{"slug":"stoa0040.stoa062a.opp-lat1","id":"latin:ogl-pl:stoa0040.stoa062a.opp-lat1","title":"Sermones. De Symbolo Ad Catechumenos","title_source":"Sermones. De Symbolo Ad Catechumenos","author":"Augustinus","genre":"homily","date":"","tradition":"latin","coverage":"not-located","coverage_claim":{"status":"not-located","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},"publication":{"status":"machine-draft","reviewed_by":null,"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","generated":"2026-11-15T06:53:22Z","cost_usd":0.011033},"source":{"registry_id":"latin:ogl-pl:stoa0040.stoa062a.opp-lat1","work_id":"stoa0040.stoa062a.opp-lat1","edition":"ogl-pl","language":"","license":"Available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License","url":"https://github.com/OpenGreekAndLatin/patrologia_latina-dev/blob/master/data/stoa0040/stoa062a/stoa0040.stoa062a.opp-lat1.xml"},"stats":{"passages":22,"english_words":5830,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":21687,"commentary_units":128,"commentary_kinds":8,"derived_notes":0,"ambiguities":30,"work_notes":5,"external_links":0,"timeline":6},"summary":{"work":"stoa0040.stoa062a.opp-lat1","abstract":"Augustine's 'Sermones. De Symbolo Ad Catechumenos' is a Latin homily delivered to catechumens in Hippo Regius, likely between 400 and 410 AD. The sermon explains the Creed (Symbolum) as a scriptural summary of faith, emphasizing oral memorization over written transmission. It reflects early 5th-century North African baptismal catechesis, including rites like exsufflation and exorcism. The text survives in 8th–9th century manuscripts and was widely used in medieval catechetical collections, influencing Carolingian and Scholastic expositions. The edition follows the Ogl–PL text, collating multiple recensions without a critical apparatus.","historical_context":"Augustine delivered this sermon during his episcopate in Hippo Regius (modern Annaba, Algeria) in the early 5th century, likely around 400–410 AD. The community was Latin-speaking, with catechumens preparing for baptism at Easter. The genre is a homily, part of Augustine's catechetical series on the Creed. The text survives in multiple manuscript families, with earliest witnesses from the 8th–9th centuries, indicating a continuous transmission through monastic and cathedral libraries. The sermon was later incorporated into medieval catechetical collections, influencing Carolingian and Scholastic authors. The edition's division into lectionary units is a later editorial addition, not original to Augustine's delivery. The Ogl–PL text collates several recensions but lacks a critical apparatus; for stemmatic analysis, the Maurist or CCL editions are recommended.","significance":"This sermon is a key witness to early 5th-century North African baptismal catechesis, illustrating the oral transmission of the Creed and pre-baptismal rites. It influenced medieval catechetical traditions and later expositions of the Creed by Carolingian and Scholastic authors, shaping Western Christian education.","timeline":[{"date":"c. 354–430","event":"Life of Augustine of Hippo"},{"date":"c. 400–410","event":"Probable delivery of the sermon in Hippo Regius"},{"date":"8th–9th c.","event":"Earliest surviving manuscript witnesses"},{"date":"Medieval period","event":"Widespread use in catechetical collections"},{"date":"Carolingian era","event":"Influence on Carolingian expositions of the Creed"},{"date":"Scholastic period","event":"Influence on Scholastic authors"}],"relations":[{"work":"De Symbolo ad Catechumenos (other versions)","relation":"Part of a broader catechetical tradition; multiple recensions exist","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Augustine's De Catechizandis Rudibus","relation":"Related catechetical work by Augustine","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Carolingian commentaries on the Creed","relation":"Influenced by this sermon","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Scholastic expositions of the Creed","relation":"Influenced by this sermon","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Maurist edition of Augustine's works","relation":"Provides critical apparatus for manuscript variants","key":"","label":null,"url":null}],"external_links":[],"cautions":["The exact date of delivery is uncertain; the range 400–410 AD is a scholarly estimate.","The division into lectionary units is a later editorial addition and does not reflect Augustine's original structure.","The edition lacks a critical apparatus; for detailed manuscript analysis, consult the Maurist or CCL editions.","The earliest manuscript witnesses date from the 8th–9th centuries, leaving a gap of several centuries from the original delivery."],"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","cost_usd":0.000474,"generated":"2026-11-15T06:53:22Z"},"links":[{"kind":"source","label":"Open Greek and Latin Patrologia Latina","url":"https://github.com/OpenGreekAndLatin/patrologia_latina-dev/blob/master/data/stoa0040/stoa062a/stoa0040.stoa062a.opp-lat1.xml"}],"checks":{"work":"stoa0040.stoa062a.opp-lat1","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":22,"translated":22,"commentary_passages":22,"commentary_units":128,"english_words":5830,"source_letters":21607,"commentary_kinds":8},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[{"unit":"dating","kind":"chronology","basis":"external","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Augustine delivered this sermon on the Creed to catechumens likely in the early 5th century, possibly around 400–410 AD, during his episcopate in Hippo Regius.