,          i. 387; ii. 332, 338\n\n  xxxiii. 13,                      i. 402\n\n\n                              LEVITICUS.\n\n  xxvi. 12,                       ii. 541\n\n\n                             DEUTERONOMY.\n\n  v. 14,                          ii. 544\n\n\n                                JOSHUA.\n\n  xxiv. 2,                        ii. 124\n\n\n                                JUDGES.\n\n  iii. 30,                        ii. 199\n\n\n                               1 SAMUEL.\n\n  ii. 1-10,                       ii. 171\n\n  ii. 27-36,                      ii. 179\n\n  vii. 9-12,                      ii. 188\n\n  vii. 14, 15,                    ii. 192\n\n  xiii. 13, 14,                   ii. 185\n\n  xv. 11,                          ii. 22\n\n  xv. 23,                         ii. 186\n\n  xv. 26-29,                      ii. 186\n\n  xxiv. 5, 6,                     ii. 185\n\n\n                               2 SAMUEL.\n\n  vii. 8,                         ii. 198\n\n  vii. 8-16,                      ii. 190\n\n  vii. 10, 11,              ii. 198 _bis_\n\n  vii. 19,                        ii. 197\n\n  vii. 29,                        ii. 198\n\n\n                               1 KINGS.\n\n  xiii. 2,                        ii. 200\n\n  xix. 10, 14, 15,                ii. 214\n\n\n                               2 KINGS.\n\n  ii. 11,                         ii. 405\n\n  v. 26,                          ii. 536\n\n  xiii. 15-17,                    ii. 200\n\n\n                             2 CHRONICLES.\n\n  xxx. 9,                          i. 384\n\n\n                                 JOB.\n\n  i. 21,                            i. 15\n\n  vii. 1,               ii. 312, 342, 440\n\n  xiv. 4,                         ii. 401\n\n  xv. 13,                         ii. 112\n\n  xix. 26,                        ii. 538\n\n  xxxiv. 30,                       i. 216\n\n  xxxviii. 7,                      i. 446\n\n  xl. 14,                     i. 455, 456\n\n  xlii. 5, 6,                     ii. 537\n\n\n                                PSALMS.\n\n  iii. 3,                          ii. 47\n\n  iii. 5,                         ii. 205\n\n  iv. 7,                           ii. 12\n\n  vi. 2,                          ii. 173\n\n  vi. 5,                           i. 532\n\n  vi. 6,                          ii. 378\n\n  ix. 18,                          ii. 20\n\n  x. 3,                            i. 107\n\n  xi. 5,                           ii. 11\n\n  xii. 6,                         ii. 182\n\n  xii. 7,                          i. 499\n\n  xiii. 1,                        ii. 194\n\n  xvi. 2,                 i. 388; ii. 339\n\n  xvi. 9, 10,                     ii. 207\n\n  xvi. 10,                        ii. 174\n\n  xvi. 11,                         ii. 12\n\n  xvii. 6,                         i. 454\n\n  xvii. 8,                        ii. 182\n\n  xvii. 15,                       ii. 456\n\n  xviii. 1,                        ii. 47\n\n  xviii. 43,                 ii. 203, 408\n\n  xviii. 45,                      ii. 158\n\n  xix. 9,                          ii. 19\n\n  xix. 12,                         i. 490\n\n  xxii. 16, 17,                   ii. 205\n\n  xxii. 18, 19,                   ii. 205\n\n  xxiv. 16,                        i. 475\n\n  xxv. 10,                         i. 520\n\n  xxv. 17,                        ii. 310\n\n  xxvi. 2,                         ii. 16\n\n  xxxi. 19,                  ii. 447, 455\n\n  xxxii. 1,                       ii. 209\n\n  xxxii. 11,                       ii. 12\n\n  xxxiv. 5,                       ii. 538\n\n  xxxiv. 8,                       ii. 456\n\n  xxxvi. 8,                       ii. 517\n\n  xxxix. 2,                       ii. 379\n\n  xxxix. 8,                       ii. 378\n\n  xl. 2,                          ii. 261\n\n  xl. 2, 3,                       ii. 256\n\n  xl. 4,                   i. 229; ii. 90\n\n  xl. 5,                          ii. 282\n\n  xl. 6,                          ii. 212\n\n  xli. 5,                         ii. 411\n\n  xli. 5-8,                       ii. 206\n\n  xli. 9,                         ii. 206\n\n  xli. 10,                        ii. 206\n\n  xlii. 3,                        ii. 378\n\n  xlii. 6,                         i. 546\n\n  xlii. 10,                         i. 41\n\n  xlv. 1-9,                       ii. 202\n\n  xlv. 7,                         ii. 203\n\n  xlv. 9-17,                      ii. 203\n\n  xlv. 16,                        ii. 204\n\n  xlvi. 4,                         i. 436\n\n  xlvi. 8,                         i. 520\n\n  xlvi. 10,                       ii. 543\n\n  xlviii. 1,                       i. 436\n\n  xlviii. 2,                 ii. 172, 203\n\n  xlix. 11,                        ii. 90\n\n  xlix. 12,                        i. 523\n\n  xlix. 20,                       ii. 524\n\n  l. 1,                            i. 370\n\n  l. 3-5,                         ii. 397\n\n  l. 12, 13,                       i. 389\n\n  l. 14, 15,                       i. 389\n\n  l. 16, 17,                       i. 388\n\n  li. 3,                           ii. 88\n\n  lii. 8,                          ii. 90\n\n  liii. 3, 4,                     ii. 121\n\n  lvii. 5-11,                     ii. 253\n\n  lix. 9,                          i. 546\n\n  lxii. 11, 12,                    i. 192\n\n  lxvii. 1, 2,                     i. 432\n\n  lxviii. 20,                     ii. 208\n\n  lxix. 6,                        ii. 212\n\n  lxix. 9,                        ii. 370\n\n  lxix. 10, 11,                   ii. 278\n\n  lxix. 20,                        ii. 19\n\n  lxix. 21,                       ii. 208\n\n  lxix. 22, 23,              ii. 208, 278\n\n  lxxii. 8,                  ii. 191, 290\n\n  lxxiii.,                        ii. 404\n\n  lxxiii. 18,                      ii. 27\n\n  lxxiii. 20,                      ii. 90\n\n  lxxiii. 28,            i. 391, 409, 416\n\n  lxxiv. 12,                      ii. 177\n\n  lxxvii. 9,                 ii. 446, 453\n\n  lxxvii. 10,                     ii. 454\n\n  lxxxii. 6,          i. 379, 385; ii. 95\n\n  lxxxiii. 16,                     ii. 28\n\n  lxxxiii. 28,                     i. 387\n\n  lxxxiv. 2,                       i. 417\n\n  lxxxiv. 4,                      ii. 540\n\n  lxxxiv. 10,                     ii. 183\n\n  lxxxvii. 3,                 i. 292, 436\n\n  lxxxvii. 5,                     ii. 402\n\n  lxxxix. 2, 3,                     i. 19\n\n  lxxxix. 3, 4,                   ii. 191\n\n  lxxxix. 19-29,                  ii. 192\n\n  lxxxix. 30-33,                  ii. 192\n\n  lxxxix. 32,                       i. 10\n\n  lxxxix. 34, 35,                 ii. 193\n\n  lxxxix. 36, 37,                 ii. 193\n\n  lxxxix. 38,               ii. 193 _bis_\n\n  lxxxix. 39-45,                  ii. 194\n\n  lxxxix. 46,                     ii. 194\n\n  lxxxix. 46, 47,                 ii. 195\n\n  lxxxix. 47,                     ii. 195\n\n  lxxxix. 48,                     ii. 195\n\n  lxxxix. 49-51,                  ii. 196\n\n  xc. 10,                          ii. 74\n\n  xciv. 4,                          i. 49\n\n  xciv. 11,             ii. 173, 302, 501\n\n  xciv. 15,                          i. 1\n\n  xciv. 19,                  ii. 284, 285\n\n  xcv. 3,                          i. 379\n\n  xcv. 5,                          i. 408\n\n  xcv. 6,                         ii. 112\n\n  xcvi. 1,                         i. 344\n\n  xcvi. 1-5,                       i. 345\n\n  xcvi. 4, 5,                       i. 42\n\n  xcvi. 5,                        ii. 338\n\n  xcvi. 5, 6,                      i. 379\n\n  ci. 1,                          ii. 354\n\n  cii. 25-27,                     ii. 395\n\n  civ. 1,                         ii. 528\n\n  civ. 4,                          ii. 92\n\n  civ. 24,                         i. 477\n\n  civ. 26,                    i. 455, 457\n\n  cv. 28,                         ii. 358\n\n  cv. 15,                         ii. 192\n\n  cx. 1,                     ii. 200, 204\n\n  cx. 2,                          ii. 204\n\n  cx. 4,               ii. 135, 205 _bis_\n\n  cxi. 1,                         ii. 187\n\n  cxi. 2,                          ii. 46\n\n  cxii. 1,                        ii. 512\n\n  cxv. 5,                          i. 344\n\n  cxvi. 10,                       ii. 535\n\n  cxvi. 15,                    i. 19, 527\n\n  cxvi.,                          ii. 255\n\n  cxviii. 1-5,                     i. 446\n\n  cxix. 20,                        ii. 11\n\n  cxix. 119,                      ii. 142\n\n  cxix. 164,                       i. 475\n\n  cxxiii. 2,                      ii. 329\n\n  cxxxvi. 2,                       i. 379\n\n  cxxxvii. 1,                     ii. 198\n\n  cxxxviii. 3,                     ii. 37\n\n  cxliv. 4,             ii. 195, 347, 454\n\n  cxliv. 15,                      ii. 341\n\n  cxlvii. 5,                       i. 508\n\n  cxlvii. 12-14,                  ii. 314\n\n  cxlviii. 2,                      i. 478\n\n  cxlviii. 4,                      i. 509\n\n  cxlviii. 8,                      i. 554\n\n\n                               PROVERBS.\n\n  i. 11-13,                       ii. 210\n\n  iii. 18,                i. 445; ii. 404\n\n  vi. 26,                           i. 54\n\n  viii. 15,                        i. 216\n\n  viii. 27,                        i. 439\n\n  ix. 1,                          ii. 174\n\n  ix. 1-5,                        ii. 211\n\n  ix. 6,                          ii. 211\n\n  x. 5,                           ii. 105\n\n  xviii. 12,                       ii. 27\n\n  xxiv. 16,                        i. 475\n\n\n                             ECCLESIASTES.\n\n  i. 2, 3,                        ii. 348\n\n  i. 9, 10,                        i. 499\n\n  ii. 13, 14,                     ii. 348\n\n  ii. 24,                         ii. 211\n\n  iii. 13,                        ii. 211\n\n  iii. 18,                        ii. 211\n\n  iii. 22,                         i. 554\n\n  vii. 4,                         ii. 212\n\n  vii. 29,                         ii. 22\n\n  viii. 14,                       ii. 349\n\n  viii. 15,                       ii. 211\n\n  x. 13,                           i. 485\n\n  x. 16, 17,                      ii. 212\n\n  xi. 9,                           i. 384\n\n  xii. 13, 14,                    ii. 349\n\n\n                          CANTICLES OR SONGS.\n\n  i. 3,                           ii. 105\n\n  i. 4,                           ii. 212\n\n  ii. 4,                           ii. 92\n\n  ii. 5,                          ii. 390\n\n  iv. 13,                          i. 546\n\n  vii. 6,                         ii. 213\n\n\n                                ISAIAH.\n\n  i. 1,                           ii. 247\n\n  ii. 2, 3,                        i. 433\n\n  ii. 3,                     ii. 282, 290\n\n  iv. 4,                          ii. 400\n\n  v. 7,                           ii. 106\n\n  vii. 14,                        ii. 277\n\n  x. 21,                          ii. 182\n\n  x. 22,                     ii. 258, 278\n\n  xi. 2,                           i. 476\n\n  xi. 4,                          ii. 288\n\n  xiv. 12,                         i. 454\n\n  xix. 1,                          i. 342\n\n  xxvi. 11,                       ii. 371\n\n  xxvi. 19,                       ii. 387\n\n  xxviii. 22,                     ii. 183\n\n  xxix. 14,                        i. 422\n\n  xl. 26,                          i. 508\n\n  xlii. 1-4,                      ii. 410\n\n  xlv. 8,                         ii. 378\n\n  xlviii. 12-16,                  ii. 407\n\n  xlviii. 20,                     ii. 235\n\n  li. 8,                          ii. 433\n\n  lii. 13-liii. 12,               ii. 449\n\n  liii. 7,                   ii. 298, 407\n\n  liv. 1-5,                       ii. 249\n\n  lvii. 21,                        ii. 13\n\n  lxv. 5,                         ii. 393\n\n  lxv. 17-19,                ii. 389, 476\n\n  lxv. 22,                        ii. 402\n\n  lxvi. 12-16,                    ii. 387\n\n  lxvi. 18,                       ii. 390\n\n  lxvi. 22-24,                    ii. 391\n\n  lxvi. 24,                       ii. 454\n\n  lxvi. 34,                       ii. 432\n\n\n                               JEREMIAH.\n\n  i. 5,                            i. 517\n\n  ix. 23, 24,                     ii. 256\n\n  xvi. 19,                        ii. 257\n\n  xvi. 20,                    i. 241, 346\n\n  xvii. 7,                         ii. 83\n\n  xvii. 9,                        ii. 257\n\n  xxiii. 5, 6,                    ii. 257\n\n  xxiii. 24,              i. 517; ii. 537\n\n  xxix. 7,                        ii. 341\n\n  xxxi. 31,                       ii. 257\n\n\n                             LAMENTATIONS.\n\n  iv. 20,                         ii. 257\n\n\n                               EZEKIEL.\n\n  xx. 12,                         ii. 544\n\n  xxviii. 13,                      i. 454\n\n  xxxiii. 6,                        i. 14\n\n  xxxiv. 23,                      ii. 259\n\n  xxxvii. 22-24,                  ii. 259\n\n\n                                DANIEL.\n\n  iii.,                             i. 22\n\n  vii. 13, 14,                    ii. 258\n\n  vii. 15-28,                     ii. 393\n\n  vii. 18,                        ii. 476\n\n  vii. 27,                        ii. 476\n\n  xii. 1, 2,                      ii. 476\n\n  xii. 1-3,                       ii. 394\n\n  xii. 13,                        ii. 395\n\n\n                                HOSEA.\n\n  i. 1,                           ii. 246\n\n  i. 10,                          ii. 248\n\n  i. 11,                          ii. 248\n\n  iii. 4,                         ii. 248\n\n  iii. 5,                         ii. 248\n\n  vi. 2,                          ii. 248\n\n  vi. 6,                  i. 390; ii. 399\n\n\n                                 JOEL.\n\n  ii. 13,                         ii. 254\n\n  ii. 28, 29,                     ii. 251\n\n\n                                 AMOS.\n\n  i. 1,                           ii. 247\n\n  iv. 12, 13,                     ii. 249\n\n  ix. 11, 12,                     ii. 249\n\n\n                               OBADIAH.\n\n  ver. 17,                        ii. 251\n\n  ver. 21,                        ii. 251\n\n\n                                JONAH.\n\n  iii. 4,                         ii. 273\n\n\n                                MICAH.\n\n  i. 1,                           ii. 247\n\n  iv. 13,                         ii. 250\n\n  v. 2-4,                         ii. 250\n\n  vi. 6-8,                         i. 389\n\n\n                                NAHUM.\n\n  i. 14-ii. 1,                    ii. 252\n\n\n                               HABAKKUK.\n\n  ii. 2, 3,                       ii. 252\n\n  ii. 4,             i. 157; ii. 301, 328\n\n  iii. 2,                         ii. 252\n\n  iii. 3,                         ii. 253\n\n  iii. 4,                         ii. 253\n\n\n                              ZEPHANIAH.\n\n  ii. 11,                         ii. 258\n\n  iii. 8,                         ii. 257\n\n  iii. 9-12,                      ii. 258\n\n\n                                HAGGAI.\n\n  ii. 6,                          ii. 259\n\n  ii. 7,                     ii. 275, 281\n\n  ii. 9,                ii. 275, 280, 281\n\n\n                              ZECHARIAH.\n\n  ix. 9, 10,                      ii. 259\n\n  ix. 11,                         ii. 260\n\n  xii. 9, 10,                     ii. 408\n\n  xiii. 2,                          i. 34\n\n\n                               MALACHI.\n\n  i. 10, 11,                      ii. 260\n\n  ii. 5-7,                        ii. 260\n\n  ii. 7,                           ii. 93\n\n  ii. 17,                    ii. 404, 406\n\n  iii. 1, 2,                      ii. 261\n\n  iii. 1-6,                       ii. 399\n\n  iii. 13-16,                     ii. 362\n\n  iii. 14,                        ii. 406\n\n  iii. 14, 15,                    ii. 404\n\n  iii. 17-iv. 3,             ii. 262, 403\n\n  iv. 4,                          ii. 404\n\n  iv. 5, 6,                       ii. 405\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n                              APOCRYPHA.\n\n                                ESDRAS.\n\n  iii. iv.,                       ii. 263\n\n\n                                TOBIT.\n\n  xii. 12,                          i. 21\n\n  xii. 19,                         i. 547\n\n\n                                JUDITH.\n\n  v. 5-9,                         ii. 126\n\n  vii. 20,                         i. 384\n\n\n                                WISDOM.\n\n  i. 9,                           ii. 403\n\n  ii. 12-21,                      ii. 210\n\n  vi. 20,                          ii. 11\n\n  vii. 22,                         i. 450\n\n  vii. 24-27,                      i. 305\n\n  viii. 1,                 i. 517; ii. 53\n\n  ix. 13-15,                       i. 501\n\n  ix. 14,                         ii. 539\n\n  ix. 15,              i. 536; ii. 4, 303\n\n  xi. 20,                     i. 475, 508\n\n  xi. 38,                          i. 532\n\n\n                            ECCLESIASTICUS.