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The text survives in multiple manuscript families, with the earliest witnesses dating from the 8th–9th centuries. The edition follows the Ogl–PL text, which collates several recensions.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"This sermon was widely used in medieval catechetical collections and influenced later expositions of the Creed, including those by Carolingian and Scholastic authors.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The sermon’s division into lectionary units is a later editorial addition; the original delivery likely had no such breaks. Readers should not assume these reflect Augustine’s own structure.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"external","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"This edition does not provide a critical apparatus of manuscript variants. For detailed stemmatic analysis, consult the Maurist or CCL editions.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"coverage","severity":"info","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},{"kind":"limit","severity":"caution","text":"The English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Coptic; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: homily in Latin; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 22 narrative."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: ogl-pl — Available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License"}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":22},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"S. AURELII AUGUSTINI HIPONENSIS EPISCOPI DE SYMBOLO SERMO AD CATECHUMENOS.\n\nSERMONES\n\nDB SYMBOLO.\n\nDE DISCIPLINA CHRISTIANA.\n\nDE CANTICO NOVO.\n\nDE QUARTA FERIA.\n\nDE CATACLYSMO.\n\nDE TEMPORE BARBARICO.\n\nDE UTILITATE JEJUNII.\n\nDE URBIS EXCIDIO.\n\nCAPUT PRIMUM. — i. Symbolum regula fidei. Symbolum ex Scripturis collectum est. Deus omnipotens. Parvuli exsufflantur et exorcizantur. Accipite, filii, regulam fidei, quod Symbolum dicitur. Et cum acceperitis, in corde scribite, et quotidie dicite apud vos: antequam dormiatis, antequam procedatis, vestro Symbolo vos munite. Symbolum nemo scribit ut legi possit: sed ad recensendum, ne forte deleat oblivio quod tradidit diligentia, sit vobis codex vestra memoria. Quod audituri estis, hoc credituri; et quod credideritis, hoc eliam lingua reddituri. Ait enim Apostolus: Corde creditur ad justitiam, ore autem confessio fit ad salutem (Rom. x, 10). IIoc est cnim Symbolum, quod recensuri estis et reddituri. Ista verba quæ audistis, per divinas Scripturas sparsa suut: sed inde collecta et ad unum redacta, ne tardorum hominum memoria laboraret; ut omnis homo possit dicere, possit tenere quod credit. Numquid enim modo solummodo audistis quia Deus omnipotens est? Sed incipitis eum babere patrem, quando nati fueritis per Ecclesiam matrem.","english":"Sermon of Saint Aurelius Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, on the Creed, to the Catechumens.\n\nSermons\n\nOn the Creed.\n\nOn Christian Discipline.\n\nOn the New Song.\n\nOn the Fourth Day of the Week.\n\nOn the Deluge.\n\nOn the Time of the Barbarians.\n\nOn the Usefulness of Fasting.\n\nOn the Destruction of the City.\n\nChapter One. — i. The Creed is the rule of faith. The Creed is collected from the Scriptures. God is omnipotent. Infants are exsufflated and exorcised. Receive, children, the rule of faith, which is called the Creed. And when you have received it, write it in your heart, and daily recite it to yourselves: before you sleep, before you go forth, fortify yourselves with your Creed. No one writes the Creed so that it may be read; but for reciting, lest forgetfulness perhaps erase what diligence has handed down, let your memory be your codex. What you are about to hear, this you are to believe; and what you have believed, this you are also to render with your tongue. For the Apostle says: Belief in the heart is for righteousness, but confession by the mouth is for salvation (Rom. 10:10). For this is the Creed, which you are to recite and render. These words which you have heard are scattered throughout the divine Scriptures; but they are collected from there and reduced to one, lest the memory of slow men should labor; so that every man can say, can hold what he believes. For do you now only hear that God is omnipotent? But you begin to have him as a father when you are born through Mother Church.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Caput Primum. — i. Symbolum regula fidei.","severity":"info","text":"The chapter heading and first section heading mark the start of the sermon proper, following a list of other sermons in the manuscript.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"Symbolum","severity":"info","text":"Symbolum here denotes the Creed, a fixed summary of faith used in baptismal catechesis. Augustine explains it as a collection from Scripture.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ait enim Apostolus: Corde creditur ad justitiam, ore autem confessio fit ad salutem (Rom. x, 10).","severity":"info","text":"Augustine cites Romans 10:10, though the Vulgate reads 'fides' not 'confessio'; the adaptation emphasizes oral confession of the Creed.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Parvuli exsufflantur et exorcizantur.","severity":"info","text":"Exsufflation and exorcism were pre-baptismal rites for infants, reflecting early Western practice of renouncing Satan before baptism.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Symbolum nemo scribit ut legi possit: sed ad recensendum...","severity":"info","text":"The discipline of not writing the Creed for reading but memorizing it orally was a standard catechetical practice, attested in other patristic sources.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The list of sermons preceding the text may be a later manuscript addition; the exact original order is uncertain."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"Inde ergo jam accepistis, meditati estis, et meditati tenuistis, ut dicatis: Credo iti Deum Patrem omnipotentem. Deus omnipotens est: et cum sit omni. potens, mori non potest, falli non potest, mentiri non potest; et, quod ait Apostolus, negare se ipsum non potest (II Tim. II, 13). Quam multa non potest, et omnipotens est: et ideo omnipotens est, quia ista non potest. Nam si mori posset, non esset omnipotens; si mentiri, si falli, si fallere, si inique agere, non esset omnipotens: quia si boc in eo esset, non fuisset dignus qui esset omnipotens. Prorsus omnipotens Pater noster peccare non potest. Facit quidquid vult: ipsa est omnipotentia. Facit quidquid bene vult, quidquid juste vult: quidquid autem male fit, non vult. Nemo resistit omnipotenti, ut non quod vult faciat. Ipse fecit cælum et terram, mare et omnia quae in eis sunt, invisibilia et visibilia: invisibilia, sicut sunt in cena Sedes, Dominationes, Principatus, Potestates, Archangeli, Angeli, si bene vixerirnus, cives nostri. Fecit in caelo visibilia; solem, lunam, stellas. Suis animalibus terrestribus ornavit terram, implevit aerem volatilibus, terram ambulantibus et serpentibus, mare natantibus: omnia implevit suis creaturis propriis. Focit et hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem suam in mente: ibi est enim imago Dei; ideo mens ipsa nan potest comprehendi nec a se ipsa, ubi est imago Dei.","english":"Therefore, you have already received it, meditated upon it, and held it in meditation, so that you may say: I believe in God the Father Almighty. God is almighty; and although He is almighty, He cannot die, cannot be deceived, cannot lie; and, as the Apostle says, He cannot deny Himself (2 Tim. 2:13). How many things He cannot do, and yet He is almighty; and He is almighty precisely because He cannot do these things. For if He could die, He would not be almighty; if He could lie, be deceived, deceive, or act unjustly, He would not be almighty: because if such things were in Him, He would not be worthy to be almighty. Absolutely, our Almighty Father cannot sin. He does whatever He wills: that itself is omnipotence. He does whatever He wills well, whatever He wills justly; but whatever is done wrongly, He does not will. No one resists the Almighty so that He does not do what He wills. He Himself made heaven and earth, the sea, and all things that are in them, both invisible and visible: invisible, such as Thrones, Dominations, Principalities, Powers, Archangels, Angels—who, if we live well, are our fellow citizens. He made visible things in heaven: the sun, the moon, the stars. He adorned the earth with its land animals, filled the air with birds, the land with walking creatures and serpents, the sea with swimming creatures: He filled everything with its own proper creatures. He also made man in His image and likeness in the mind: for there is the image of God; therefore, the mind itself cannot be comprehended even by itself, where the image of God is.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"II Tim. II, 13","severity":"info","text":"Augustine cites 2 Timothy 2:13, but the modern verse numbering differs; the reference likely corresponds to 2 Timothy 2:13 in the Vulgate, which reads 'Deus negare se ipsum non potest'.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":["ogl-pl"]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"omnipotens","severity":"info","text":"Augustine paradoxically defines omnipotence by what God cannot do (die, lie, sin), arguing that these limitations are essential to divine power, a common patristic theme.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Sedes, Dominationes, Principatus, Potestates, Archangeli, Angeli","severity":"info","text":"This list of angelic orders reflects the Pseudo-Dionysian hierarchy (Celestial Hierarchy, c. 5th–6th century), though Augustine's earlier usage shows its roots in Latin tradition.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The passage moves from a theological paradox (omnipotence defined by limitations) to a doxological catalogue of creation, mirroring the Creed's structure of belief in God the Father Almighty as creator.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"parallel","kind":"parallel","basis":"text","lemma":"imago Dei in mente","severity":"info","text":"Augustine locates the image of God in the mind, echoing his earlier works (e.g., De Trinitate 12.7) and distinguishing it from bodily likeness, a key theme in his anthropology.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"in cena","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase 'in cena' (in the sky) is likely a scribal error or variant for 'in caelo' (in heaven), as the context lists celestial beings; the English draft reads 'in heaven'.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'in cena' may be a corruption of 'in caelo' or a rare usage; the translation adopts 'in heaven'.","The reference 'II Tim. II, 13' uses old chapter numbering; modern Bibles place it at 2 Timothy 2:13."