\n\n  ii. 7,                          ii. 368\n\n  iii. 27,                          i. 38\n\n  vii. 13,                         ii. 14\n\n  vii. 17,                        ii. 433\n\n  x. 13,                           ii. 25\n\n  xv. 17,                         ii. 142\n\n  xxi. 1,                         ii. 466\n\n  xxiv. 3,                         i. 455\n\n  xxvii. 5,                       ii. 461\n\n  xxx. 12,                        ii. 518\n\n  xxx. 24,                i. 390; ii. 466\n\n  xxxiii. 15,                      i. 457\n\n  xxxvi. 1-5,                     ii. 210\n\n  xl. 1,                          ii. 441\n\n\n                                BARUCH.\n\n  iii. 26, 27,                     ii. 97\n\n  iii. 35-37,                     ii. 257\n\n\n                           HYMN OF THE THREE\n                               CHILDREN.\n\n  ver. 35,                         i. 466\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n                            NEW TESTAMENT.\n\n                               MATTHEW.\n\n  i.,                              ii. 77\n\n  i. 1, 18,                       ii. 192\n\n  i. 21,                          ii. 208\n\n  i. 23,                          ii. 277\n\n  iii. 2,                         ii. 282\n\n  iii. 8,                         ii. 465\n\n  iv. 3-11,                        i. 377\n\n  iv. 9,                           i. 478\n\n  iv. 17,                         ii. 282\n\n  iv. 19,                         ii. 408\n\n  v. 4,                           ii. 254\n\n  v. 8,                      ii. 388, 538\n\n  v. 16,                           i. 206\n\n  v. 19,                          ii. 364\n\n  v. 20,                     ii. 364, 467\n\n  v. 23, 24,                      ii. 467\n\n  v. 28,                           ii. 21\n\n  v. 45,              i. 10, 138; ii. 454\n\n  vi. 1,                           i. 206\n\n  vi. 2,                           i. 207\n\n  vi. 12,      ii. 342, 349, 465, 467, 522\n\n  vi. 14,                          ii. 468\n\n  vi. 14, 15,                      ii. 449\n\n  vi. 15,                          ii. 468\n\n  vi. 19-21,                         i. 16\n\n  vi. 28-30,                        i. 403\n\n  vii. 7, 8,                       ii. 196\n\n  vii. 12,                          ii. 13\n\n  vii. 18,                          ii. 26\n\n  vii. 20,                         ii. 106\n\n  viii. 22,           i. 212; ii. 354, 375\n\n  viii. 29,                i. 342; ii. 345\n\n  x. 22,                            ii. 16\n\n  x. 27,                           ii. 255\n\n  x. 28,          i. 19, 212, 522; ii. 283\n\n  x. 30,                            i. 508\n\n  x. 32,                            i. 527\n\n  x. 33,                            i. 205\n\n  x. 34,                           ii. 390\n\n  x. 36,                           ii. 308\n\n  x. 37,                           ii. 464\n\n  x. 41,                           ii. 470\n\n  xi. 13,                          ii. 217\n\n  xi. 22,                          ii. 350\n\n  xi. 24,                          ii. 350\n\n  xii. 27,                         ii. 351\n\n  xii. 29,                         ii. 408\n\n  xii. 32,                         ii. 453\n\n  xii. 41, 42,                     ii. 351\n\n  xiii. 37-43,                     ii. 351\n\n  xiii. 39-41,                     ii. 264\n\n  xiii. 41-43,                     ii. 414\n\n  xiii. 43,                        ii. 514\n\n  xiii. 47-50,                     ii. 282\n\n  xiii. 52,                        ii. 350\n\n  xvi. 16,                          i. 342\n\n  xvi. 25,                          i. 528\n\n  xvii. 1, 2,                      ii. 410\n\n  xvii. 7,                         ii. 313\n\n  xviii. 10,                        i. 439\n\n  xviii. 15,                        ii. 56\n\n  xviii. 18,                       ii. 365\n\n  xviii. 23,                       ii. 469\n\n  xviii. 35,                        ii. 56\n\n  xix. 4, 5,                        ii. 38\n\n  xix. 27, 28,                     ii. 175\n\n  xix. 28,                         ii. 351\n\n  xix. 29,                         ii. 358\n\n  xx. 22,                          ii. 106\n\n  xxii. 11-14,                     ii. 281\n\n  xxii. 14,                        ii. 273\n\n  xxii. 29,                        ii. 510\n\n  xxii. 30,                i. 477; ii. 510\n\n  xxii. 37-40,                      i. 387\n\n  xxii. 39,                        ii. 466\n\n  xxii. 40,                         i. 390\n\n  xxii. 44,                        ii. 200\n\n  xxiii. 3,                        ii. 364\n\n  xxiii. 26,                        i. 417\n\n  xxiv. 12,               ii. 16, 313, 363\n\n  xxiv. 13,                   ii. 178, 448\n\n  xxiv. 15,                        ii. 183\n\n  xxiv. 21,                        ii. 138\n\n  xxiv. 25,                        ii. 396\n\n  xxiv. 29,                        ii. 396\n\n  xxv. 24,                         ii. 407\n\n  xxv. 30,                         ii. 392\n\n  xxv. 33,                         ii. 449\n\n  xxv. 34,               ii. 364, 399, 462\n\n  xxv. 34-41,                      ii. 353\n\n  xxv. 34, 41, 46,                 ii. 543\n\n  xxv. 35,                         ii. 207\n\n  xxv. 40,                         ii. 207\n\n  xxv. 41,     ii. 370, 434, 450, 451, 462\n\n  xxv. 45,                         ii. 466\n\n  xxv. 46,           i. 453, 376, 414, 451\n\n  xxvi. 10-13,                      ii. 13\n\n  xxvi. 38,                         ii. 18\n\n  xxvi. 39,                        ii. 106\n\n  xxvi. 63,                        ii. 398\n\n  xxvi. 75,                         ii. 16\n\n  xxvii. 34, 48,                   ii. 208\n\n  xxviii. 19,                       i. 554\n\n  xxviii. 20,                      ii. 364\n\n\n                                 MARK.\n\n  i. 2,                            ii. 93\n\n  i. 24,                           i. 377\n\n  iii. 5,                          ii. 17\n\n  iii. 27,                        ii. 357\n\n  ix. 43, 48,                     ii. 432\n\n\n                                 LUKE.\n\n  i. 27,                          ii. 192\n\n  i. 33,                          ii. 472\n\n  i. 34,                          ii. 137\n\n  i. 35,                          ii. 137\n\n  ii. 14,                          ii. 14\n\n  ii. 25-30,                      ii. 172\n\n  ii. 29, 30,                     ii. 538\n\n  iii. 6,                         ii. 538\n\n  v. 10,                          ii. 408\n\n  vi. 13,                         ii. 282\n\n  vi. 38,                         ii. 437\n\n  xii. 4,                           i. 19\n\n  xii. 7,                         ii. 513\n\n  xii. 49,                        ii. 390\n\n  xvi. 9,                    ii. 469, 470\n\n  xvi. 24,                   ii. 416, 435\n\n  xix. 10,                        ii. 185\n\n  xx. 34,                      ii. 39, 85\n\n  xx. 35,                          ii. 81\n\n  xxi. 18,                   ii. 504, 507\n\n  xxii. 15,                        ii. 18\n\n  xxiii. 34,                      ii. 253\n\n  xxiv. 27,                       ii. 290\n\n  xxiv. 44-47,                     i. 433\n\n  xxiv. 45-47,                    ii. 283\n\n\n                                 JOHN.\n\n  i. 1-5,                          i. 426\n\n  i. 6-9,                          i. 386\n\n  i. 9,                            i. 447\n\n  i. 14,               i. 415, 426; ii. 3\n\n  i. 32,                          ii. 410\n\n  i. 47, 51,                      ii. 156\n\n  ii. 19,                 i. 160; ii. 261\n\n  iii. 5,                 i. 527; ii. 467\n\n  iii. 17,                        ii. 254\n\n  iv. 24,                          i. 554\n\n  v. 17,                          ii. 523\n\n  v. 22,                          ii. 410\n\n  v. 22-24,                       ii. 353\n\n  v. 25, 26,                      ii. 353\n\n  v. 28,                          ii. 394\n\n  v. 28, 29,                      ii. 355\n\n  v. 29,                          ii. 413\n\n  v. 44,                           i. 205\n\n  v. 46,                          ii. 404\n\n  vi. 50, 51,                ii. 447, 458\n\n  vi. 51,                         ii. 183\n\n  vi. 56,                         ii. 458\n\n  vi. 60-64,                       i. 415\n\n  vi. 70,                         ii. 207\n\n  vii. 39,                        ii. 408\n\n  viii. 25,                   i. 415, 476\n\n  viii. 34,                       ii. 324\n\n  viii. 36,                        ii. 23\n\n  viii. 44,               i. 453; ii. 320\n\n  x. 9,                            i. 270\n\n  x. 18,                      i. 160, 195\n\n  xi. 15,                          ii. 18\n\n  xi. 35,                          ii. 18\n\n  xii. 43,                         i. 205\n\n  xiv. 6,                   i. 432; ii. 6\n\n  xvi. 13,                         i. 476\n\n  xix. 30,                        ii. 160\n\n  xix. 38,                          i. 21\n\n  xx. 13,                           ii. 3\n\n  xx. 22,                          i. 551\n\n  xxi. 15-17,                      ii. 11\n\n\n                                 ACTS.\n\n  i. 6, 7,                        ii. 288\n\n  i. 7,                           ii. 544\n\n  i. 7, 8,                        ii. 283\n\n  i. 17,                          ii. 207\n\n  ii. 3,                          ii. 390\n\n  ii. 27, 31,                     ii. 174\n\n  ii. 45,                          i. 213\n\n  vii. 2,                         ii. 130\n\n  vii. 2, 3,                      ii. 128\n\n  vii. 4,                         ii. 129\n\n  vii. 22,                   ii. 101, 264\n\n  vii. 53,                         i. 403\n\n  ix. 4,                          ii. 193\n\n  x. 42,                          ii. 177\n\n  xiii. 46,                       ii. 196\n\n  xv. 15-17,                      ii. 249\n\n  xvii. 28,                        i. 320\n\n  xvii. 30, 31,                   ii. 290\n\n\n                                ROMANS.\n\n  i. 3,                 ii. 186, 190, 248\n\n  i. 11-13,                        ii. 17\n\n  i. 17,                          ii. 401\n\n  i. 19, 20,                  i. 316, 320\n\n  i. 20,                  i. 323; ii. 539\n\n  i. 21,                      i. 341, 383\n\n  i. 21-23,                        i. 320\n\n  i. 21-25,                        ii. 48\n\n  i. 25,                           i. 170\n\n  i. 26,                           ii. 41\n\n  i. 31,                           ii. 18\n\n  ii. 4,                            i. 10\n\n  ii. 15, 16,                     ii. 403\n\n  iii. 2,                         ii. 173\n\n  iii. 4,                         ii. 135\n\n  iii. 7,                           ii. 6\n\n  iii. 20,                         ii. 27\n\n  iii. 20-22,                     ii. 350\n\n  iii. 23,                        ii. 390\n\n  iii. 26,                        ii. 172\n\n  iii. 28, 29,                    ii. 196\n\n  iv. 15,                         ii. 142\n\n  v. 5,                           ii. 212\n\n  v. 12,                           ii. 24\n\n  v. 12, 19,                      ii. 142\n\n  vi. 4,                          ii. 368\n\n  vi. 9,                  i. 499; ii. 195\n\n  vi. 12, 13,                      ii. 57\n\n  vi. 13,                  i. 390; ii. 60\n\n  vi. 22,                         ii. 315\n\n  vii. 12, 13,                     i. 526\n\n  vii. 17,                         ii. 60\n\n  viii. 6,                        ii. 389\n\n  viii. 10,                       ii. 375\n\n  viii. 13,                       ii. 433\n\n  viii. 14,                       ii. 441\n\n  viii. 15,                        ii. 19\n\n  viii. 18,                        i. 215\n\n  viii. 23,                   ii. 16, 379\n\n  viii. 24,               i. 550; ii. 307\n\n  viii. 24, 25,                    i. 418\n\n  viii. 28,                i. 14; ii. 284\n\n  viii. 28, 29,                    i. 549\n\n  viii. 29,                  ii. 285, 505\n\n  viii. 32,             ii. 148, 174, 529\n\n  viii. 37,                       ii. 522\n\n  ix. 2,                      ii. 17, 379\n\n  ix. 5,                           ii. 86\n\n  ix. 7, 8,                  ii. 148, 150\n\n  xi. 10-13,                      ii. 151\n\n  ix. 14,                         ii. 346\n\n  ix. 21,                          ii. 30\n\n  ix. 22, 23,                      ii. 52\n\n  ix. 27,                         ii. 258\n\n  ix. 27, 28,                     ii. 278\n\n  ix. 28,                         ii. 183\n\n  x. 3,             ii. 17, 172, 256, 456\n\n  x. 5,                           ii. 203\n\n  x. 13,                           ii. 83\n\n  xi. 5,                          ii. 182\n\n  xi. 11,                         ii. 278\n\n  xi. 20,                          ii. 12\n\n  xi. 32,             i. 39; ii. 447, 456\n\n  xi. 33,                         ii. 346\n\n  xii. 1,                 i. 390; ii. 183\n\n  xii. 2,                          i. 391\n\n  xii. 3,                          i. 504\n\n  xii. 3-6,                        i. 391\n\n  xii. 12,                   ii. 255, 284\n\n  xii. 15,                         ii. 17\n\n  xiii. 10,                       ii. 459\n\n  xiii. 24, 25,                    ii. 83\n\n  xiv. 4,                         ii. 368\n\n  xiv. 9,                         ii. 366\n\n\n                            1 CORINTHIANS.\n\n  i. 19-25,                        i. 423\n\n  i. 25,                          ii. 107\n\n  i. 27,                          ii. 211\n\n  i. 30, 31,                      ii. 456\n\n  i. 31,                          ii. 256\n\n  ii. 11,                      i. 38, 553\n\n  ii. 11-14,                        ii. 7\n\n  iii. 1,                      ii. 7, 517\n\n  iii. 2,                         ii. 161\n\n  iii. 3,                           ii. 7\n\n  iii. 7,                 i. 517; ii. 524\n\n  iii. 9,                    ii. 114, 328\n\n  iii. 11-15,                     ii. 448\n\n  iii. 13,                   ii. 461, 462\n\n  iii. 14, 15,                    ii. 462\n\n  iii. 15,                        ii. 460\n\n  iii. 17,                        ii. 191\n\n  iii. 20,                   ii. 173, 302\n\n  iv. 5,                          ii. 540\n\n  iv. 7,                          ii. 176\n\n  iv. 9,                           ii. 17\n\n  v. 12,                          ii. 366\n\n  vi. 3,                          ii. 352\n\n  vii. 4,                         ii. 140\n\n  vii. 25,                        ii. 469\n\n  vii. 31,                        ii. 396\n\n  vii. 31, 32,                    ii. 374\n\n  vii. 32,                        ii. 461\n\n  vii. 33,                        ii. 461\n\n  viii. 1,                         i. 376\n\n  viii. 5, 6,                      i. 380\n\n  x. 4,                   i. 545; ii. 281\n\n  x. 12,                          ii. 368\n\n  x. 17,           ii. 183, 448, 458, 511\n\n  x. 19, 20,                       i. 345\n\n  xi. 14,                           i. 86\n\n  xi. 19,                         ii. 105\n\n  xii. 12,                   ii. 178, 207\n\n  xii. 27,                        ii. 511\n\n  xiii. 4,                        ii. 107\n\n  xiii. 9, 10,               ii. 434, 535\n\n  xiii. 10, 12,                   ii. 476\n\n  xiii. 11, 12,                   ii. 536\n\n  xiii. 12,                  ii. 535, 538\n\n  xv. 10,                         ii. 352\n\n  xvi. 21, 22,                     i. 550\n\n  xv. 22,                         ii. 385\n\n  xv. 28,                ii. 48, 393, 541\n\n  xv. 32,                          i. 544\n\n  xv. 36,                         ii. 385\n\n  xv. 38,                          i. 517\n\n  xv. 39,                           ii. 2\n\n  xv. 42-45,                       i. 549\n\n  xv. 44,                         ii. 517\n\n  xv. 46,                          ii. 50\n\n  xv. 46, 47,                     ii. 228\n\n  xv. 47-49,                       i. 550\n\n  xv. 51,                         ii. 385\n\n  xv. 54,                          ii. 16\n\n  xv. 55,                         ii. 379\n\n  xv. 56,                          i. 525\n\n  xv. 57,                         ii. 522\n\n\n                            2 CORINTHIANS.\n\n  i. 12,                           i. 201\n\n  iii. 15, 16,                    ii. 188\n\n  iii. 18,                        ii. 538\n\n  iv. 16,                   i. 552; ii. 4\n\n  v. 1-4,                           ii. 4\n\n  v. 4,                           ii. 379\n\n  v. 6,                           ii. 328\n\n  v. 10,                          ii. 177\n\n  v. 14, 15,                      ii. 354\n\n  vi. 7-10,                        i. 457\n\n  vi. 10,                         ii. 358\n\n  vi. 14,                         ii. 369\n\n  vii. 5,                          ii. 17\n\n  vii. 8-11,                       ii. 15\n\n  viii. 9,                        ii. 174\n\n  ix. 7,                           ii. 16\n\n  x. 12,                           i. 506\n\n  xi. 1-3,                         ii. 17\n\n  xi. 3,                            i. 12\n\n  xi. 14,                 i. 397; ii. 313\n\n  xi. 29,                         ii. 433\n\n  xii. 21,                         ii. 17\n\n\n                              GALATIANS.