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"Ad bec facti sumus, ut creaturis caeteris dominemur: sed per peccatum in primo homine lapsi sumus, et, in mortis bacreditatem omnes devenimus. Facti sumus humiles mortales, impleti suRius timoribus, erroribus: hoc merito peccati; cum quo merito et reatu nascitur omnis homo (Gen. I-III). Ideo sicut vidistis hodie, sicut nostis, et parvuli exsufflantur et exorcizantur, ut pellatur ab eis diaboli potestas inimica, quæ decepit hominem, ut possideret homines. Non ergo creatura Dei in infantibus exorcizatur aut exsumalur: sed ille sub quo sunt omnes qui com peccato nascuntur; est enim princeps peccatorum. Ac per hoc propter unum qui lapsus est et omnes misit in mortem, missus est unus sine peccato qui omnes in se credontes perducat ad vitam, liberans eos a peccato.\n\nCAPUT II. — 3. Filium Dei Dominum nostrum vere esse Deum et omnipotentem. Pater et Filius non dii duo, sed unus Deus. Filius omnipotens et œqualis a Patre genitus. Ideo credimus et in Filium ejus, id est, Dei Patris omnipotentis, unicum, Dominum nostrum. Quando audis unicum Dei Filium, agnosce Deum. Non enim Filius Dei unicus posset esse non Dens. Quod est, hoc genuit; etsi non est quem genuit. Si verus est autem Filius, hoc est quod Pater: si hoc non est quod Pater, non est verus Filius. Mortales et lerrenas creaturas attendite: quod est res quæque, boc generat.","english":"We were made to rule over the other creatures; but through sin we fell in the first man, and all came into the inheritance of death. We were made lowly, mortal, filled with fears and errors: this is the merit of sin, with which merit and guilt every human is born (Gen. I–III). Therefore, as you have seen today, as you know, even infants are blown upon and exorcised, so that the hostile power of the devil, who deceived man, may be driven from them, that he might possess men. It is not, then, God’s creature in infants that is exorcised or blown upon; but that one under whom all who are born with sin lie; for he is the prince of sinners. And on this account, because of the one who fell and sent all into death, one without sin was sent, who leads all who believe in him to life, freeing them from sin.\n\nCHAPTER II. — 3. That the Son of God, our Lord, is truly God and omnipotent. The Father and the Son are not two gods, but one God. The Son is omnipotent and equal, begotten by the Father. Therefore we also believe in his Son, that is, of God the Father Almighty, the only one, our Lord. When you hear “the only Son of God,” recognize God. For the only Son of God could not be not God. What He is, He begot; even if what He begot is not. But if He is a true Son, He is what the Father is: if He is not what the Father is, He is not a true Son. Consider mortal and earthly creatures: each thing gives birth to what it is.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"background","lemma":"exsufflantur et exorcizantur","severity":"info","text":"The practice of exsufflatio (blowing upon) and exorcism of infants before baptism is attested in early African liturgy, reflecting the belief in inherited sin and the need to expel the devil's power.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Gen. I-III","severity":"info","text":"The reference to the fall in the first man and the inheritance of death alludes to Genesis 3, the narrative of Adam and Eve's sin and its consequences for humanity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"unicum Filium Dei","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'unicum Filium Dei' (only Son of God) is a key Christological term, emphasizing the unique and divine nature of Christ, distinct from any other sonship.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"CAPUT II. — 3.","severity":"info","text":"This passage begins a new chapter (CAPUT II) and section (3), marking a shift from the discussion of original sin and exorcism to a doctrinal exposition on the Son of God.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"parallel","kind":"parallel","basis":"text","lemma":"Quod est, hoc genuit","severity":"info","text":"The principle 'what He is, He begot' echoes the Nicene theology of consubstantiality, asserting that the Son is of the same substance as the Father, a key anti-Arian argument.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"et si non est quem genuit","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase 'et si non est quem genuit' is textually problematic; the Latin may be corrupt or elliptical. The intended sense is likely 'and if what He begot is not [what He is],' contrasting mortal generation with divine.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'et si non est quem genuit' is ambiguous; it may be a textual corruption or a compressed conditional. The reading taken treats it as a contrast with mortal generation."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":4,"ref":"p4","source":"Non generat homo bovem, non generat oris canem, nec canis otem. Quidquid est quod generat, Id quod est generat. Tenete ergo fortiter, firmiter. fideliter, quia boc genuit Deus Pater, quod esi ipse omnipotens. Creaturæ istac mortales per corruptionem generant. Numquid sic Deus generat? Mortalis natus id quod est generat, immortalis quod ost generat: corruptibilis corruptibilem generat, incorruptibilis incorruptibitenl; corruptibilis corruptibiliter, incorruptibilis incorruptibiliter: usque adeo hoc quod est, ut unus unum, idco unicum. Scitis quonlam cum vobis pronuntiarem Symbolum sic dixi, et sic credere debetis: quia credimus in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, et in Jesum Christum Filium ejus unicum. Jam quando unicum, crede omnipotentem: non