\n\n  ii. 14-20,                      ii. 248\n\n  iii. 11,                          ii. 2\n\n  iii. 17,                        ii. 138\n\n  iii. 19,                         i. 432\n\n  iii. 27,                         i. 550\n\n  iv. 21-31,                       ii. 51\n\n  iv. 22-31,                      ii. 168\n\n  iv. 25,                         ii. 188\n\n  iv. 26,                 i. 444; ii. 388\n\n  v. 6,                      ii. 342, 459\n\n  v. 17,              i. 534; ii. 55, 59,\n                            303, 441, 521\n\n  v. 19-21,                    ii. 3, 457\n\n  vi. 1,                       ii. 16, 56\n\n  vi. 2,                           ii. 56\n\n  vi. 3,                          ii. 172\n\n  vi. 4,                           i. 201\n\n\n                              EPHESIANS.\n\n  i. 4,                      ii. 185, 281\n\n  i. 18,                          ii. 539\n\n  i. 22, 23,                      ii. 512\n\n  iv. 9, 10,                      ii. 178\n\n  iv. 10-16,                      ii. 511\n\n  iv. 12,                         ii. 510\n\n  iv. 13,                         ii. 505\n\n  iv. 26,                          ii. 56\n\n  v. 8,                            i. 477\n\n  v. 14,                          ii. 368\n\n  v. 25,                           ii. 39\n\n  v. 28, 29,                       ii. 61\n\n  vi. 5,                           i. 383\n\n  vi. 20,                         ii. 172\n\n\n                              COLOSSIANS.\n\n  i. 12,                          ii. 358\n\n  i. 13,                          ii. 251\n\n  i. 24,                          ii. 511\n\n  ii. 8,                           i. 319\n\n  iii. 1,                    ii. 249, 368\n\n  iii. 1, 2,                      ii. 365\n\n  iii. 1-3,                       ii. 174\n\n  iii. 3,                         ii. 375\n\n\n                             PHILIPPIANS.\n\n  i. 3,                            ii. 17\n\n  i. 18,                          ii. 106\n\n  i. 23,                           ii. 11\n\n  ii. 7,                          ii. 192\n\n  ii. 8,                           ii. 29\n\n  ii. 12,                          ii. 12\n\n  ii. 21,                         ii. 365\n\n  iii. 7, 8,                      ii. 175\n\n  iii. 14,                         ii. 17\n\n  iii. 19,                        ii. 389\n\n  iii. 20,                        ii. 365\n\n  iv. 7,                          ii. 534\n\n\n                           1 THESSALONIANS.\n\n  iv. 4,                           ii. 31\n\n  iv. 13-16,                      ii. 384\n\n  iv. 16,                          i. 499\n\n  iv. 17,                         ii. 398\n\n  v. 5,                       i. 444, 479\n\n  v. 14, 15,                       ii. 56\n\n\n                           2 THESSALONIANS.\n\n  i. 9,                           ii. 288\n\n  ii. 1-11,                       ii. 381\n\n  ii. 8,                          ii. 371\n\n\n                              1 TIMOTHY.\n\n  i. 5,                            ii. 44\n\n  ii. 5,    i. 374; ii. 98, 183, 186, 280\n\n  ii. 14,                          ii. 24\n\n  iii. 1,                         ii. 329\n\n  v. 8,                           ii. 323\n\n  v. 20,                           ii. 56\n\n  vi. 6-10,                         i. 15\n\n  vi. 17-19,                        i. 16\n\n\n                              2 TIMOTHY.\n\n  ii. 9,                          ii. 172\n\n  ii. 19,               ii. 285, 359, 441\n\n  ii. 25, 26,                     ii. 452\n\n  iii. 2,                          ii. 11\n\n  iii. 7,                           i. 49\n\n  iii. 12,                        ii. 284\n\n  iii. 16,                        ii. 214\n\n  iv. 1,                          ii. 207\n\n\n                                TITUS.\n\n  i. 2, 3,                         i. 504\n\n  i. 8,                            ii. 10\n\n\n                               HEBREWS.\n\n  ii. 4,                          ii. 283\n\n  iv. 12,                         ii. 390\n\n  vii. 11-27,                     ii. 183\n\n  viii. 8,                        ii. 168\n\n  ix. 15,                         ii. 185\n\n  xi. 7,                          ii. 264\n\n  xi. 11,                         ii. 144\n\n  xi. 12,                         ii. 144\n\n  xi. 13-16,                      ii. 255\n\n  xi. 17-19,                      ii. 146\n\n  xii. 14,                         ii. 56\n\n  xiii. 2,                        ii. 144\n\n  xiii. 16,                        i. 389\n\n\n                                JAMES.\n\n  i. 2,                            ii. 16\n\n  i. 17,                           i. 460\n\n  ii. 13,               ii. 449, 464, 469\n\n  ii. 14,                         ii. 460\n\n  ii. 17,                         ii. 342\n\n  iv. 6,          i. 2, 478; ii. 175, 342\n\n\n                               1 PETER.\n\n  ii. 2,                          ii. 161\n\n  ii. 9,                     ii. 183, 269\n\n  iii. 4,                           i. 14\n\n  iii. 20, 21,                    ii. 264\n\n  iv. 5,                          ii. 207\n\n  v. 5,                         i. 2, 175\n\n  v. 6,                           ii. 342\n\n\n                               2 PETER.\n\n  ii. 4,              i. 477; ii. 93, 450\n\n  ii. 19,                 i. 138; ii. 324\n\n  iii. 3-13,                      ii. 380\n\n  iii. 6,                         ii. 396\n\n  iii. 8,                         ii. 356\n\n  iii. 10, 11,                    ii. 396\n\n\n                                1 JOHN.\n\n  i. 8,              ii. 16, 19, 379, 400\n\n  ii. 15,                          ii. 11\n\n  ii. 17,                         ii. 396\n\n  ii. 18, 19,                     ii. 381\n\n  ii. 19,                         ii. 362\n\n  iii. 2,                         ii. 535\n\n  iii. 8,                     i. 453, 454\n\n  iii. 9,                         ii. 393\n\n  iii. 12,                         ii. 58\n\n  iv. 7,                          ii. 176\n\n  iv. 18,                     ii. 19, 455\n\n\n                                 JUDE.\n\n  ver. 14,                        ii. 264\n\n\n                              REVELATION.\n\n  i. 4,                           ii. 173\n\n  iii. 1,                          i. 476\n\n  iii. 14,                         i. 476\n\n  xiv. 13,                        ii. 366\n\n  xv. 2,                          ii. 377\n\n  xx. 1-6,                        ii. 356\n\n  xx. 4,                          ii. 366\n\n  xx. 9, 10,                      ii. 360\n\n  xx. 10,               ii. 435, 450, 454\n\n  xxi. 1,                         ii. 377\n\n  xxi. 25,                        ii. 378\n\n\n\n\n                   II.--INDEX OF PRINCIPAL SUBJECTS.\n\n\n  Abel, the relation of, to Christ, ii. 82, 83. _See_ Cain.\n\n  Abraham, the era in the life of, from which a new succession begins,\n          i. 124;\n    time of the migration of, 127, etc.;\n    the order and nature of God's promises to, 129, etc.;\n    the three great kingdoms existing at the time of the birth of, 130,\n          131;\n    the repeated promises of the land of Canaan made to, and to his\n          seed, 131;\n    his denial of his wife in Egypt, 132;\n    the parting of Lot and, 132, 133;\n    the third promise of the land to, 133;\n    his victory over the kings, 134;\n    the promise made to, of a large posterity, 135;\n    the sacrifices offered by, when the covenant was renewed with, 136;\n    the seed of, to be in bondage 400 years, 138;\n    Sarah gives Hagar to, 139;\n    the promise of a son given to,--receives the seal of circumcision,\n          140;\n    change of the name of, 143;\n    visit of three angels to, 144;\n    his denial of his wife in Gerar, 146;\n    birth of his son Isaac, 147;\n    his offering up of Isaac, 147;\n    death of his wife Sarah, 149;\n    what is meant by marrying Keturah after Sarah's death? 150;\n    the time of the fulfilment of the promise made to, respecting\n          Canaan, 166.\n\n  Abyss, casting Satan into the, ii. 358.\n\n  Achior, his answer to Holofernes' inquiry respecting the Jews, ii.\n          126.\n\n  Adam forsook God before God forsook him, i. 535;\n    in Paradise;\n    his temptation and fall, ii. 22, etc.;\n    nature of his first sin, 25;\n    an evil will preceded his evil act, 25, 26;\n    the pride involved in the sin of, 28;\n    the justice of the punishment of, 28, etc.;\n    the nakedness of, seen after his base sin, 32;\n    the fearful consequences of the sin of, i. 515, 521, ii. 1, 2.\n\n  \u00c6neas, i. 94;\n    time of the arrival of, in Italy, ii. 238.\n\n  \u00c6sculanus, the god, i. 159.\n\n  \u00c6sculapius, sent for to Epidaurus by the Romans, i. 115, 116;\n    a deified man, 349.\n\n  Affections of the soul, right or wrong according to their direction,\n          ii. 10, 12, 15.\n\n  Africa, a fearful visitation of, by locusts, i. 134.\n\n  Ages of ages, i. 508, etc.\n\n  \u0391\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, ii. 141.\n\n  Albans, the wickedness of the war waged by the Romans against, i. 105.\n\n  Alcimus, ii. 276.\n\n  Alexander the Great, the apt reply of a pirate to, i. 140;\n    and Leo, an Egyptian priest,--a letter of, to his mother Olympias,\n          i. 313, 351;\n    invades Judea, ii. 275.\n\n  Alexandra, queen of the Jews, ii. 276.\n\n  Alms-deeds, of those who think that they will free evil-doers from\n          damnation in the day of judgment, ii. 449, 464.\n\n  Altor, i. 288.\n\n  Alypius, ii. 485.\n\n  _Amor_ and _dilectio_, how used in Scripture, ii. 10, etc.\n\n  Amulius and Numitor, ii. 240, 241.\n\n  Anaxagoras, i. 308;\n    ii. 268.\n\n  Anaximander, i. 307.\n\n  Anaximenes, i. 308.\n\n  'Ancient compassions, Thine,' sworn unto David, ii. 195, etc.\n\n  Andromache, i. 104.\n\n  Anebo, Porphyry's letter to, i. 397, etc.\n\n  Angels, the holy things common to men and, i. 347, etc.;\n    not mediators, 370;\n    the difference between the knowledge of, and that of demons, 377;\n    the love of, which prompts them to desire that we should worship\n          God alone, 392;\n    miracles wrought by the ministry of, for the confirmation of the\n          faith, 392, etc., 400, etc.;\n    the ministry of, to fulfil the providence of God, 403;\n    those who seek worship for themselves, and those who seek honour\n          for God, which to be trusted about life eternal, 404;\n    rather to be imitated than invoked, 418;\n    the creation of, 445, etc.;\n    whether those who fell partook of the blessedness of the unfallen,\n          450;\n    were those who fell aware that they would fall? 452;\n    were the unfallen assured of their own perseverance? 452, 453;\n    the separation of the unfallen from the fallen, meant by the\n          separation of the light from the darkness, 458;\n    approbation of the good, signified by the words, 'God saw the light\n          that it was good,' 459;\n    the knowledge by which they know God in His essence, and perceive\n          the causes of His works, 473;\n    of the opinion that they were created before the world, 476;\n    the two different and dissimilar communities of, 477, etc.;\n    the idea that angels are meant by the separation of the waters by\n          the firmament, 479;\n    the nature of good and bad, one and the same, 481;\n    the cause of the blessedness of the good, and of the misery of the\n          bad, 487;\n    did they receive their good-will as well as their nature from God?\n          491;\n    whether they can be said to be creators of any creatures, 516;\n    the opinion of the Platonists that man's body was created by, 518;\n    the wickedness of those who sinned did not disturb the order of\n          God's providence, ii. 46;\n    the 'sons of God' of the 6th chapter of Genesis not, 92, etc.;\n    what we are to understand by God's speaking to, 114;\n    the three, which appeared to Abraham, 144;\n    Lot delivered by, 146;\n    the creation of, 472.\n\n  Anger of God, the, ii. 97, etc., 454.\n\n  Animals, the dispersion of those preserved in the ark, after the\n          deluge, ii. 115, etc.\n\n  Animals, rational, are they part of God? i. 151.\n\n  Antediluvians, the long life and great stature of, ii. 63, etc.;\n    the different computation of the ages of, given by the Hebrew and\n          other MSS. of the Old Testament, 65, etc.;\n    the opinion of those who believe they did not live so long as is\n          stated, considered, 68;\n    was the age of puberty later among, than it is now? 75, etc.\n\n  Antichrist, the time of the last persecution by, hidden, ii. 288, etc;\n    whether the time of the persecution by, is included in the thousand\n          years, 371;\n    the manifestation of, preceding the day of the Lord, 381, etc.;\n    Daniel's predictions respecting the persecution caused by, 393, etc.\n\n  Antiochus of Syria, ii. 275.\n\n  Antipater, ii. 276, 277.\n\n  Antipodes, the idea of, absurd, ii. 118.\n\n  Antiquities, Varro's book respecting human and divine, i. 234, 235.\n\n  Antiquity of the world, the alleged, i. 494, etc.\n\n  Antisthenes, ii. 268.\n\n  Antithesis, i. 457.\n\n  Antoninus, quoted, i. 18.\n\n  Antony, i. 132.\n\n  Apis, and Serapis, the alleged change of name;\n    worshipped, ii. 222, 223.\n\n  Apocryphal Scriptures, ii. 95.\n\n  Apollo and Diana, i. 279.\n\n  Apollo, the weeping statue of, i. 101.\n\n  Apostles, the, whence chosen, ii. 282.\n\n  Apples of Sodom, the, ii. 421.\n\n  Apuleius, referred to, or quoted, i. 56, 137, 324;\n    his book _concerning the God of Socrates_, 326;\n    his definition of man, 329;\n    what he attributes to demons, to whom he ascribes no virtue, 354,\n          355;\n    on the passions which agitate demons, 360;\n    maintains that the poets wrong the gods, 361;\n    his definition of gods and men, 362;\n    the error of, in respect to demons, 419, etc.\n\n  Aquila, the translator, ii. 95, and note.\n\n  Archelaus, i. 308.\n\n  Areopagus, the, ii. 227.\n\n  Argos, the kings of, ii. 222, 223;\n    the fall of the kingdom of, 233.\n\n  Argus, King, ii. 223, 224.\n\n  Aristippus, ii. 268.\n\n  Aristobulus, ii. 276.\n\n  Aristotle, and Plato, i. 323.\n\n  Ark, the, of Noah, a figure of Christ and of His Church, ii. 98, etc.;\n    and the deluge, the literal and allegorical interpretation of, 100;\n    the capacity of, 101;\n    what sort of creatures entered, 101, 102;\n    how the creatures entered, 102;\n    the food required by the creatures in, 102, 103;\n    whether the remotest islands received their _fauna_ from the\n          animals preserved in, 115, etc.\n\n  Ark of the covenant, the, i. 407.\n\n  Art of making gods, the invention of the, i. 343.\n\n  Asbestos, ii. 421.\n\n  Assyrian empire, the, ii. 219;\n    close of, 240.\n\n  Athenians, the, ii. 219.\n\n  Athens, the founding of, and reason of the name, ii. 226.\n\n  Atlas, ii. 224.\n\n  Atys, the interpretation of the mutilation of, i. 291, 292.\n\n  Audians, i. 479, and note.\n\n  Augury, the influence of, i. 162, 168, 169.\n\n  Augustus C\u00e6sar, i. 132.\n\n  Aulus Gellius, the story he relates in the _Noctes Attic\u00e6_ of the\n          Stoic philosopher in a storm at sea, i. 356, 357.\n\n  Aurelius, Bishop, ii. 487.\n\n  Aventinus, king of Latium, deified, ii. 240, 241.\n\n\n  Babylon, the founding of, ii. 111, etc.;\n    meaning of the word, 112, 269.\n\n  _Bacchanalia_, the, ii. 232.\n\n  Baptism, the confession of Christ has the same efficacy as, i. 527,\n          528, 544;\n    of those who think that Catholic, will free from damnation, ii.\n          447, etc., 457, etc.;\n    other references to, 489, 490.\n\n  Barbarians, the, in the sack of Rome, spared those who had taken\n          refuge in Christian churches, i. 2.\n\n  \"Barren, the, hath born seven,\" ii. 173, 174.\n\n  Bassus, the daughter of, restored to life by a dress from the shrine\n          of St. Stephen, ii. 494.\n\n  Bathanarius, count of Africa, and his magnet, ii. 420.\n\n  Beast, the, and his image, ii. 366, 367.\n\n  Beatific vision, the nature of, considered, ii. 534-540.\n\n  Beauty of the universe, the, i. 457.\n\n  \"Beginning, in the,\" i. 476.\n\n  Berecynthia, i. 52, and note.\n\n  Binding the devil, ii. 357.\n\n  Birds, the, offered by Abraham, not to be divided,--import of this,\n          ii. 137.\n\n  Birds, the, of Diomede, ii. 234, 238.\n\n  Blessed life, the, not to be obtained by the intercession of demons,\n          but of Christ alone, i. 374.\n\n  Blessedness, the, of the righteous in this life compared with that of\n          our first parents in Paradise, i. 451;\n    of good angels,--its cause, 487, etc.;\n    the true, ii. 43;\n    eternal, the promise of, 475.\n\n  Blessings, the, with which the Creator has filled this life, although\n          it is obnoxious to the curse, ii. 522-529.\n\n  Boasting, Christians ought to be free from, i. 209.\n\n  Bodies, earthly, refutation of those who affirm that they cannot be\n          made incorruptible and eternal, i. 538;\n    refutation of those who hold that they cannot be in heavenly\n          places, 540, etc.;\n    of the saints, after the resurrection, in what sense spiritual, 546;\n    the animal and spiritual, 547-551;\n    can they last for ever in burning fire? ii. 414-418;\n    against the wise men who deny that they can be transferred to\n          heavenly habitations, 476;\n    the Platonists refuted, who argue that they cannot inhabit heaven,\n          501;\n    all blemishes shall be removed from the resurrection bodies, the\n          substance of, remaining, 572;\n    the substance of, however they may have been disintegrated, shall\n          in the resurrection be reunited, 515;\n    the opinion of Porphyry, that souls must be wholly released from,\n          in order to be happy, exploded by Plato, 531.