enim Deus Pater facit quod vult, et Deus Filius non facit quod vult. Una voluntas est Patris et Filii, quia una natura. Nec enim voluntas Filii potest a Patris voluntate aliquantulum segregari. Deus et Deus, ambo unus Deus: omnipotens et omnipotens, ambo unus omnipotens.","english":"A man does not beget a cow, nor a sheep a dog, nor a dog a sheep. Whatever begets, begets what it is. Hold this therefore strongly, firmly, faithfully: that God the Father begot what He Himself is—omnipotent. These mortal creatures beget through corruption. Does God beget in that way? A mortal begets what it is; an immortal begets what it is; a corruptible begets a corruptible; an incorruptible begets an incorruptible; a corruptible begets corruptibly, an incorruptible begets incorruptibly—so much so that what He is, being one, He begets one, and therefore the only one. You know that when I recited the Creed to you, I said, and you must believe thus: that we believe in God the Father Almighty, and in Jesus Christ His only Son. Now when He is the only Son, believe Him to be Almighty. For God the Father does not do what He wills, and God the Son not do what He wills. There is one will of the Father and the Son, because there is one nature. For the will of the Son cannot be separated in any degree from the will of the Father. God and God, both are one God; Almighty and Almighty, both are one Almighty.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"Non generat homo bovem...","severity":"info","text":"Augustine uses a series of biological impossibilities to illustrate the principle that like begets like, a premise for the theological argument that the Son is consubstantial with the Father.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"unicum","severity":"info","text":"The Latin 'unicum' (only Son) is a creedal term from the Old Roman Symbol, emphasizing the unique and singular generation of the Son from the Father, which Augustine here links to omnipotence.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem","severity":"info","text":"This phrase echoes the opening of the Old Roman Creed (Symbolum Apostolorum), which Augustine is expounding to catechumens; the creed itself is a scriptural summary, not a direct biblical quote.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"corruptibilis corruptibilem generat","severity":"info","text":"Augustine contrasts mortal, corruptible generation (through sexual reproduction and decay) with the divine generation of the Son, which is incorruptible and eternal, reflecting anti-Arian polemic.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Tenete ergo fortiter, firmiter, fideliter","severity":"info","text":"This tricolon of adverbs marks a rhetorical climax, urging the catechumens to hold the doctrine of consubstantiality with unwavering faith, a common catechetical exhortation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"boc genuit Deus Pater, quod esi ipse omnipotens","severity":"caution","text":"The Latin text has a probable scribal error: 'boc' for 'hoc', and 'esi' for 'est'. The sense is clear: God the Father begot what He Himself is, i.e., omnipotent.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Latin 'boc' and 'esi' are likely scribal errors for 'hoc' and 'est', but the intended meaning is unambiguous."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":5,"ref":"p5","source":"Non introducimus duos deos, quomodo quidam introducunt, et dicunt: Deus Pater et Deus Filius, sed major Deus Pater, minor Deus Filius. Ambo quid? Duo dii? Erubescis dicere, erubesce credere. Domitus Deus Pater dicis, et Dominus Deus Filius: et dicit ipse Filius, Nemo potest duobus dominis servire (Matth. vi, 24). In familia ipsius sic erimus, ut, quomodo in domo magna ubi est paterfamilias et habet filium, dicamus et nos: Dominus major, Dominus minor? Aversamini ta!em cogitationem. Si vobis latia feceritis in corde, idola ponitis in anima una. Prorsus repellite. Prius credite, postea intelligite. Cui autem donat Deus, ut cum crediderit, cito intelligat; Dei donum est, non bumana fragilitas. Tamen si nondum intelligitis, credie: Deus unus Pater, Deus Christus Filius Dei. Ambo quid? Unus Deus. Et quomodo ambo unus Deus dicitur? Quomodo? miraris? In Actibus Apostolorum, El erat, inquit, credentium anima una et cor unum (Acl. IV, 32). Multx animae erant, fides easdem unam fecerat. Tot millia animarum erant; amavcrunt se, et multæ suut una: amaverunt Deum in igne charitatis, et ex multitudine ad pulchritudinis unitatem venerunt. Si tam multas animas fecit animam unam charitas; qualis charitas est apud Deum, ubi nulla diversitas, sed integra æqualitas?","english":"We do not introduce two gods, as some do, who say: God the Father and God the Son, but God the Father is greater, God the Son is lesser. Both are what? Two gods? You blush to say it, blush to believe it. You say Lord God the Father and Lord God the Son; and the Son Himself says, \"No one can serve two masters\" (Matt. 6:24). Shall we be in His household in such a way that, as in a large house where there is a father of the family and he has a son, we also say: Greater Lord, Lesser Lord? Shrink from such a thought. If you make altars in your heart, you set up idols in your soul. Reject it utterly. First believe, then understand. But if God grants that, having believed, you understand quickly, that is a gift of God, not human frailty. Yet if you do not yet understand, believe: God is one Father, God Christ is the Son of God. Both are what? One God. And how are both called one God? How? Are you amazed? In the Acts of the Apostles, it says, \"And the multitude of believers was one soul and one heart\" (Acts 4:32). There were many souls; faith had made them one. So many thousands of souls were there; they loved one another, and many are one: they loved God in the fire of charity, and from multitude they came to the unity of beauty. If charity made so many souls one soul, what is the charity in God, where there is no diversity, but complete equality?