\n\n  Body, the, sanctity of, not polluted by the violence done to it by\n          another's lust, i. 26, 27;\n    the Platonic and Manich\u00e6an idea of, ii. 8, etc.;\n    the new spiritual, 516;\n    obviously meant to be the habitation of a reasonable soul, 526.\n\n  Body, the, of Christ, against those who think that the participation\n          of, will save from damnation, ii. 447, 448.\n\n  Body of Christ, the Church the, ii. 511.\n\n  Books opened, the, ii. 374.\n\n  Bread, they that were full of,--who? ii. 173.\n\n  Breathing, the, of God, when man was made a living soul, distinguished\n          from the breathing of Christ on His disciples, i. 551.\n\n  Brutus, Junius, his unjust treatment of Tarquinius Collatinus, i. 68,\n          111, 112;\n    kills his own son, 210.\n\n  Bull, the sacred, of Egypt, ii. 223.\n\n  Burial, the denial of, to Christians, no hurt to them, i. 19;\n    the reason of, in the case of Christians, 20, etc.\n\n  Busiris, ii. 230.\n\n\n  C\u00e6sar, Augustus, i. 132.\n\n  C\u00e6sar, Julius, the statement of, respecting an enemy when sacking a\n          city, i. 7, etc.;\n    claims to be descended from Venus, 94;\n    assassination of, 132.\n\n  Cain, and Abel, belonged respectively to the two cities, the earthly\n          and the heavenly, ii. 50;\n    the fratricidal act of the former corresponding with the crime of\n          the founder of Rome, 54, etc.;\n    cause of the crime of,--God's expostulation with,--exposition of\n          the viciousness of his offering, 57-61;\n    his reason for building a city so early in the history of the human\n          race, 61, etc.;\n    and Seth, the heads of the two cities, the earthly and heavenly, 81;\n    why the line of, terminates in the eighth generation from Adam,\n          84-89;\n    why the genealogy of, is continued to the deluge, while after the\n          mention of Enos the narrative returns to the creation, 89,\n          etc.\n\n  Cakus (\u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2), the giant, ii. 317.\n\n  Camillus, Furius, the vile treatment of, by the Romans, i. 68, 115,\n          211.\n\n  Canaan, the land of, the time of the fulfilment of God's promise of,\n          to Abraham, ii. 166.\n\n  Canaan, and Noah, ii. 106.\n\n  Candelabrum, a particular, in a temple of Venus, ii. 423, 424.\n\n  Cann\u00e6, the battle of, i. 121.\n\n  Canon, the ecclesiastical, has excluded certain writings, on account\n          of their great antiquity, ii. 264, 265.\n\n  Canonical Scriptures, the, i. 438, ii. 263;\n    the concord of, in contrast with the discordance of philosophical\n          opinion, 267, 268.\n\n  Cappadocia, the mares of, ii. 422.\n\n  Captivity of the Jews, the, the end of, ii. 246.\n\n  Captivity, the, of the saints, consolation in, i. 22.\n\n  Carnal life, the, ii. 2, etc.\n\n  Carthaginians, the, their treatment of Regulus, i. 23.\n\n  Cataline, i. 80.\n\n  Catholic truth, the, confirmed by the dissensions of heretics, ii.\n          283-285.\n\n  Cato, what are we to think of his conduct in committing suicide? i.\n          34;\n    excelled by Regulus, 35;\n    his virtue, 202;\n    was his suicide fortitude or weakness? ii. 305.\n\n  Catosus, the cook, ii. 492.\n\n  Cecrops, ii. 224, 226.\n\n  Ceres, i. 279;\n    the rites of, 283.\n\n  Ch\u00e6remon, cited by Porphyry in relation to the mysteries of Isis and\n          Osiris, i. 399.\n\n  Chald\u00e6an, a certain, quoted by Porphyry as complaining of the\n          obstacles experienced from another man's influence with the\n          gods to his efforts at self-purification, i. 395, 396.\n\n  Charcoal, the peculiar properties of, ii. 418.\n\n  Chariots, the, of God, ii. 389.\n\n  Charity, the efficacy of, ii. 466.\n\n  Chickens, the sacred, and the treaty of Numantia, i. 124.\n\n  Children of the flesh, and children of promise, ii. 51.\n\n  Chiliasts, the, ii. 357.\n\n  Christ, the preserving power of the name of, in the sack of Rome, i.\n          2, etc., 9, etc.;\n    the mystery of the redemption of, at no past time awanting, but\n          declared in various forms, 299, etc.;\n    the incarnation of, 414;\n    faith in the incarnation of, alone justifies, 416;\n    the true Wisdom, but Porphyry fails to recognise, 422, 423;\n    the Platonists blush to acknowledge the incarnation of, 423, etc.;\n    the grace of, opens a way for the soul's deliverance, 430, etc.;\n    the knowledge of God attained only through, 437, etc.;\n    possessed true human emotions, ii. 17, etc.;\n    the passion of, typified by Noah's nakedness, 106;\n    described in the 45th Psalm, 201-204;\n    the priesthood and passion of, described in the 110th and 122d\n          Psalms, 204;\n    the resurrection of, predicted in the Psalms, 205;\n    the passion of, foretold in the Book of Wisdom, 209;\n    the birth of, 277;\n    the birth and death of, 290, 291;\n    Porphyry's account of the responses of the oracles respecting, 334,\n          etc.;\n    the world to be judged by, 406, etc.;\n    the one Son of God by nature, 441;\n    the Foundation, 460;\n    the world's belief in, the result of divine power, 483;\n    the measure of the stature of, 508;\n    the Perfect Man, and His Body, 511;\n    the body of, after His resurrection, 514;\n    the grace of, alone delivers us from the misery caused by the first\n          sin, 520, 521.\n\n  Christian faith, the certainty of, ii. 328.\n\n  Christian religion, the, health-giving, i. 88;\n    alone, revealed the malignity of evil spirits, 300;\n    the length it is to last foolishly and lyingly fixed by the\n          heathen, ii. 289-292.\n\n  Christianity, the calamities of Rome attributed to, by the heathen,\n          i. 23, 50, 51;\n    the effrontery of such an imputation to, 132.\n\n  Christians, why they are permitted to suffer evils from their\n          enemies, i. 39;\n    the reply of, to those who reproach them with suffering, 41;\n    ought to be far from boasting, 209;\n    the God whom they serve, the true God, to whom alone sacrifice\n          ought to be offered, ii. 333, etc.\n\n  Chronology, the enormously long, of heathen writers, i. 494, 495, 496;\n    the discrepancy in that of the Hebrew and other MSS. in relation to\n          the lives of the antediluvians, ii. 65, etc.\n\n  Church, the sons of the, often hidden among the wicked, and false\n          Christians within the, i. 46;\n    the indiscriminate increase of, ii. 281, 282, 283;\n    the endless glory of, 377, etc.;\n    the body of Christ, 511, etc.\n\n  Cicero, his opinion of the Roman republic, i. 74;\n    on the miseries of this life, 302;\n    his definition of a republic,--was there ever a Roman republic\n          answering to it? 330, 331;\n    variously quoted, 57, 58, 62, 63, 87, 109, 117, 129, 165, 170, 171,\n          173, 205, 256, 511, ii. 480, 482.\n\n  Cincinnatus, Quintus, i. 213.\n\n  Circe, ii. 235, 237.\n\n  Circumcision, instituted, ii. 141;\n    the punishment of the male who had not received, 141, 142.\n\n  City, the celestial, i. 207.\n\n  City of God, the, i. 418;\n    the origin of, and of the opposing city, 436;\n    nature of, and of the earthly, ii. 47;\n    Abel the founder of, and Cain of the earthly, 50;\n    the citizens of, and of the earthly, 51;\n    the weakness of the citizens of, during their earthly pilgrimage,\n          56;\n    and the earthly, compared and contrasted, 292;\n    what produces peace, and what discord, between, and the earthly,\n          326, etc.;\n    the eternal felicity of, 540-545.\n\n  Claudian, the poet, quoted, i. 225.\n\n  C\u0153lestis, i. 52, and note;\n    the mysteries of, 86.\n\n  Collatinus, Tarquinius, the vile treatment of, by Junius Brutus, i.\n          68, 111, etc.\n\n  Concord, the temple of, erected, i. 126;\n    the wars which followed the building of, 128, etc.\n\n  Confession of Christ, the efficacy of, for the remission of sins, i.\n          527.\n\n  Conflagration of the world, the, ii. 377;\n    where shall the saints be during? 380.\n\n  Confusion of tongues, the, ii. 111, etc.;\n    God's coming down to cause, 113, etc.\n\n  Conjugal union, the, as instituted and blessed by God, ii. 38.\n\n  Constantine, i. 219, etc.;\n    the prosperity granted to, by God, 223, etc.\n\n  Consuls, the first Roman, their fate, ii. 111, etc.\n\n  Corn, the gods which were supposed to preside over, at the various\n          stages of its growth, gathering in, etc., i. 144.\n\n  Creation, i. 439, 443;\n    the reason and cause of, 461, 462;\n    the beauty and goodness of, ii. 258.\n\n  Creation, the, of angels, i. 445;\n    of the human race in time, 500;\n    of both angels and men, ii. 472, etc.\n\n  Creator, the, is distinguished from His works by piety, i. 297, etc.;\n    sin had not its origin in, 456.\n\n  Creatures, the, to be estimated by their utility, i. 455.\n\n  Cum\u00e6an Sibyl, the, i. 421.\n\n  Curiatii and Horatii, the, i. 105.\n\n  Curtius leaps into the gulf in the Forum, i. 211.\n\n  Curubis, a comedian, miraculously healed, ii. 490.\n\n  Cybele, i. 52, 53;\n    the priests of, 56.\n\n  Cycles of time maintained by some, i. 498, 505, etc., 511, 513.\n\n  Cynics, the foolish beastliness of the, ii. 36;\n    further referred to, 297.\n\n  Cynocephalus, i. 65.\n\n\n  Damned, the punishment of the, ii. 432.\n\n  Dan\u00e4e, ii. 232.\n\n  Darkness, the, when the Lord was crucified, i. 108, 109.\n\n  David, the promise made to, in his Son;\n    Nathan's message to, ii. 189, etc., 193, etc.;\n    God's \"ancient compassions\" sworn to, 195, etc., 198;\n    his concern in writing the Psalms, 199;\n    his reign and merit, 209.\n\n  Day, the seventh, the meaning of God's resting on, i. 444.\n\n  Days, the first, i. 443.\n\n  Days, lucky and unlucky, i. 186, 187.\n\n  \"Days of the tree of life,\" the, ii. 402.\n\n  Dead, the, given up to judgment by the sea, death, and hell, ii. 375.\n\n  Dead, prayers for the, ii. 453.\n\n  Dead men, the religion of the pagans has reference to, i. 347.\n\n  Death, caused by the fall of man, i. 521;\n    that which can affect an immortal soul, and that to which the body\n          is subject, 521, 522;\n    is it the punishment of sin, even in case of the good? 522-524;\n    why, if it is the punishment of sin, is it not withheld from the\n          regenerate? 524;\n    although an evil, yet made a good to the good, 525;\n    the evil of, as the separation of soul and body, 526;\n    that which the unbaptized suffer for the confession of Christ,\n          527, etc.;\n    the saints, by suffering the first, are freed from the second, 528;\n    the moment of, when it actually occurs, 528, 529;\n    the life which mortals claim may be fitly called, 529, 530;\n    whether one can be living and yet in the state of, at the same\n          time, 531;\n    what kind of, involved in the threatenings addressed to our first\n          parents, 533;\n    concerning those philosophers who think it is not penal, 536;\n    the second, ii. 343, etc.\n\n  Death, when it may be inflicted without committing murder, i. 32.\n\n  Deborah, ii. 233.\n\n  \"Debts, forgive us our,\" ii. 467, 468.\n\n  Decii, the, ii. 212.\n\n  Deliverance, the way of the soul's, which grace throws open, i. 430.\n\n  Dem\u00e6netus, ii. 235.\n\n  Demon of Socrates, the, Apuleius on, i. 326, 327.\n\n  Demoniacal possessions, ii. 303.\n\n  Demonolatry, illicit acts connected with, i. 394.\n\n  Demons, the vicissitudes of life, not dependent on, i. 79;\n    look after their own ends only, 82;\n    incite to crime by the pretence of divine authority, 83;\n    give certain obscure instructions in morals, while their own\n          solemnities publicly inculcate wickedness, 85, etc.;\n    what they are, 326;\n    not better than men because of their having aerial bodies, 327,\n          etc.;\n    what Apuleius thought concerning the manners and actions of, 329,\n          etc.;\n    is it proper to worship? 331, etc.;\n    ought the advocacy of, with the gods, to be employed? 332, 334;\n    are the good gods more willing to have intercourse with, than with\n          men? 335;\n    do the gods use them as messengers, or interpreters, or are they\n          deceived by? 335, etc.;\n    we must reject the worship of, 338;\n    are there any good, to whom the guardianship of the soul may be\n          committed? 354;\n    what Apuleius attributes to, 354, 355;\n    the passions which agitate, 360;\n    does the intercession of, obtain for men the favour of the\n          celestial gods? 363;\n    men, according to Plotinus, less wretched than, 364;\n    the opinion of the Platonists that the souls of men become, 365;\n    the three opposite qualities by which the Platonists distinguish\n          between the nature of man, and that of, 365, 366;\n    how can they mediate between gods and men, having nothing in common\n          with either? 366;\n    the Platonist idea of the necessity of the mediation of, 371;\n    mean, by their intercession, to turn man from the path of truth,\n          375;\n    the name has never a good signification, 375;\n    the kind of knowledge which puffs up the, 376;\n    to what extent the Lord was pleased to make Himself known to, 376,\n          377;\n    the difference between the knowledge possessed by, and that of the\n          holy angels, 377;\n    the power delegated to, for the trial of the saints, 411;\n    where the saints obtain power against, 412;\n    seek to be worshipped, 419;\n    error of Apuleius in regard to, 419, etc.;\n    strange transformations of men, said to have been wrought by, ii.\n          235, 238;\n    the friendship of good angels in this life, rendered insecure by\n          the deception of, 313, etc.\n\n  Demons, various other references to, i. 174, 222, 223, 281, 288, 301,\n          302, 303, 304, 305, 312, 326, 327, 345, 370, 411, 420,\n          ii. 223, 289, 347.\n\n  \"Desired One, the,\" of all nations, ii. 275.\n\n  Deucalion's flood, ii. 228.\n\n  Devil, the, how he abode not in the truth, i. 454;\n    how is it said that he sinned from the beginning? 454, 455;\n    the reason of the fall of (the wicked angel), ii. 46, 47;\n    stirs up persecution, 284;\n    the nature of, _as nature_, not evil, 320, 321;\n    the binding of, 357;\n    cast into the abyss, 358;\n    seducing the nations, 359;\n    the binding and loosing of, 360, etc.;\n    stirs up Gog and Magog against the Church, 369, etc.;\n    the damnation of, 373;\n    of those who deny the eternal punishment of, 450.\n\n  Devil, a young man freed from a, at the monument of Protasius and\n          Gervasius, ii. 491;\n    a young woman freed from a, by anointing, 492.\n\n  Devils, marvels wrought by, ii. 424.\n\n  Diamond, the, the peculiar properties of, ii. 419.\n\n  Diana, and Apollo, i. 279.\n\n  Dictator, the first, i. 116.\n\n  Diomede and his companions, who were changed into birds, ii. 234, 238.\n\n  Dis, i. 279, 288, 296.\n\n  Discord, why not a goddess as well as Concord? i. 127.\n\n  Divination, i. 302.\n\n  Doctor, a gouty, of Carthage, miraculously healed, ii. 489.\n\n  Duration and space, infinite, not to be comprehended, i. 441.\n\n\n  Earth, the, affirmed by Varro to be a goddess,--reason of his\n          opinion, i. 286.\n\n  \"Earth, in the midst of the,\" ii. 176, 177, 178.\n\n  Earth, holy, from Jerusalem, the efficacy of, ii. 490, 491.\n\n  Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom, the Books of, ii. 209.\n\n  Eclipses, i. 108, 109.\n\n  Education, the divine, of mankind, i. 402.\n\n  Egeria, the nymph, and Numa, i. 303.\n\n  Egypt, a fig-tree of a peculiar kind found in, ii. 421.\n\n  Egyptians, the mendacity of, in ascribing an extravagant antiquity to\n          their science, ii. 266, 267.\n\n  Eleusinian rites of Ceres, the, i. 283.\n\n  Eleven, the significance of the number, ii. 88.\n\n  Eli, the message of the man of God to, ii. 179-183.\n\n  Elias, the coming of, before the judgment, ii. 405.\n\n  Elisha and Gehazi, ii. 536, 537.\n\n  Emotions, mental, opinions of the Peripatetics and Stoics respecting,\n          i. 355, 356.\n\n  Emotions and affections, good and bad, ii. 10, 12, 15.\n\n  Emperors, the Christian, the happiness of, i. 222, etc.\n\n  Empire, a great, acquired by war,--is it to be reckoned among good\n          things? i. 138;\n    should good men wish to rule an extensive? 152, 153, 154.\n\n  Empire, the Roman. _See_ Roman Empire.\n\n  Enemies of God, the, are not so by nature, but by will, i. 484.\n\n  Enlightenment from above, Plotinus respecting, i. 385.\n\n  Enoch, the seventh from Adam, the significance of the translation of,\n          ii. 84;\n    left some divine writings, 96.\n\n  Enoch, the son of Cain, ii. 81.\n\n  Enos, the son of Seth, ii. 81;\n    a type of Christ, 82-84.\n\n  Entity, none contrary to the divine, i. 483.