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Nemo potest duobus dominis servire (Matth. vi, 24)","severity":"info","text":"Augustine cites Matthew 6:24 to argue against a hierarchy of two gods, reinforcing the unity of God.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"El erat, inquit, credentium anima una et cor unum (Acl. IV, 32)","severity":"info","text":"The reference to Acts 4:32 (Vulgate: 'animae unius et cordis unius') illustrates unity among believers as a model for divine unity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Non introducimus duos deos, quomodo quidam introducunt","severity":"info","text":"Augustine opposes subordinationist views, likely those of Arians or Homoians, who distinguished a greater Father and lesser Son.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Prius credite, postea intelligite","severity":"info","text":"This phrase marks a rhetorical pivot from refutation to exhortation, encapsulating Augustine's principle of faith seeking understanding.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Aversamini talem cogitationem","severity":"info","text":"Augustine's warning against mental idols anticipates later medieval critiques of anthropomorphic conceptions of the Trinity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Domitus Deus Pater dicis","severity":"caution","text":"The Latin 'Domitus' is likely a scribal error for 'Dominus'; the English draft correctly reads 'Lord God the Father'.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'Domitus Deus Pater' is textually corrupt; the intended reading is 'Dominus Deus Pater'.","The citation 'Acl. IV, 32' refers to Acts 4:32, but the Vulgate text differs slightly from Augustine's paraphrase."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":6,"ref":"p6","source":"Si in terris et in hominibus potuit esse tanta charitas, ut de tot animabus faceret unam animam; ubi semper inseparabilis fuit Pater a Filio, Filius a Patre, potuerunt ambo esse nisi Deus unus? Sed illae animae, et multæ animæ dici potuerunt, et anima una: Dens autem, ubi est ineffabilis et summa coujunctio, unus Deus dici potest, non dii duo.\n\nFacit quod vult Pater, facit quod vult Filius. Nolite putare omnipotentem Patrem et non omnipotentem Filium: error est, delete boc in vobis, non hæreat in memoria vestra, non bibatur in fide vestra, et Ii forte aliquis vestrum biberit, vomat. Omnipotens est Pater, omnipotens Filius. Si omnipotens non genuh omnipotentem, non verum filium genuit. Quid enim dicimus, fratres, si Pater major minorem filium genuit? Quid enim dixi 1, genuit? Homo enim major generat filium minorem, vcruin est: sed quia senescit ille, crescit iste, et ad formam patris sui vel crescendo pervenit. Filius Dei si 2non crescit, quia nee potest Deus senescere, perfectus natus est. Perfectus quidem natus, si non crescit, et minor non remansit; aqualis est. Nam ut sciatis omnipotentem de omnipotente natum, ipsum audite qui Veritas est: De so quod dicit Veritas, hoc est verum. Quid ait Vcritas? quid ait Filius, qui est Veritas? Quacumque Pater fucit, hæc et Filius similiter facit (Joan. v, 19). Omnipotens est Filius, omnia facicndo quoe volucrit.","english":"If on earth and among human beings there could be such great love that from many souls it made one soul, where the Father was always inseparable from the Son, the Son from the Father, could they both be anything but one God? But those souls could be called both many souls and one soul; God, however, where there is an ineffable and supreme union, can be called one God, not two gods.\n\nThe Father does what He wills, the Son does what He wills. Do not think that the Father is omnipotent and the Son is not omnipotent: it is an error, delete this from yourselves, let it not cling to your memory, let it not be drunk in your faith, and if by chance any of you has drunk it, let him vomit it up. The Father is omnipotent, the Son is omnipotent. If the omnipotent one did not beget an omnipotent one, He did not beget a true son. For what do we say, brothers, if the Father begot a son who is lesser? For what have I said, begot? For a human being begets a son who is lesser, that is true: but because that one grows old, this one grows, and by growing he reaches the form of his father. The Son of God does not grow, because God cannot grow old, He was born perfect. Indeed, born perfect, if He does not grow, and He did not remain lesser, He is equal. For that you may know that the omnipotent was born from the omnipotent, hear the one who is Truth Himself: what Truth says, that is true. What does Truth say? What does the Son, who is Truth, say? Whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise (John 5:19). The Son is omnipotent, doing everything He wills.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"charitas","severity":"info","text":"Augustine uses the human analogy of many souls becoming one through love to argue for the unity of Father and Son, despite their distinct persons.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Joan. v, 19","severity":"info","text":"Augustine cites John 5:19, where Jesus states that whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise, to support the Son's omnipotence and equality.