\n\n  Epictetus, quoted on mental emotions, i. 357.\n\n  Ericthonius, ii. 230.\n\n  Errors, the, of the human judgment, when the truth is hidden, ii.\n          209, etc.\n\n  Erythr\u00e6an Sibyl, the, her predictions of Christ, ii. 242.\n\n  Esau and Jacob, the dissimilarity of the character and actions of,\n          i. 182;\n    the things mystically prefigured by, ii. 153, etc.\n\n  Esdras and Maccabees, the Books of, ii. 262.\n\n  Eternal life, the gift of God, i. 257;\n    the promise of, uttered before eternal times, 504.\n\n  Eternal punishment, ii. 433.\n    _See_ Punishment.\n\n  Eucharius, a Spanish bishop, cured of stone by the relics of St.\n          Stephen, ii. 493.\n\n  _Eudemons_, i. 365, 368.\n\n  \u0395\u1f50\u03c3\u03ad\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, i. 384.\n\n  Evil, no natural, i. 461.\n\n  Evil will, a, no efficient cause of, i. 490.\n\n  Existence, and knowledge of it, and love of both, i. 469, etc., 471,\n          etc.\n\n  Eye, the, of the resurrection body, the power of, ii. 537.\n\n\n  Fables invented by the heathen in the times of the judges of Israel,\n          ii. 231.\n\n  Fabricius and Pyrrhus, i. 213.\n\n  Faith, justification by, i. 416, etc.\n\n  Faith and Virtue, honoured by the Romans with temples, i. 156, 157.\n\n  Fall of man, the, and its results, foreknown by God, i. 514;\n    mortality contracted by, 521;\n    the second death results from, ii. 1;\n    the nature of, 22, etc., 25, etc.\n\n  Fate, i. 178;\n    the name misapplied by some when they use it of the divine will,\n          189.\n\n  Fathers, the two, of the two cities, sprung from one progenitor, ii.\n          81.\n\n  Fear and Dread, made gods, i. 161.\n\n  Felicity, the gift of God, i. 257;\n    the eternal, of the city of God, ii. 540-545.\n\n  Felicity, the goddess of, i. 155;\n    the Romans ought to have been content, with Virtue and, 157, 158;\n    for a long time not worshipped by the Romans; her deserts, 161,\n          162, 163.\n\n  Fever, worshipped as a deity, i. 65 and note, 102.\n\n  Fig-tree, a singular, of Egypt, ii. 421.\n\n  Fimbria, the destruction of Ilium by, i. 96, 97.\n\n  Fire, the peculiar properties of, ii. 418.\n\n  Fire, the, whirlwind, and the sword, ii. 389.\n\n  Fire, saved so as by, ii. 460.\n\n  Fire, the, which comes down from heaven to consume the enemies of the\n          holy city, ii. 370.\n\n  Fire, the, and the worm that dieth not, ii. 433;\n    of hell,--is it material? and if it be so, can it burn wicked\n          spirits? 434, etc.\n\n  First man (our first parents), the, the plenitude of the human race\n          contained in, i. 519;\n    the fall of, 521;\n    what was the first punishment of? 534;\n    the state in which he was made, and that into which he fell, 534,\n          535;\n    forsook God, before God forsook him, 535;\n    effects of the sin of,--the second death, ii. 1, etc.;\n    was he, before the fall, free from perturbations of soul? 20;\n    the temptation and fall of, 22-25;\n    nature of the first sin of, 25;\n    the pride of the sin of, 28;\n    justice of the punishment of, 28-31;\n    the nakedness of, 32;\n    the transgression of, did not abolish the blessing of fecundity, 37;\n    begat offspring in Paradise without blushing, 44-46.\n\n  First parents, our. _See_ First Man.\n\n  First principles of all things, the, according to the ancient\n          philosophy, i. 313.\n\n  First sin, the nature of the, ii. 25.\n\n  Flaccianus, ii. 242.\n\n  Flesh, the, of believers, the resurrection of, i. 544;\n    the world at large believes in the resurrection of [_see_\n          Resurrection], ii. 477;\n    of a dead man, which has become the flesh of a living man,--whose\n          shall it be in the resurrection? 515.\n\n  Flesh, living after the, ii. 2, etc., 4, etc., 6, etc.;\n    children of the, and of the promise, 51.\n\n  Florentius, the tailor, how he prayed for a coat, and got it, ii. 492.\n\n  Foreknowledge, the, of God, and the free-will of man, i. 190, etc.\n\n  Forgiveness of debts, prayed for, ii. 467, 468.\n\n  Fortitude, ii. 304, 305.\n\n  Fortune, the goddess of, i. 155, 263.\n\n  Foundation, the, the opinion of those who think that even depraved\n          Catholics will be saved from damnation on account of,\n          considered, ii. 448, etc., 460, etc.;\n    who has Christ for? 460, 461.\n\n  Fountain, the singular, of the Garamant\u00e6, ii. 421.\n\n  Free-will of man, the, and the foreknowledge of God, i. 190, etc.\n\n  Free-will, in the state of perfect felicity, ii. 542.\n\n  Friendship, the, of good men, anxieties connected with, ii. 311;\n    of good angels, rendered insecure by the deceit of demons, 313, etc.\n\n  Fruit, i. 467.\n\n  _Fugalia_, the, i. 54, 55.\n\n  Furnace, a smoking, and a lamp of fire passing between the pieces of\n          Abraham's sacrifice, the import of, ii. 139.\n\n\n  Galli, the, i. 56, and note, 289, 290.\n\n  Games, restored in Rome during the first Punic war, i. 118.\n\n  Ganymede, ii. 232.\n\n  Garamant\u00e6, the singular fountain of the, ii. 421.\n\n  Gauls, the, Rome invaded by, i. 115, 116.\n\n  Gehazi and Elisha, ii. 536, 537.\n\n  Generation, would there have been, in Paradise if man had not sinned?\n          ii. 39, etc., 41, etc.\n\n  Genius, and Saturn, both shown to be really Jupiter, i. 275, etc.\n\n  Giants, the offspring of the sons of God and daughters of men,--and\n          other, ii. 93, etc., 96.\n\n  Glory, the difference between, and the desire of dominion, i. 215;\n    shameful to make the virtues serve human, 217;\n    the, of the latter house, ii. 280, 281;\n    the endless, of the Church, 377, etc.\n\n  God, the vicissitudes of life dependent on the will of, i. 79, etc.;\n    not the soul of the world, 151;\n    rational animals not parts of, 151, 152;\n    THE ONE, to be worshipped, although His name is unknown, the giver\n          of felicity, 164, 165;\n    the times of kings and kingdoms ordered by, 175;\n    the kingdom of the Jews founded by, 175;\n    the foreknowledge of, and the free-will of man, 190, etc.;\n    the providence of, 198, etc., 403;\n    all the glory of the righteous is in, 205;\n    what He gives to the followers of truth to enjoy above His general\n          bounties, 199;\n    the worship of, 383, 384, 386;\n    the sacrifices due to Him only, 387, etc.;\n    the sacrifices not required, but enjoined by, for the exhibition of\n          truth, 388;\n    the true and perfect sacrifice due to, 390, etc.;\n    invisible, yet has often made Himself visible, 401, etc.;\n    our dependence for temporal good, 402;\n    angels fulfil the providence of, 403, 404;\n    sin had not its origin in, 457;\n    the eternal knowledge, will, and design of, 459, etc.;\n    has He been always sovereign Lord, and has He always had creatures\n          over whom He exercised His sovereignty? 501, etc.;\n    His promise of eternal life uttered before eternal times, 504;\n    the unchangeable counsel and will of, defended against objections,\n          505;\n    refutation of the opinion that His knowledge cannot comprehend\n          things infinite, 507;\n    the fall of man foreknown by, 514;\n    the Creator of every kind of creature, 516;\n    the providence of, not disturbed by the wickedness of angels or of\n          men, ii. 46;\n    the anger of, 97, etc., 454;\n    the coming down of, to confound the language of the builders of\n          Babel, 113, etc.;\n    whether the, of the Christians is the true, to whom alone sacrifice\n          ought to be paid, 333, etc.;\n    the will of, unchangeable and eternal, 474.\n\n  Gods, the, cities never spared on account of, i. 3, etc.;\n    folly of the Romans in trusting, 4, etc.;\n    the worshippers of, never received healthy precepts from,--the\n          impurity of the worship of, 51;\n    obscenities practised in honour of the Mother of the, 53;\n    never inculcated holiness of life, 55;\n    the shameful actions of, as displayed in theatrical exhibitions, 57;\n    the reason why they suffered false or real crimes to be attributed\n          to them, 59;\n    the Romans showed a more delicate regard for themselves than for\n          the, 61;\n    the Romans should have considered those who desired to be worshipped\n          in a licentious manner as unworthy of being honoured as, 62;\n    Plato better than, 63;\n    if they had any regard for Rome, the Romans should have received\n          good laws from them, 66;\n    took no means to prevent the republic from being ruined by\n          immorality, 77, etc.;\n    the vicissitudes of life not dependent on, 79, etc.;\n    incite to evil actions, 83, etc.;\n    give secret and obscure instructions in morals, while their\n          solemnities publicly incite to wickedness, 85;\n    the obscenities of the plays consecrated to, contributed to\n          overthrow the republic, 87;\n    the evils which alone the pagans feared, not averted by, 91, etc.;\n    were they justified in permitting the destruction of Troy? 92;\n    could not be offended at the adultery of Paris, the crime being so\n          common among themselves, 93;\n    Varro's opinion of the utility of men feigning themselves to be the\n          offspring of, 94;\n    not likely they were offended at the adultery of Paris, as they\n          were not at the adultery of the mother of Romulus, 94;\n    exacted no penalty for the fratricidal conduct of Romulus, 95;\n    is it credible that the peace of Numa's reign was owing to? 98;\n    new, introduced by Numa, 101;\n    the Romans added many to those of Numa, 102;\n    Rome not defended by, 114, etc.;\n    which of the, can the Romans suppose presided over the rise and\n          welfare of the empire? 143, etc.;\n    the silly and absurd multiplication of, for places and things, 144;\n    divers set over divers parts of the world, 146;\n    the many, who are asserted by pagan doctors to be the one Jove,\n          148, etc.;\n    the knowledge and worship of the, which Varro glories in having\n          conferred on the Romans, 159;\n    the reasons by which the pagans defended their worshipping the\n          divine gifts themselves among the, 163, etc.;\n    the scenic plays which they have exacted from their worshippers,\n          165;\n    the three kinds of, discovered by Sc\u00e6vola, 166, etc.;\n    whether the worship of, has been of service to the Romans, 168;\n    what their worshippers have owned they have thought about, 170;\n    the opinions of Varro about, 172;\n    of those who profess to worship them on account of eternal\n          advantages, 229, etc.;\n    Varro's thoughts about the, of the nations, 233, etc.;\n    the worshippers of, regard human things more than divine, 235, etc.;\n    Varro's distribution of, into fabulous, natural, and civil, 238,\n          etc.;\n    the mythical and civil, 240;\n    natural explanations of, 246, etc.;\n    the special offices of, 248;\n    those presiding over the marriage chamber, 249, 250;\n    the popular worship of, vehemently censured by Seneca, 252-254;\n    unable to bestow eternal life, 256, 257;\n    the select, 258, 259;\n    no reason can be assigned for forming the select class of, 260;\n    those which preside over births, 260;\n    the inferior and the select compared, 364;\n    the secret doctrine of the pagans concerning the physical\n          interpretation of, 266;\n    Varro pronounces his own opinions concerning, uncertain, 280, 281;\n    Varro's doctrine concerning, not self-consistent, 295, etc.;\n    distinguished from men and demons, 326;\n    do they use the demons as messengers? 335;\n    Hermes laments the error of his forefathers in inventing the art of\n          making, 343;\n    scarcely any of, who were not dead men, 348;\n    the Platonists maintain that the poets wrong the, 361;\n    Apuleius' definition of, 363;\n    does the intercession of demons secure the favour of, for men? 363;\n    according to the Platonists, they decline intercourse with men,\n          371, etc.;\n    the name falsely given to those of the nations, yet given in\n          Scripture to angels and men, 378, etc.;\n    threats employed towards, 399;\n    philosophers assigned to each of, different functions, ii. 327.\n\n  Gods, the multitudes of, for every place and thing, i. 144, etc.,\n          158, 159, 248, 249, 259, 260.\n\n  Gods, the invention of the art of making, i. 343.\n\n  Gog and Magog, ii. 369.\n\n  Good, no nature in which there is not some, ii. 320.\n\n  Good, the chief, ii. 288;\n    various opinions of the philosophers respecting, 293;\n    the three leading views of, which to be chosen, 299, etc.;\n    the Christian view of, 301, etc.\n\n  Good men, and wicked, the advantages and disadvantages\n          indiscriminately occurring to, i. 10;\n    reasons for administering correction to both together, 11, etc.;\n    what Solomon says of things happening alike to both, 348.\n\n  Goods, the loss of, no loss to the saints, i. 14, etc.\n\n  Gospel, the, made more famous by the sufferings of its preachers,\n          ii. 282.\n\n  Gracchi, the civil dissensions occasioned by, i. 126.\n\n  Grace of God, the, the operation of, in relation to believers, ii.\n          441;\n    pertains to every epoch of life, 442;\n    delivers from the miseries occasioned by the first sin, 520, 521.\n\n  Great Mother, the, the abominable sacred rites of, i. 292, 293.\n\n  Greeks, the conduct of the, on the sack of Troy, i. 6, 7.\n\n\n  Habakkuk, the prophecy and prayer of, ii. 252.\n\n  Hagar, the relation of, to Sarah and Abraham, ii. 139.\n\n  Haggai's prophecy respecting the glory of the latter house, ii. 280,\n          281.\n\n  Hadrian yields up portions of the Roman empire, i. 169, 170.\n\n  Ham, the conduct of, towards his father, ii. 105;\n    the sons of, 109.\n\n  Hannah's prophetic song, an exposition of, ii. 170-179.\n\n  Hannibal, his invasion of Italy, and victories over the Romans, i.\n          120;\n    his destruction of Saguntum, 121, 122.\n\n  Happiness, the gift of God, i. 257;\n    of the saints in the future life, ii. 314, 315.\n\n  Happiness, the, desired by those who reject the Christian religion,\n          i. 72, etc.\n\n  Happy man, the, described by contrast, i. 138.\n\n  Heaven, God shall call to, ii. 398.\n\n  Hebrew Bible, the, and the Septuagint,--which to be followed in\n          computing the years of the antediluvians, ii. 70, etc.\n\n  Hebrew language, the original, ii. 121, etc.;\n    written character of, 265, 266.\n\n  Hebrews, the Epistle to the, ii. 135.\n\n  Hecate, the reply of, when questioned respecting Christ, ii. 335.\n\n  Heifer, goat, and ram, three years old, in Abraham's sacrifice,--the\n          import of, ii. 136, 137.\n\n  Hell, ii. 432;\n    is the fire of, material? and if so, can it burn wicked spirits?\n          434.\n\n  Hercules, ii. 225, 230;\n    the story of the sacristan of, i. 244.\n\n  Here, i. 411.\n\n  Heretics, the Catholic faith confirmed by the dissensions of, ii.\n          283, 284.\n\n  Hermes, the god, i. 349.\n\n  Hermes Trismegistus, respecting idolatry and the abolition of the\n          superstitions of the Egyptians, i. 339, etc.;\n    openly confesses the error of his forefathers, the destruction of\n          which he yet deplores, 342, etc.\n\n  Herod, ii. 277;\n    a persecutor, 287.\n\n  Heroes of the Church, the, ii. 411.\n\n  Hesperius, miraculously delivered from evil spirits, ii. 490.\n\n  Hippocrates quoted in relation to twins, i. 179.\n\n  _Histriones_, i. 63, note.\n\n  Holofernes, his inquiry respecting the Israelites, and Achior's\n          answer, ii. 126.\n\n  Holy Ghost, the, i. 553.\n\n  Homer, quoted, i. 92, 189.\n\n  Hope, the influence of, ii. 307;\n    the saints now blessed in, 330.\n\n  Horace, quoted, i. 5, 204.\n\n  Horatii and Curiatii, the, i. 105, 106.\n\n  Hortensius, the first dictator, i. 116.\n\n  Hosea, his prophecies respecting the things of the gospel, ii.\n          247-249.\n\n  Human race, the, the creation of, in time, i. 500;\n    created at first in one individual, 513, 514;\n    the plenitude of, contained in the first man, 519.\n\n  Hydromancy, i. 302.\n\n  Hyrcanus, ii. 276.\n\n\n  Ilium, modern, destroyed by Fimbria, i. 96, 97.\n\n  Image of the beast, the, ii. 366, 367.\n\n  Image of God, the human soul created in the, i. 515.\n\n  Images of the gods, not used by the ancient Romans, i. 173.\n\n  Imitation of the gods, i. 56.\n\n  Immortality, the portion of man, had he not sinned, i. 521, 542, etc.\n\n  Incarnation of Christ, the, i. 414, ii. 277;\n    faith in, alone justifies, 416, etc.;\n    the Platonists, in their impiety, blush to acknowledge, 423, etc.\n\n  Innocentia, of Carthage, miraculously cured of cancer, ii. 488, 489.\n\n  Innocentius, of Carthage, miraculously cured of fistula, ii. 485-488.\n\n  Ino, ii. 233.\n\n  Intercession of the saints,--of those who think that, on account of,\n          no man shall be damned in the last judgment, ii. 445, etc.,\n          451, etc.\n\n  Io, daughter of, ii. 221.\n\n  Ionic school of philosophy, the founder of the, i. 307.\n\n  Iren\u00e6us, a tax-gatherer, the son of, restored to life by means of the\n          oil of St. Stephen, ii. 494.