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"vomat","severity":"info","text":"The vivid metaphor of vomiting up error reflects Augustine's catechetical urgency, urging catechumens to reject subordinationist views before baptism.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"omnipotens","severity":"info","text":"Augustine insists that both Father and Son are omnipotent, countering the idea that the Son is a lesser deity, a key point in anti-Arian polemic.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"narrative","severity":"info","text":"This passage continues the argument against ditheism and subordinationism, using analogy, imperative exhortation, and scriptural proof to assert co-equality.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"error est, delete hoc in vobis","severity":"info","text":"Augustine's forceful language against subordinationism reflects the ongoing fourth- and fifth-century Nicene controversies, shaping later Trinitarian orthodoxy.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Latin 'vomat' is a strong metaphor; the English draft renders it as 'vomit it up', which is literal but may obscure the rhetorical force of purging error from faith."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":7,"ref":"p7","source":"Kain si facit aliqua Pater quæ non facit Filius, falsum die xit Filius: Quacumque Pater facit, hœc et Filius facit similiter. Sed quia verum dixit Filius: credite, Quœcumque Pater facit, hœc et Filius facit similiter; et ere. didistis in Filium omnipotentem. Quod verbum etsi in Symbolo non dixistis, tamen hoc est quod expressistis, quando in unicum ipsum Dcum credidistis. Habet aliquid Pater quod non habet Filius? Hoc Ariani hæretici blasphemi dicunt, non ego. Scd cgo quid dico? Si habet aliquid Pater, quod non habet Filius; mentitur Filius, qui dicit, OnOma quæ habet Pater, mea sunt (Id., XVI, 15). Multa et innumerabilia sont testimonia quibns probetnr quia Filius verus Dei a Patris est Filius, et Pater Deus veram gcnuit Filium Deum, et Pater et Filius imus est Deus.\n\nCAPUT III. — 6. Filii Dei nativitas humana ex virgine. Passio sub prœside Pilato. Nativitas Christi aterna de Patre. Crucis supplicium cur electum a Christo. Patientiœ merces non temporatis in prœsenti, sed œternn speretur in futuro sœcuto. Sed iste Filius unicus Dei Patris4 omnipotentis vidcamus quid fecit propter nos, quid passus est propter nos.Natus de Spiritu sancto et virgine Maria. Ille Deos tantus æqualis Patri, natus do Spiritu sancto et virgine Maria humilis, unde sanaret superbos. Exaltavit se homo, et cecidit: humiliavit sc Deus, eterexit. Humilitas Christi quid est? Manum Deus homin!","english":"If the Father does something that the Son does not do, then the Son spoke falsely when he said: “Whatever the Father does, this the Son also does likewise.” But because the Son spoke truly, believe: “Whatever the Father does, this the Son also does likewise”; and you have believed in the Son as omnipotent. Even if you did not say that word in the Creed, nevertheless this is what you expressed when you believed in the one and only God. Does the Father have something that the Son does not have? The Arian heretics blasphemously say this, not I. But what do I say? If the Father has something that the Son does not have, then the Son lies when he says: “All that the Father has, are mine” (John 16:15). Many and innumerable are the testimonies by which it is proved that the Son is the true Son of God the Father, and that the Father, true God, begot the Son, true God, and that the Father and the Son are one God.\n\nChapter III. — 6. The human birth of the Son of God from the Virgin. The Passion under the governor Pilate. The eternal birth of Christ from the Father. Why the punishment of the cross was chosen by Christ. The reward of patience is not to be hoped for in the present temporal world, but in the future eternal world. But let us see what this only Son of the omnipotent God the Father did for us, what he suffered for us. Born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary. That God, so great, equal to the Father, born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, humble, in order to heal the proud. Man exalted himself and fell; God humbled himself and raised up. What is the humility of Christ? The hand of God to men!","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Quœcumque Pater facit, hœc et Filius facit similiter","severity":"info","text":"Augustine paraphrases John 16:15, a key proof-text for Nicene orthodoxy against Arian subordinationism.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"unicum ipsum Deum","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'unicum ipsum Deum' in the Creed underscores the oneness of God, a point Augustine uses to argue against Arian claims of two distinct divine beings.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Ariani hæretici blasphemi","severity":"info","text":"Augustine refutes Arianism, which held that the Son was a created being inferior to the Father, by citing scriptural proofs of their equality.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"CAPUT III","severity":"info","text":"The passage transitions from doctrinal argument to a narrative of Christ's incarnation and passion, marked by the chapter heading 'CAPUT III'.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Natus de Spiritu sancto et virgine Maria","severity":"info","text":"This phrase echoes the Creed's article on the Incarnation, a standard catechetical formula in the Latin tradition.