\n\n  Isaac, and Ishmael, ii. 52;\n    a type, 53;\n    the birth of, and import of his name, 146, 147;\n    the offering up of, 148;\n    Rebecca, the wife of, 149;\n    the oracle and blessing received by, just as his father died, 152.\n\n  Isaiah, the predictions of, respecting Christ, ii. 249.\n\n  Isis and Osiris, i. 349, 351, 395, ii. 221, 223, 264, 266.\n\n  Israel, the name given to Jacob,--the import of, ii. 157.\n\n  Israel, the nation of, its increase in, and deliverance from Egypt,\n          ii. 161-163;\n    were there any outside of, before Christ, who belonged to the\n          fellowship of the holy city? 279, etc.\n\n  Italic school of philosophy, the, i. 306.\n\n\n  Jacob, and Esau, the things mysteriously prefigured by, ii. 153, etc.;\n    his mission to Mesopotamia, 155;\n    his dream, 156;\n    his wives, 157;\n    why called Israel, 157;\n    how said to have gone into Egypt with seventy-five souls, 158;\n    his blessing on Judah, 159;\n    his blessing the sons of Joseph, 161;\n    the times of, and of Joseph, 221, etc.\n\n  Janus, the temple of, i. 98;\n    the relation of, to births, 260, 261;\n    nothing infamous related of, 265;\n    is it reasonable to separate Terminus and? 268;\n    why two faces, and sometimes four, given to the image of? 269;\n    compared with Jupiter, 270;\n    why he has received no star, 278.\n\n  Japhet, ii. 105.\n\n  Jeroboam, ii. 214.\n\n  Jerome, his labours as a translator of Scripture, ii. 271;\n    his commentary on Daniel referred to, 394.\n\n  Jerusalem, the new, coming down from heaven, ii. 377, etc.\n\n  Jews, the, the kingdom of, founded by God, i. 175;\n    what Seneca thought of, 255, 256;\n    their unbelief, foretold in the Psalms, ii. 208;\n    end of the captivity of,--their prophets, 246, etc.;\n    the many adversities endured by, 274, etc.;\n    the dispersion of, predicted, 277-279;\n    whether, before Christ, there were any outside of, who belonged to\n          the heavenly city, 279.\n\n  Joseph, the sons of, blessed by Jacob, ii. 161;\n    the times of, 221;\n    the elevation of, to be ruler of Egypt, 222;\n    who were kings at the period of the death of? 224.\n\n  Joshua, i. 163;\n    who were kings at the time of the death of? ii. 229;\n    the sun stayed in its course by, 429, 430;\n    the Jordan divided by, 430.\n\n  Jove, are the many gods of the pagans one and the same Jove? i. 148;\n    the enlargement of kingdoms improperly ascribed to, 152;\n    Mars, Terminus, and Juventus refuse to yield to, 162, 169.\n    _See_ Jupiter.\n\n  Judah, Jacob's blessing on, ii. 159, etc.\n\n  Judgment, ever going on,--the last, ii. 345, 346;\n    ever present, although it cannot be discerned, 346;\n    proofs of the last, from the New Testament and the Old, 349, etc.;\n    words of Jesus respecting, 350, 373, 374, 375;\n    what Peter says of, 379;\n    predictions respecting, 389, 390, etc., 395, etc., 399, etc.;\n    separation of the good and bad in the, 403;\n    to be effected in the person of Christ, 406, etc.\n\n  Julian the apostate, i. 219;\n    a persecutor, ii. 287.\n\n  Juno, i. 147, 148, 260.\n\n  Jupiter, the power of, compared with Janus, i. 270, etc.;\n    is the distinction made between, and Janus, a proper one? 273;\n    the surnames of, 273;\n    called \"Pecunia,\"--why? 275;\n    scandalous amours of, ii. 232.\n\n  Justinus, the historian, quoted respecting Ninus' lust of empire, i.\n          141.\n\n  Juventus, i. 162, 169.\n\n\n  Keturah, what is meant by Abraham's marrying, after the death of\n          Sarah? ii. 150.\n\n  \"Killeth and maketh alive, the Lord,\" ii. 174.\n\n  Killing, when allowable, i. 32.\n\n  Kingdom, the, of Israel, under Saul, a shadow, ii. 184;\n    the description of, 186;\n    promises of God respecting, 189, etc., 193, etc.;\n    varying character of, till the captivity, and, finally, till the\n          people passed under the power of the Romans, 214, 215.\n\n  Kingdom of Christ, the, ii. 363, 364.\n\n  Kingdoms, without justice, i. 139;\n    have any been aided or deserted by the gods? 142;\n    the enlargement of, unsuitably attributed to Jove, 152;\n    the times of, ordained by the true God, 175;\n    not fortuitous, nor influenced by the stars, 177-179;\n    the three great, when Abraham was born, ii. 130, 131.\n\n  Kings, of Israel, the times of the, ii. 163;\n    after Solomon, 213;\n    after the judges, 239;\n    of the earthly city which synchronize with the times of the saints,\n          reckoning from Abraham, ii. 218, etc.;\n    of Argos, ii. 223, 224;\n    of Latium, 240.\n\n  Knowledge, the eternal and unchangeable, of God, i. 439, etc.;\n    of our own existence, 469, etc., 471, etc.;\n    by which the holy angels know God, 473, etc.\n\n\n  Labeo, cited, i. 64. 127, 325, ii. 533.\n\n  Lactantius, quotations made by, from a certain Sibyl, ii. 243, 244.\n\n  Language, the origin of the diversity of, ii. 111, etc.;\n    the original, 121, etc.;\n    diversities of, how they operate to prevent human intercourse, 310,\n          311.\n\n  Larentina, the harlot, i. 244.\n\n  Latinius, Titus, the trick of, to secure the re-enactment of the\n          games, i. 165.\n\n  Latium, the kings of, ii. 240.\n\n  \u039b\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 and \u0394\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1, i. 383, 386.\n\n  Laurentum, the kingdom of, ii. 233.\n\n  Laver of regeneration, the, ii. 441.\n\n  Law, the, confirmed by miraculous signs, i. 407, etc.;\n    of Moses, must be spiritually understood, to cut off the murmurs of\n          carnal interpreters, ii. 403, 404.\n\n  Lethe, the river, i. 428.\n\n  _Lex Voconia_, the, i. 124.\n\n  Liber, the god, i. 230;\n    and Libera, 248, 260, 261, ii. 232.\n\n  Liberty, the, which is proper to man's nature, ii. 323, etc.\n\n  Life, the end of, whether it is material that it be long delayed, i.\n          18;\n    the vicissitudes of, not dependent on the favour of the gods, but\n          on the will of the true God, 79.\n\n  Life, eternal, the gift of God, i. 257;\n    the promise of, uttered before the eternal times, 504.\n\n  Light, the, the division of, from the darkness,--the significance of\n          this, i. 458;\n    pronounced \"good,\"--meaning of this, 459.\n\n  Lime, the peculiar properties of, ii. 418, 419.\n\n  Livy, quoted, i. 165.\n\n  Loadstone, the, ii. 420.\n\n  Locusts, a fearful invasion of Africa by, i. 134.\n\n  Lot, the parting of Abraham and, ii. 132;\n    the deliverance of, from captivity, by Abraham, 134.\n\n  Lot's wife, i. 293.\n\n  Love and regard used in Scripture indifferently of good and evil\n          affections, ii. 10.\n\n  Lucan's _Pharsalia_, quoted, i. 20, 103, 129.\n\n  Lucillus, bishop of Sinita, cured of a fistula by the relics of St.\n          Stephen, ii. 493.\n\n  Lucina, the goddess, i. 149, 260.\n\n  Lucretia, her chastity and suicide, i. 28, 29.\n\n  Lucretius, quoted, ii. 419.\n\n  Lust, the evil of, ii. 31;\n    and anger, to be bridled, 35, etc.;\n    the bondage of, worse than bondage to men, 224, 225.\n\n  Lying-in woman, the, her god-protectors, i. 249.\n\n\n  Maccab\u00e6us, Judas, ii. 276.\n\n  Maccabees, the Books of, ii. 262.\n\n  Madness, the strange, which once seized upon all the domestic animals\n          of the Romans, i. 126.\n\n  Magic art, the impiety of, i. 33;\n    the marvels wrought by, ii. 424.\n\n  Magicians of Egypt, the, i. 393.\n\n  Magnets, two, an image suspended between, in mid air, ii. 425.\n\n  Malachi, ii. 399.\n\n  \"Mammon of unrighteousness,\" ii. 469, 470.\n\n  Man, though mortal, can enjoy true happiness, i. 369;\n    recentness of the creation of, 496, etc.;\n    the first, 519, etc.;\n    the fall of the first, 521;\n    the death with which he first was threatened, 533;\n    in what state made, and into what state he fell, 534;\n    forsook God before God forsook him, 535;\n    effects of the sin of the first, ii. 1, etc.;\n    what it is to live according to, 6, etc.\n    _See_ First Man.\n\n  Manich\u00e6ans, the, references to, i. 461, 462, 463;\n    their view of the body, ii. 8, etc.\n\n  Manlius, Cneius, i. 123.\n\n  Manturn\u00e6, the goddess, i. 249, 250.\n\n  Marcellus, Marcus, destroys Syracuse, and bewails its ruin, i. 8.\n\n  Mares, the, of Cappadocia, ii. 422.\n\n  Marica, the Minturnian goddess, i. 81.\n\n  Marius, i. 79, 80, 81;\n    the war between, and Sylla, 128, 129, 130.\n\n  Marriage, as originally instituted by God, ii. 38;\n    among blood relations in primitive times, 78;\n    between blood relations, now abhorred, 79.\n\n  Marriage bed-chamber, the, the gods which preside over, i. 249, 250.\n\n  Mars, Terminus, and Juventus, refuse to yield to Jove, i. 162, 169;\n    and Mercury, the offices of, 276.\n\n  Martial, a nobleman, converted by means of flowers brought from the\n          shrine of St. Stephen, ii. 493.\n\n  Martyrs, the honour paid to, by Christians, i. 350, etc.;\n    the heroes of the Church, 411;\n    miracles wrought by, ii. 499, 500.\n\n  Marvels related in history, ii. 417-423, 426, 427;\n    wrought by magic, 424, 425.\n\n  Massephat, ii. 188.\n\n  Mathematicians, the, convicted of professing a vain science, i. 183.\n\n  Mediator, Christ the, between God and man, i. 369;\n    the necessity of having Christ as, to obtain the blessed life, 374;\n    the sacrifice effected by, 410, etc.\n\n  Melchizedek, blesses Abraham, ii. 135.\n\n  Melicertes, ii. 233.\n\n  Men, the primitive, immortal, had they never sinned, i. 542;\n    the creation of, and of angels, ii. 472-474.\n\n  Mercury, and Mars, i. 276;\n    the fame of, ii. 225.\n\n  Metellus, rescues the sacred things from the fire in the temple of\n          Vesta, i. 119.\n\n  Methuselah, the great age of, ii. 66.\n\n  Millennium, the, ii. 356.\n\n  Mind, the capacity and powers of, ii. 525.\n\n  Minerva, i. 146, 262, 279, 296, ii. 225.\n\n  Miracles, wrought by the ministry of angels, i. 392, etc., 400, etc.,\n          405;\n    the, ascribed to the gods, 405, 406;\n    the, by which God authenticated the law, 407, etc.;\n    against such as deny the, recorded in Scripture, 408, etc.;\n    the ultimate reason for believing, 425-428;\n    wrought in more recent times, 484-499;\n    wrought by the martyrs in the name of Christ 499, etc.\n\n  Miseries, the, of this life, Cicero on, ii. 302;\n    of the human race through the first sin, 517-520;\n    deliverance from, through the grace of Christ, 520, 521;\n    which attach peculiarly to the toil of good men, 521, etc.\n\n  Mithridates, the edict of, enjoining the slaughter of all Roman\n          citizens found in Asia, i. 125.\n\n  Monstrous races,--are they derived from the stock of Adam, or from\n          Noah's sons? i. 116, 118.\n\n  Moses, miracles wrought by, i. 393;\n    the time of, ii. 161-163;\n    who were kings at the period of the birth of? 224;\n    the time he led Israel out of Egypt, 228;\n    the antiquity of the writings of, 264.\n\n  Mother of the gods, the obscenities of the worship of, i. 52, 53,\n          etc.;\n    whence she came, 102.\n\n  Mucius, and king Porsenna, i. 211.\n\n  Mysteries, i. 266;\n    the Eleusinian, 283;\n    the Samothracian, 296.\n\n  Mystery, the, of Christ's redemption often made known by signs, etc.,\n          i. 299.\n\n  Mystery of iniquity, the, ii. 381, 382.\n\n\n  Nahor, ii. 125.\n\n  Nakedness of our first parents, the, ii. 32.\n\n  Nathan, his message to David, ii. 189;\n    the resemblance of Psalm lxxxix. to the prophecy of, 191, etc.\n\n  Natural history, curious facts in:--the salamander, ii. 417;\n    the flesh of the peacock, 417, 418;\n    fire, 418;\n    charcoal, 418;\n    lime, 418, 419;\n    the diamond, 419;\n    the loadstone, 420;\n    the salt of Agrigentum, 421;\n    the fountain of the Garamant\u00e6, and of Epirus, 421;\n    asbestos, 421;\n    the wood of the Egyptian fig-tree, 421;\n    the apples of Sodom, 421;\n    the stone pyrites, 421, 422;\n    the stone selenite, 422;\n    the Cappadocian mares, 422;\n    the island Tilon, 422;\n    the star Venus, 429.\n\n  Nature, not contrary to God, but good, i. 484;\n    of irrational and lifeless creatures, 485;\n    none in which there is not good, 320, 321.\n\n  Natures, God glorified in all, i. 486.\n\n  Necessity, is the will of man ruled by? i. 195.\n\n  Necromancy, i. 302.\n\n  Neptune, i. 279, 296;\n    and Salacia, and Venilia, 285.\n\n  Nero, the first to reach the citadel of vice, i. 216;\n    curious opinions entertained of him after his death, ii. 382.\n\n  New Academy, the uncertainty of, contrasted with the Christian faith,\n          ii. 328.\n\n  New heavens, and new earth, the, ii. 373, 374, 376, etc.\n\n  Nigidius, cited in reference to the birth of twins, i. 181.\n\n  Nimrod, ii. 108, 109, 112, 122.\n\n  Nineveh, ii. 109;\n    curious discrepancy between the Hebrew and Septuagint as to the\n          time fixed for the overthrow of, in Jonah's prophecy, 273,\n          274;\n    spared, 446;\n    how the prediction against, was fulfilled, 455.\n\n  Ninus, ii. 219, 220.\n\n  Noah, commanded by God to build an ark, ii. 98;\n    whether after, till Abraham, any family can be found who lived\n          according to God, 104;\n    was prophetically signified by the sons of? 105;\n    the nakedness of, revealed by Ham, but covered by Shem and Japheth,\n          its typical significance, 106, 107;\n    the generation of the sons of, 108, etc.\n\n  _Noctes Attic\u00e6_, the, of Aulus Gellius, quoted, 356, 357.\n\n  Numa Pompilius, the peace that existed during the reign of, is it\n          attributable to the gods? i. 98;\n    introduces new gods, 101, etc.;\n    the Romans add new gods to those introduced by, 102;\n    the story of finding the books of, respecting the gods, and the\n          burning of the same by the senate, 301, etc.;\n    befooled by hydromancy, 302.\n\n  Numantia, i. 124.\n\n  Numitor and Amulius, ii. 240, 241.\n\n\n  Ogyges, ii. 225, 226.\n\n  Old Testament Scriptures, caused by Ptolemy Philadelphus to be\n          translated out of Hebrew into Greek, ii. 270, 271.\n\n  Opimius, Lucius, and the Gracchi, i. 126.\n\n  Oracles of the gods, responses of, respecting Christ, as related by\n          Porphyry, ii. 344, etc.\n\n  Order and law, the, which obtain in heaven, and on earth, ii. 322.\n\n  Origen, the errors of, i. 463-465.\n\n  \u1f49\u03c1\u03bc\u03ae, 303.\n\n  Orpheus, ii. 233.\n\n\n  Pagan error, the probable cause of the rise of, i. 281, 282, 347.\n\n  Paradise, man in, ii, 23;\n    would there have been generation in, had man not sinned? 39, etc.,\n          41, etc., 44, etc.;\n    Malachi's reference to man's state in, 401.\n\n  Paris, the gods had no reason to be offended with, i. 93.\n\n  Passions, the, which assail Christian souls, i. 359, etc.;\n    which agitate demons, 360.\n\n  _Paterfamilias_, ii. 325.\n\n  Patricians and Plebs, the dissensions between, i. 69, 70, 113.\n\n  Paulinus, i. 16.\n\n  Paulus and Palladia, members of a household cursed by a\n          mother-in-law, miraculously healed at the shrine of St.\n          Stephen, ii. 497-499.\n\n  Peace, the eternal, of the saints, ii. 314, 315;\n    the fierceness of war, and the disquietude of men make towards,\n          315-319;\n    the universal, which the law of nature preserves, 319, etc.;\n    the, between the heavenly and earthly cities, 326, etc.;\n    the, of those alienated from God, and the use made of it by God's\n          people, 341;\n    of those who serve God in this mortal life, cannot be apprehended\n          in its perfection, 341-343;\n    of God, which passeth all understanding, 534, 535.\n\n  Peacock, the antiseptic properties of the flesh of, ii. 417.\n\n  Pecunia, i. 264;\n    Jupiter so named, 275.\n\n  Peleg, ii. 122, 123.\n\n  Peripatetic sect, the, i. 323.\n\n  Peripatetics, and Stoics, the opinion of, about mental emotions,--an\n          illustrative story, i. 355-358.\n\n  \"Perish,\" ii. 296.\n\n  _Periurgists_, i. 404.\n\n  Persecution, all Christians must suffer, ii. 284;\n    the benefits derived from, 285;\n    the \"ten persecutions,\" 286-288;\n    the time of the final, hidden, 288-290.\n\n  Persius, quoted, i. 55, 56.\n\n  Perturbations, the three, of the souls of the wise, as admitted by\n          the Stoics, ii. 12;\n    in the souls of the righteous, 15, etc.;\n    were our first parents before the fall free from? 20.\n\n  Peter, ridiculously feigned by the heathen to have brought about by\n          enchantment the worship of Christ, ii. 289;\n    heals the cripple at the temple gate, 291.\n\n  Petronia, a woman of rank, miraculously cured, ii. 496.\n\n  Philosopher, origin of the name, i. 307.\n\n  Philosophers, the secret of the weakness of the moral precepts of,\n          i. 55;\n    the Italic and Ionic schools of, 306, etc.;\n    of some who think the separation of soul and body not penal, 536;\n    the discord of the opinions of, contrasted with the concord of the\n          canonical Scriptures, ii. 267-270.\n\n  Philosophy, Varro's enumeration of the multitudinous sects of, ii.\n          293-297.\n\n  Phoroneus, ii. 221.\n\n  Picus, king of Argos, ii. 233.\n\n  \"Piety,\" i. 384.\n\n  Pirate, the apt reply of a, to Alexander the Great, i. 140.\n\n  Plato, would exclude the poets from his ideal republic, i. 63, etc.;\n    his threefold division of philosophy, 310, etc.;\n    how he was able to approach so near Christian knowledge, 321, etc.;\n    his definition of the gods, 324;\n    the opinion of, as to the transmigration of souls, 427;\n    the opinion of, that almost all animals were created by inferior\n          gods, 519;\n    declared that the gods made by the Supreme have immortal bodies,\n          536, ii. 531;\n    the apparently conflicting views of, and of Porphyry, if united,\n          might have led to the truth, 532, 533.\n\n  Platonists, the opinions of, preferable to those of other\n          philosophers, i. 312, etc.;\n    their views of physical philosophy, 314, etc.;\n    how far they excel other philosophers in logic, or rational\n          philosophy, 316;\n    hold the first rank in moral philosophy, 317;\n    their philosophy has come nearest the Christian faith, 318;\n    the Christian religion above all their science, 319;\n    thought that sacred rites were to be performed to many gods, 323;\n    the opinion of, that the souls of men become demons, 365;\n    the three qualities by which they distinguish between the nature of\n          men and of demons, 365, etc.;\n    their idea of the non-intercourse of celestial gods with men, and\n          the need of the intercourse of demons, 371, etc.;\n    hold that God alone can bestow happiness, 382;\n    have misunderstood the true worship of God, 386;\n    the principles which, according to, regulate the purification of\n          the soul, 413;\n    blush to acknowledge the incarnation of Christ, 423;\n    refutation of the notion of, that the soul is co-eternal with God,\n          429, 430;\n    opinion of, that angels created man's body, 518;\n    refutation of the opinion of, that earthly bodies cannot inherit\n          heaven, ii. 501, etc.\n\n  Players, excluded by the Romans from offices of state, i. 60, 61.\n\n  Plays, scenic, which the gods have exacted from their worshippers,\n          i. 165.\n\n  Pleasure, bodily, graphically described, i. 217.\n\n  Plebs, the dissensions between, and the Patricians, ii. 69, 70, 113;\n    the secession of, 113.\n\n  Plotinus, men, according to, less wretched than demons, i. 364;\n    regarding enlightenment from above, 385.\n\n  Plutarch, his _Life of Cato_ quoted, i. 34;\n    his _Life of Numa_, 173.\n\n  Pluto, i. 296.\n\n  \u03a0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1, i. 553, 554, 555.\n\n  Poetical licence, allowed by the Greeks, restrained by the Romans,\n          i. 57, 61.\n\n  Poets, the, Plato would exclude from his ideal republic, i. 63, etc.,\n          325;\n    the theological, ii. 232, 233.\n\n  Pontius, Lucius, announces Sylla's victory, i. 82.\n\n  \"Poor, He raiseth the, out of the dunghill,\" ii. 175.\n\n  Porphyry, his views of theurgy, i. 394, etc., 396, etc.;\n    epistle of, to Anebo, 397, etc.;\n    as to how the soul is purified, 413;\n    refused to recognise Christ, 414;\n    vacillation of, between the confession of the true God and the\n          worship of demons, 418;\n    the impiety of, 419;\n    so blind as not to recognise the true wisdom, 422;\n    his emendations of Platonism, 426, etc.;\n    his ignorance of the universal way of the soul's deliverance, 430,\n          etc.;\n    abjured the opinion that souls constantly pass away and return in\n          cycles, 511;\n    his notion that the soul must be separated from the body in order\n          to be happy, demolished by Plato, 531, etc.;\n    the conflicting opinions of Plato and, if united, might have led to\n          the truth, 532, 533;\n    his account of the responses of the oracles of the gods concerning\n          Christ, ii. 334-339.\n\n  Portents, strange, i. 133;\n    meaning of the word, ii. 429.\n\n  Possidonius, the story of, i. 179.\n\n  Postumius, the augur, and Sylla, i. 81, 82, 83.\n\n  Pr\u00e6stantius, the strange story related by, respecting his father,\n          ii. 237.\n\n  Praise, the love of, why reckoned a virtue? i. 204;\n    of the eradication of the love of human, 205.\n\n  Prayer for the dead, ii. 453.\n\n  Predictions of Scripture, i. 434.\n\n  Priest, the faithful, ii. 181.\n\n  Priesthood, the, the promise to establish it for ever, how to be\n          understood, ii. 184;\n    of Christ, described in the Psalms, 204, 205.\n\n  Proclus, Julius, i. 108.\n\n  Projectus, Bishop, and the miraculous cure of blind women, ii. 492,\n          493.\n\n  _Proletarii_, the, i. 116.\n\n  Prometheus, ii. 224.\n\n  Promises, the, made to Abraham, ii. 129, etc., 131, etc., 133.\n\n  Prophetic age, the, ii. 165.\n\n  Prophetic records, the, ii. 163.\n\n  Prophecies, the threefold meaning of the, ii. 167-169;\n    respecting Christ and His gospel, 247-249, 250, 251, 252, 256, 258,\n          259.\n\n  Prophets, the later, ii. 215;\n    of the time when the Roman kingdom began, 246.\n\n  Proscription, the, of Sylla, i. 130.\n\n  Proserpine, i. 284, 288.\n\n  Protasius and Gervasius, martyrs, a blind man healed by the bodies\n          of, at Milan, ii. 485;\n    a young man freed from a devil by, 491.\n\n  Providence of God, the, i. 197, 403;\n    not disturbed by the wickedness of angels or men, ii. 46.\n\n  Prudence, ii. 304.\n\n  Psalms, the, David's concern in writing, ii. 199.\n\n  Ptolemy Philadelphus causes the Hebrew Scriptures to be translated\n          into Greek, ii. 270, 271.\n\n  Puberty, was it later among the antediluvians than it is now? ii. 75,\n          etc.\n\n  Pulvillus, Marcus, i. 212.\n\n  Punic wars, the, the disasters suffered by the Romans in, i. 117;\n    the second of these, its deplorable effects, 119, etc.\n\n  Punishment, eternal, ii. 413;\n    whether it is possible for bodies to last for ever in burning fire,\n          414;\n    whether bodily sufferings necessarily terminate in the destruction\n          of the flesh, 414-417;\n    examples from nature to show that bodies may remain unconsumed and\n          alive in fire, 417;\n    the nature of, 432, etc.;\n    is it just that it should last longer than the sins themselves\n          lasted? 436, etc.;\n    the greatness of the first transgression on account of which it is\n          due to all not within the pale of the Saviour's grace, 437,\n          etc.;\n    of the wicked after death, not purgatorial, 438-440;\n    proportioned to the deserts of the wicked, 444;\n    of certain persons, who deny, 444;\n    of those who think that the intercession of saints will deliver\n          from, 445;\n    of those who think that participation of the body of Christ will\n          save from, 447;\n    of those who think that Catholic baptism will deliver from, 447;\n    of the opinion that building on the \"Foundation\" will save from,\n          448;\n    of the opinion that alms-giving will deliver from, 449;\n    of those who think that the devil will not suffer, 450;\n    replies to all those who deny, 451, 457, etc., 460.\n\n  Punishments, the temporary, of this life, ii. 440;\n    the object of, 441.\n\n  Purgatorial punishments, ii. 399, 400, 453.\n\n  Purification of heart, the, whence obtained by the saints, i. 412;\n    the principles which, according to the Platonists, regulate, 413;\n    the one true principle which alone can effect, 414.\n\n  Purifying punishment, the, spoken of by Malachi, ii. 399.\n\n  Pyrites, the Persian stone so called, ii. 421.\n\n  Pyrrhus, invades Italy,--response of the oracle of Apollo to, i. 116;\n    cannot tempt Fabricius, 213.\n\n  Pythagoras, the founder of the Italic school of philosophy, i. 307.\n\n\n  Queen, the, the Church, ii. 202, 203.\n\n  Quiet, the temple of, i. 154.\n\n\n  Radagaisus, king of the Goths, the war with, i. 221.\n\n  Rain, portentous, i. 133.\n\n  Rape of the Sabine women, the, i. 103, 104.\n\n  Rebecca, wife of Isaac, ii. 149;\n    the divine answer respecting the twins in the womb of, 151.\n\n  Recentness of man's creation, an answer to those who complain of, i.\n          496.\n\n  Regeneration, the laver or font of, ii. 490.\n\n  Regulus, as an example of heroism, and voluntary endurance for\n          religion's sake, i. 22, etc.;\n    the virtue of, far excelled that of Cato, 35.\n\n  Reign of the saints with Christ for a thousand years, 263, etc.\n\n  Religion, i. 384;\n    no true, without true virtues, ii. 340.\n\n  Religions, false, kept up on policy, ii. 174.\n\n  Republic, Cicero's definition of a,--was there ever a Roman,\n          answering to? ii. 330-333;\n    according to what definition could the Romans or others assume the\n          title of a? 339, 340.\n\n  Resting on the seventh day, God's, the meaning of, i. 444, 445.\n\n  Restitutus, presbyter of the Calamensian Church, a curious account\n          of, ii. 42, 43.\n\n  Resurrection, the, of the flesh of believers, to a perfection not\n          enjoyed by our first parents, i. 544, 546, 547;\n    the first and the second, ii. 353-356, 367, 368;\n    Paul's testimony on, 384;\n    utterances of Isaiah respecting, 387, etc.;\n    some refuse to believe, while the world at large believes, 477;\n    vindicated against ridicule thrown on it, 504, etc.;\n    whether abortions shall have part in, 506;\n    whether infants shall have that body in, which they would have had\n          if they had grown up, 507;\n    whether in the, the dead shall rise the same size as the Lord's\n          body, 508;\n    the saints shall be conformed to the image of Christ in the, 508,\n          509;\n    whether women shall retain their sex in, 509, 510;\n    all bodily blemishes shall be removed in, 512;\n    the substance of our bodies, however disintegrated, shall be\n          entirely reunited, 515;\n    the new spiritual body of, 517;\n    the obstinacy of those who impugn, while the world believes, 529,\n          etc.\n\n  Resurrection of Christ, the, referred to in the Psalms, ii. 205, 206.\n\n  Reward, the, of the saints, after the trials of this life, 314.\n\n  Rhea, or Ilia, mother of Romulus and Remus, ii. 240, 241.\n\n  Rich man, the, in hell, ii. 435.\n\n  Righteous, the glory of the, is in God, i. 205.\n\n  Righteous man, the, the sufferings of, described in the Book of\n          Wisdom, ii. 209, etc.\n\n  Rites, sacred, of the gods, i. 245.\n\n  Rituals of false gods, instituted by kings of Greece, from the exodus\n          of Israel downward, ii. 229.\n\n  Roman empire, the, which of the gods presided over? i. 143;\n    whether the great extent and duration of, should be attributed to\n          Jove, 165;\n    whether the worship of the gods has been of service in extending,\n          168;\n    the cause of, not fortuitous, nor attributable to the position of\n          the stars, 177, etc.;\n    by what virtues the enlargement of, was merited, 198, etc.\n\n  Roman kings, what manner of life and death they had, i. 108, etc.\n\n  Roman republic, was there ever one answering to Cicero's definition?\n          i. 331-333, 339, 340.\n\n  Romans, the, the folly of, in trusting gods which could not defend\n          Troy, i. 4, etc.;\n    by what steps the passion of governing increased among, 43;\n    the vices of, not corrected by the overthrow of their city, 45;\n    the calamities suffered by, before Christ, 50, etc., 67, etc.;\n    poetical licence restrained by, 57, etc.;\n    excluded players from offices of state, and restrained the licence\n          of players, 60, 61;\n    the gods never took any steps to prevent the republic of, from\n          being ruined by immorality, 77, etc;\n    the obscenities of their plays consecrated to the service of their\n          gods, contributed to overthrow their republic, 87, etc.;\n    exhorted to forsake paganism, 89;\n    was it desirable that the empire of, should be increased by a\n          succession of furious wars? 99;\n    by what right they obtained their first wives, 103;\n    the wickedness of the wars waged by, against the Albans, 105, 106;\n    the first consuls of, 111, etc.;\n    the disasters which befell, in the Punic wars, 117, etc., 119, etc.;\n    the ingratitude of, to Scipio, the conqueror of Hannibal, 123;\n    the internal disasters which vexed the republic, 125, etc.;\n    multiplied gods for small and ignoble purposes, 144;\n    to what profit they carried on war, and how far to the well-being\n          of the conquered, 208;\n    dominion granted to, by the providence of God, 218.\n\n  Rome, the sack of, by the Barbarians, i. 2;\n    the evils inflicted on the Christians in the sack of,--why\n          permitted, 39;\n    the iniquities practised in the palmiest days of, 67, etc.;\n    the corruption which had grown up in, before Christianity, 71, etc.;\n    Cicero's opinion of the republic of, 74;\n    frost and snow incredibly severe at, 117;\n    calamities which befell, in the Punic wars, 117, etc., 119, etc.;\n    Asiatic luxury introduced to, 123;\n    when founded, ii. 241;\n    the founder of, made a god, 480.\n\n  Romulus, the alleged parentage of, i. 94, 95;\n    no penalty exacted for his fratricidal act, 95, etc.;\n    the death of, 108, 109, ii. 240;\n    suckled by a wolf, ii. 240, 241;\n    made a god by Rome, 480, etc.\n\n  Rule, equitable, ii. 325.\n\n  Rulers serve the society which they rule, ii. 322, 323.\n\n\n  Sabbath, the perpetual, ii. 543.\n\n  Sabine women, the rape of the, i. 67, 103, 104.\n\n  Sack, of Rome, the, by the Barbarians, i. 2, etc.;\n    of Troy, 6, etc.\n\n  Sacrifice, that due to the true God only, i. 387;\n    the true and perfect, 390;\n    the reasonableness of offering a visible, to God, 409;\n    the supreme and true, of the Mediator, 410;\n    of Abraham, when he believed,--its meaning, ii. 136.\n\n  Sacrifices, those not required by God, but enjoined for the\n          exhibition of the truth, i. 388.\n\n  Sacrifices of righteousness, ii. 400, 401.\n\n  Sacristan of Hercules, a, the story of, i. 244.\n\n  Sages, the seven, ii. 244, 245.\n\n  Saguntum, the destruction of, i. 121, 122.\n\n  Saints, the, lose nothing in losing their temporal goods, i. 14, etc.;\n    their consolations in captivity, 22;\n    cases in which the examples of, are not to be followed, 37;\n    why the enemy was permitted to indulge his lust on the bodies of,\n          39;\n    the reply of, to unbelievers, who taunted them with Christ's not\n          having rescued them from the fury of their enemies, 41, etc.;\n    the reward of, after the trials of this life, ii. 314;\n    the happiness of the eternal peace which constitutes the perfection\n          of, 314, 315;\n    in this life, blessed in hope, 330.\n\n  Salacia, i. 285.\n\n  Salamander, the, ii. 417.\n\n  Sallust, quoted, i. 7, 8, 67, 69, 92, 100, 107, 113, 198, 201, 263,\n          ii. 219.\n\n  Salt, the, of Agrigentum, the peculiar qualities of, ii. 421.\n\n  Samnites, the, defeated by the Romans, i. 115.\n\n  Samothracians, the mysteries of the, i. 296.\n\n  Samuel, the address of, to Saul on his disobedience, ii. 186, etc.;\n    sets up a stone of memorial, 188.\n\n  Saul, spared by David, ii. 184, 185;\n    forfeits the kingdom, 185, 186.\n\n  Sanctity, the, of the body, not violated by the violence of another's\n          lust, i. 26, 27.\n\n  Sancus, or Sangus, a Sabine god, ii. 238.\n\n  Sarah, and Hagar, and their sons,--the typical significance of, ii.\n          51, 52;\n    Sarah's barrenness, 52, 53;\n    preservation of the chastity of, in Egypt, and in Gerar, 32, 146;\n    change of the name of, 143, 144;\n    the death of, 149.\n\n  Satan, transforms himself into an angel of light, ii. 313. _See_\n          Devil.\n\n  Saturn, i. 147, 260, 261, 265;\n    and Genius, thought to be really Jupiter, 275, etc.;\n    interpretations of the reasons for worshipping, 282;\n    and Picus, ii. 233.\n\n  Saved by fire, ii. 460.\n\n  Sc\u00e6vola, the pontiff, slain in the Marian wars, i. 129, 131;\n    distinguishes three kinds of gods, 166, 167.\n\n  Scenic representations, the establishment of, opposed by Scipio\n          Nasica, i. 44;\n    the obscenities of, contributed to the overthrow of the republic,\n          84, etc.\n\n  Schools of philosophers, i. 306, etc.\n\n  Scipio Nasica, Rome's \"best man,\" opposes the destruction of\n          Carthage, i. 42, 43;\n    opposes scenic representations, 144.\n\n  Scripture, the obscurity of,--its advantages, i. 458.\n\n  Scriptures, the canonical, the authority of, i. 438;\n    of the Old Testament, translated into Greek, ii. 270, 271.\n\n  Sea, the, gives up the dead which are in it, ii. 375;\n    no more, 377.\n\n  Sects of philosophy, the number of, according to Varro, ii. 293-297.\n\n  Selenite, the stone so called, ii. 422.\n\n  Semiramis, ii. 220.\n\n  Seneca, Ann\u00e6us, recognises the guiding will of the Supreme, i. 189;\n    censures the popular worship of the gods, and the popular theology,\n          252-255;\n    what he thought of the Jews, 255, 256.\n\n  Septuagint,--is it or the Hebrew text to be followed in computing\n          years? ii. 70, etc.;\n    origin of the, 270, 271;\n    authority of, in relation to the Hebrew original, 271-273;\n    difference between, and the Hebrew text, as to the days fixed by\n          Jonah for the destruction of Nineveh, 273-275.\n\n  Servitude introduced by sin, ii. 323.\n\n  Servius Tullius, the foul murder of, i. 110.\n\n  Seth and Cain, heads of two lines of descendants, ii. 81;\n    relation of the former to Christ, 82.\n\n  Seven, the number, i. 475, ii. 173, 174.\n\n  Seventh day, the, i. 475.\n\n  Severus, bishop of Milevis, ii. 420.\n\n  Sex, shall it be restored in the resurrection? ii. 509, 510.\n\n  Sexual intercourse, ii. 34;\n    in the antediluvian age, 75, etc.\n\n  Shem, ii. 105;\n    the sons of, 109;\n    the genealogy of, 119, etc.\n\n  Sibyl, the Cum\u00e6an, i. 421;\n    the Erythr\u00e6an, 422.\n\n  Sibylline books, the, i. 118.\n\n  Sicyon, the kingdom and kings of, ii. 219, 220, 221, 239.\n\n  Silvanus, the god, i. 249.\n\n  Silvii, ii. 239.\n\n  Simplicianus, bishop of Milan, his reminiscence of the saying of a\n          certain Platonist, i. 426.\n\n  Sin, should not be sought to be obviated by sin, i. 36;\n    should not be sought to be shunned by a voluntary death, 38;\n    had not its origin in God, but in the will of the creature, 456;\n    not caused by the flesh, but by the soul, ii. 4;\n    servitude introduced by, 323.\n\n  Sins, how cleansed, i. 413.\n\n  Six, the perfection of the number, i. 474.\n\n  Slave, when the word, first occurs in Scripture;\n    its meaning, ii. 324.\n\n  Social life, disturbed by many distresses, ii. 307, etc.\n\n  Socrates, a sketch of,--his philosophy, i. 308-310;\n    the god or demon of, the book of Apuleius concerning, 325, 327.\n\n  Sodom, the region of, ii. 431.\n\n  Solomon, books written by, and the prophecies they contain, ii. 209,\n          etc.;\n    the kings after, both of Israel and Judah, 213.\n\n  Son of God, but one by nature, ii. 441.\n\n  Sons of God, the, and daughters of men, ii. 91, etc.;\n    not angels, 92, etc.\n\n  Soranus, Valerius, i. 274.\n\n  Soul, the, immortal, i. 257;\n    the way of its deliverance, 430;\n    created in the image of God, 515;\n    Porphyry's notion that its blessedness requires separation from the\n          body, demolished by Plato, 531;\n    the separation of, and the body, considered by some not to be\n          penal, 536.\n\n  Soul of the world, God not the, i. 151;\n    Varro's opinion of, examined, 267.\n\n  Souls, rational, the opinion that there are three kinds of, i. 325,\n          326;\n    the, of men, according to the Platonists, become demons, 363;\n    views of the transmigration of, 427, 428;\n    not co-eternal with God, 429;\n    do not return from blessedness to labour and misery, after certain\n          periodic revolutions, 509.\n\n  \u03a3\u03c9\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7, ii. 303.\n\n  Speusippus, i. 324.\n\n  Spirit, i. 553, 554, 555.\n\n  Spiritual body, the, of the saints, in the resurrection, 516.\n\n  Stars, the supposed influence of, on kingdoms, births, etc., i. 177,\n          178, 179, 180;\n    some, called by the names of gods, 277, etc.\n\n  Stephen, St., miracles wrought by the relics of, and at the shrine\n          of, ii. 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497.\n\n  Stoics, opinions of, about mental emotions, i. 355, etc.;\n    the three perturbations admitted by, in the soul of the wise man,\n          ii. 12, etc.;\n    the belief of, as to the gods, 268;\n    suicide permitted by, 304, 305.\n\n  Strong man, the, ii. 356.\n\n  Substance, the, of the people of God, ii. 194.\n\n  Suicide, committed through fear of dishonour or of punishment, i. 25;\n    Christians have no authority for committing, under any\n          circumstances, 30;\n    can never be prompted to, by magnanimity, 32;\n    the example of Cato in relation to, 34;\n    should it be resorted to, to avoid sin? 38;\n    permitted by the Stoics, ii. 304, 305.\n\n  Sun, the, stayed in its course by Joshua, ii. 429, 430.\n\n  Superstition, i. 171.\n\n  Sylla, the deeds of, i. 81-83;\n    and Marius, the war between, 128, 129.\n\n  Sylva, i. 95.\n\n  Symmachus, i. 51, and note.\n\n\n  Tarquinius, Priscus, or Superbus, his barbarous murder of his\n          father-in-law, i. 110;\n    the expulsion of, from Rome, 110, 111.\n\n  Tatius, Titus, introduces new gods, i. 161.\n\n  Tellus, i. 147;\n    the surnames of, and their significance, 289.\n\n  Temperance, ii. 303.\n\n  Ten kings, the, ii. 394.\n\n  Terah, the emigration of, from Ur of the Chaldees, ii. 125;\n    the years of, 126.\n\n  Terence, quoted, i. 56.\n\n  Terentius, a certain, finds the books of Numa Pompilius, i. 301.\n\n  Terminus, i. 162, 169;\n    and Janus, 268.\n\n  Thales, the founder of the Ionic school of philosophy, i. 307.\n\n  Theatrical exhibitions, publish the shame of the gods, i. 57;\n    the obscenities of, contributed to overthrow the republic, 87.\n\n  Theodorus, the Cyrenian philosopher, his reply to Lysimachus, i. 20,\n          note.\n\n  Theodosius, the faith and piety of, i. 224, etc.\n\n  Theological poets, ii. 232, 233.\n\n  Theology, Varro's threefold division of, i. 238-243.\n\n  \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u03c3\u03ad\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, i. 384.\n\n  Theurgy, i. 394, etc., 396, etc.\n\n  Thousand years, the, of the Book of Revelation, ii. 356;\n    the reign of the saints with Christ during, 362, etc.\n\n  Threats employed against the gods to compel their aid, i. 399.\n\n  \u0398\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03b1, i. 384.\n\n  Tilon, the island of, ii. 422.\n\n  Time, i. 442.\n\n  Time, times, and a half time, ii. 394.\n\n  Times and seasons, the hidden, ii. 288, 289.\n\n  Titus, Latinius, i. 325.\n\n  Torquatus, slays his victorious son, i. 210.\n\n  Transformations, strange, of men, ii. 235;\n    what we should believe respecting, 235-238\n\n  Transgression, the first, the greatness of, ii. 347, 348.\n\n  Transmigration of souls, the Platonic views of, amended by Porphyry,\n          i. 427, 428.\n\n  \"Tree of life, the, the days of,\" ii. 402.\n\n  Trinity, the, i. 414;\n    further explained, 447-450;\n    further statements of,--indications of, scattered everywhere among\n          the works of God, 465;\n    indications of, in philosophy, 466-468;\n    the image of, in human nature, 468.\n\n  Troy, the gods unable to afford an asylum during the sack of, i. 6;\n    were the gods justified in permitting the destruction of? 93, etc.\n\n  Truth, the sad results where it is hidden, ii. 309, etc.\n\n  Tullus Hostilius, i. 109, 110.\n\n  Twelve thrones, ii. 351.\n\n  Twenty Martyrs, the, how a tailor got a new coat by praying at the\n          shrine of, ii. 492.\n\n  Twins, on the difference of the health, etc., of, i. 179, 180;\n    of different sexes, 185.\n\n\n  Unbaptized, the, saved through the confession of Christ, i. 527, 528.\n\n  Unbelief of the Jews, the, foretold, ii. 208.\n\n  Unity, the, of the human race, i. 513, etc.\n\n  Universe, the beauty of the, i. 457.\n\n\n  Valens, a persecutor, ii. 287.\n\n  Valentinian, protected by Theodosius, i. 224;\n    a confessor, ii. 287.\n\n  Valerius, Marcus, i. 213.\n\n  Varro, his opinion of the utility of men feigning themselves to be\n          the offspring of gods, i. 94;\n    boasts of having conferred the knowledge of the worship of the gods\n          on the Romans, 159, 160;\n    what he thought of the gods of the nations, 232;\n    his book concerning the antiquities of divine and human things,\n          234, 235, etc.;\n    his threefold division of theology into fabulous, natural, and\n          civil, 238, etc.;\n    the opinion of, that God is the soul of the world, 267, 272;\n    pronounces his own opinions respecting the gods uncertain, 280;\n    holds the earth to be a goddess, 286, etc.;\n    his doctrine of the gods not self-consistent, 295;\n    assigns the reason why Athens was so called, ii. 226;\n    the opinion of, about the name of Areopagus, 227, 228;\n    what he relates of the strange transformations of men, 235, etc.;\n    on the number of philosophical sects, 293-299, etc;\n    in reference to a celestial portent, 429;\n    his story of the Vestal virgin falsely accused, 503;\n    his work on _The Origin of the Roman People_, quoted in relation to\n          the _Palingenesy_, 533.\n\n  Vaticanus, i. 149.\n\n  Venilia, i. 285.\n\n  Venus, a peculiar candelabrum in a temple of, ii. 423, 424.\n\n  Venus, the planet, a strange prodigy that occurred to, ii. 429.\n\n  Vesta, i. 147, 148, 279.\n\n  Vestal virgin, a, to prove her innocence, carries water in a sieve\n          from the Tiber, ii. 503.\n\n  Vestal virgins, the punishment of those caught in adultery, i. 95.\n\n  Vice, not nature, contrary to God, and hurtful, i. 484.\n\n  Vicissitudes of life, the, on what dependent, i. 79, etc.\n\n  _Victoria_, the goddess, i. 152, 153;\n    ought she to be worshipped as well as Jove? 154.\n\n  Virgil, quoted, i. 2, 4, 5, 6, 29, 78, 89, 92, 101, 103, 106, 107,\n          199, 200, 270, 272, 294, 332, 333, 384, 412, 421, 428, ii. 5,\n          234, 397, 425, 439, 470.\n\n  Virgin Mary, the, ii. 204.\n\n  Virgins, the violation of, by force, does not contaminate, i. 25.\n\n  Virtue and Faith, honoured by the Romans with temples, i. 156, 157;\n    the Romans ought to have been content with, and Felicity, 157;\n    the war waged by, ii. 203.\n\n  Virtues, as disgraceful to make them serve human glory as to serve\n          bodily pleasure, i. 217;\n    true, necessary to true religion, ii. 340, 341.\n\n  Virtumnus and Sentinus, i. 260, 261.\n\n  Virtus, the goddess, i. 263, 264.\n\n  Vision, the beatific, ii. 534-540.\n\n  Vulcan, i. 279.\n\n\n  Warfare, the Christian, ii. 442.\n\n  War, against the Albans, i. 105;\n    with Pyrrhus, 116;\n    the Punic, 117, etc.; 119, etc.;\n    the civil, of the Gracchi, 126;\n    the civil, between Marius and Sylla, 128, etc.;\n    the Gothic and Gallic, 130;\n    severe and frequent, before the advent of Christ, 131;\n    the duration of various, 220;\n    with Radagaisus, 221;\n    the miseries of, ii. 311.\n\n  Waters, the separation of the, i. 479.\n\n  Wicked, the, the ills which alone are feared by, i. 91;\n    God makes a good use of, ii. 284;\n    going out to see the punishment of, 392;\n    the end of, 343;\n    and the good, one event befalls, i. 10, ii. 348;\n    the connection of, and the good together, i. 11.\n\n  Wickedness, not a flaw of nature, i. 456.\n\n  Will, the consent of, to an evil deed, makes the deed evil, i. 26;\n    is it ruled by necessity? 195;\n    the enemies of God are so by, 484, 487;\n    no efficient cause of an evil, 490;\n    the misdirected love by which it fell away from the immutable to\n          the mutable good, 490, 491;\n    whether the angels received their good, from God, 491, 492;\n    the character of, makes the affections of the soul right or wrong,\n          ii. 9, etc.;\n    in the state of perfect felicity, 542.\n\n  Will of God, the eternal and unchangeable, ii. 474.\n\n  Wisdom, described in the Book of Proverbs, ii. 211.\n\n  Wisdom, the Book of, a prophecy of Christ in the, ii. 209.\n\n  Wives, how the Romans obtained their first, i. 103.\n\n  Woman, shall she retain he sex in the resurrection? ii. 509, 510;\n    the formation of, from a rib of sleeping Adams, a type, 510.\n\n  World, the, not eternal, i. 439;\n    the infinite ages before, not to be comprehended, 441;\n    and time had both one beginning, 442;\n    falseness of the history which ascribes many thousand years to the\n          past existence of, 494;\n    of those who hold a plurality of worlds, 496;\n    predictions respecting the end of, ii. 395, etc.\n\n  Worlds without end, or ages of ages, i. 508, etc.\n\n  Wonders, lying, ii. 483.\n\n  Worm, the, that dieth not, ii. 393, 433.\n\n  Worship of God, distinction between _latria_ and _dulia_, i. 383,\n          384, 386, etc.\n\n\n  Xenocrates, i. 324.\n\n\n  Years, in the time of the antediluvians, ii. 68, etc., 73, etc.;\n    in the words, \"their days shall be an hundred and twenty years,\"\n          97, etc.;\n    the thousand, of the Book of Revelation, 356;\n    the three and a half, of the Book of Revelation, 394.\n\n\n  Zoroaster, ii. 440.\n\n                      MURRAY AND GIBB, EDINBURGH,\n             PRINTERS TO HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE.\n\n\n\n\n                   _T. and T. Clark's Publications._\n\n                   =Ante-Nicene Christian Library.=\n\n          A COLLECTION OF ALL THE WORKS OF THE FATHERS OF THE\n           CHRISTIAN CHURCH, PRIOR TO THE COUNCIL OF NIC\u00c6A,\n\n                             EDITED BY THE\n\n                    =REV. ALEXANDER ROBERTS, D.D.=,\n\n             Author of 'Discussions on the Gospels,' etc.,\n\n                                  AND\n\n                       =JAMES DONALDSON, LL.D.=,\n\n       Rector of the Royal High School, Edinburgh, and Author of\n              'Early Christian Literature and Doctrine.'\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\nMessrs. Clark are now happy to announce the near completion of this\nSeries. It has been received with marked approval by all sections of\nthe Christian Church in this country and in the United States, as\nsupplying what has long been felt to be a want, and also on account\nof the impartiality, learning, and care with which Editors and\nTranslators have executed a very difficult task.\n\nThe whole Series will be completed in Twenty-four Volumes, of which\nEighteen are ready, and the remaining Six will be published in the\ncourse of this year.\n\nEach Work is supplied with a good and full Index; but, to add to\nthe value of the completed Series, an Index Volume is preparing for\nthe whole Series, which will be sold separately to those who may\ndesire it, at a moderate price; and the complete Series (exclusive of\nGeneral Index), in Twenty-four Volumes, will cost Six Guineas.\n\nThe Subscription for 1st, 2d, 3d, 4th, and 5th Years is now due--\u00a35,\n5s.\n\n  _The Subscription to the Series is at the rate of_ 21_s. for Four\n      Volumes when paid in advance_ (_or_ 24_s. when not so paid_),\n      _and_ 10_s._ 6_d. each Volume to Non-Subscribers._\n\nThe Publishers, however, do not bind themselves to _continue_ to\nsupply the complete Series at this rate.\n\nSingle Years cannot be had separately, with the exception of\ncurrent year, unless to complete sets, but _any Volume_ may be had\nseparately, price 10s. 6d.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe Homilies of Origen are not included in the Series, as the\nPublishers have received no encouragement to have them translated.\n\nThe Works are arranged as follow:--\n\n\n                              FIRST YEAR.\n\n  APOSTOLIC FATHERS, comprising Clement's Epistles to the\n      Corinthians; Polycarp to the Ephesians; Martyrdom of Polycarp;\n      Epistle of Barnabas; Epistles of Ignatius (longer and shorter,\n      and also the Syriac version); Martyrdom of Ignatius; Epistle\n      to Diognetus; Pastor of Hermas; Papias; Spurious Epistles of\n      Ignatius. In One Volume.\n\n  JUSTIN MARTYR; ATHENAGORAS. In One Volume.\n\n  TATIAN; THEOPHILUS; THE CLEMENTINE RECOGNITIONS. In One Volume.\n\n  CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA, Volume First, comprising Exhortation to\n      Heathen; The Instructor; and a portion of the Miscellanies.\n\n\n                             SECOND YEAR.\n\n  HIPPOLYTUS, Volume First; Refutation of all Heresies and Fragments\n      from his Commentaries.\n\n  IREN\u00c6US, Volume First.\n\n  TERTULLIAN AGAINST MARCION.\n\n  CYPRIAN, Volume First; the Epistles and some of the Treatises.\n\n\n                              THIRD YEAR.\n\n  IREN\u00c6US (completion); HIPPOLYTUS (completion); Fragments of Third\n      Century. In One Volume.\n\n  ORIGEN: De Principiis; Letters; and portion of Treatise against\n      Celsus.\n\n  CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA, Volume Second; Completion of Miscellanies.\n\n  TERTULLIAN, Volume First: To the Martyrs; Apology; To the Nations,\n      etc.\n\n\n                             FOURTH YEAR.\n\n  CYPRIAN, Volume Second (completion); Novatian; Minucius Felix;\n      Fragments.\n\n  METHODIUS; ALEXANDER OF LYCOPOLIS; PETER OF ALEXANDRIA; Anatolius;\n      Clement on Virginity, and Fragments.\n\n  TERTULLIAN, Volume Second.\n\n  APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS; ACTS AND REVELATIONS, comprising all the very\n      curious Apocryphal Writings of the first Three Centuries.\n\n\n                              FIFTH YEAR.\n\n  TERTULLIAN, Volume Third (completion).\n\n  CLEMENTINE HOMILIES; APOSTOLICAL CONSTITUTIONS. In One Volume.\n\n  ARNOBIUS.\n\n  DIONYSIUS; GREGORY THAUMATURGUS; SYRIAN FRAGMENTS. In One Volume.\n\n                (ARNOBIUS and DIONYSIUS, etc., in May.)\n\n\n                   SIXTH YEAR (to be ready in 1871).\n\n  LACTANTIUS. Two Volumes.\n\n  ORIGEN, Volume Second (completion).\n\n  EARLY LITURGIES AND REMAINING FRAGMENTS.\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber's Notes:\n\n\nObvious punctuation and spelling errors have been fixed throughout.\n\nInconsistent hyphenation is as in the original.","title":"The City of God, Volume II","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":243869}