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Kain si facit aliqua Pater","severity":"caution","text":"The Latin text shows a possible scribal error: 'Kain' may be a corruption of 'Quid enim' or similar, and the syntax is disrupted; the English translation follows a conjectural emendation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Latin 'Kain' is unclear; it may be a scribal error for 'Quid enim' or a Coptic loanword, but the context suggests a rhetorical question."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":8,"ref":"p8","source":"j acenti porrexit. Nos ceeidirmus, ille descendit: nos jacebamus, ille se inclinavit. Prendamus et surgamus, ut non in paenam cadamus. Ergo inclinatio ipsius ha:c est, Natus est de Spiritu sancto et virgino Maria. Et ipsa nativitas humana, humilis et excelsa. Unde humilis? Quia homo natus est ex hominibus. Unde excelsa? Quia de virgine. Virgo concepit, virgo peperit, et post partum virgo permansit.\n\nQuid deinde? Passus sub Pontio Pilato. Præsidatam agebat, et judex erat ipse Ponlius Pilatus, quando passus est Christus. Judicis nomine signata sunt tempora, quando passus est, sub Pontio Pilato; quando passus est, crucifixus, mortuus 3, ct sepultus. Qnis? quid? pro quibus? Quis? Filius Dei unicus, Dominus noster. Quid? Crucifixus, mortuus, et sepaltus. Pro quibus? Pro impiis ct peccatoribus. Magna dignatio! magna gratia! Quid retribuam Domino, pre omnibus quos retribuit mihi (Psal. cxv, 12)?","english":"does, this the Son also does likewise.\" He lay prostrate; we had fallen; he descended; we lay; he bent down. Let us take hold and rise, so that we do not fall into punishment. Therefore, his bending down is this: He was born from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary. And that human birth is both humble and exalted. Why humble? Because a man was born from human beings. Why exalted? Because from a virgin. A virgin conceived, a virgin gave birth, and after childbirth the virgin remained.\n\nWhat next? He suffered under Pontius Pilate. He was presiding as governor, and Pontius Pilate himself was the judge when Christ suffered. The times when he suffered are marked by the name of the judge: under Pontius Pilate; when he suffered, he was crucified, died, and was buried. Who? What? For whom? Who? The only Son of God, our Lord. What? Crucified, died, and buried. For whom? For the impious and sinners. Great condescension! Great grace! What shall I render to the Lord for all that he has rendered to me (Psalm 115:12)?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Psalm 115:12","severity":"info","text":"The closing quotation 'Quid retribuam Domino...' is from Psalm 115:12 (LXX; Vulgate numbering). Augustine adapts it to his rhetorical question.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"inclinatio","severity":"info","text":"'Inclinatio' (bending down) is Augustine's metaphor for the Incarnation, contrasting human prostration with divine condescension. It echoes the earlier image of Christ bending to lift the fallen.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"sub Pontio Pilato","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'sub Pontio Pilato' anchors the Passion in Roman history. Pontius Pilate was prefect of Judaea c. 26–36 CE. Augustine notes his role as 'praesidatam' (governor) and judge.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Quis? quid? pro quibus?","severity":"info","text":"Augustine uses a catechetical triplet (Who? What? For whom?) to expound the Creed's clause on the Passion, reinforcing the doctrinal content for catechumens.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"virgo concepit, virgo peperit, et post partum virgo permansit","severity":"info","text":"This threefold affirmation of Mary's perpetual virginity became a standard formula in Latin patristic and medieval theology, often cited in Marian doctrine.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Natus est de Spiritu sancto et virgino Maria","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase 'de Spiritu sancto et virgino Maria' is unusual; the Creed typically says 'de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria virgine'. Augustine may be paraphrasing or the text may reflect a variant tradition.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'Natus est de Spiritu sancto et virgino Maria' could be a loose paraphrase or a textual variant; the standard Creed uses 'ex Maria virgine'.","The quotation from Psalm 115:12 is adapted; the original reads 'Quid retribuam Domino pro omnibus quae retribuit mihi'."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":9,"ref":"p9","source":"Natus cst ante omnia tempora, natus ante omnia sxcula. Natus ante. Ante quid, ubi non est ante? Prorsus nolitc cogitare aliquod tempus ante nativitatem Christi, qua natus cst de Patre: de ipsa nativitate loquor, qua est Filius Dei omnipotentis unicus Dominus noster; de ipsa prius loquor. Nolite cogitare in hac nativitate initium temporis; nolite cogitare ullum spatium æternitatis, quando crat Pater et non crat Filius. Ex quo Pater, ex eo Filius. Et quid est, ex quo, ubi non est initium? Ergo semper Pater sine initio, semper Filius sine initio. Etquomodo, inquies, natus est, si non habet initium? De aeterno coæternus. Nunquam fuit Pater et non erat Filius, et tamen Filius a Patre est genitus. Unde datur qualiscumque similitiudo? In rebus terrenis sumus, in creatura visibili sumus. DeL mihi similitudinem terra: non dat. net mihi aliquam similitudinem undarum clementum: non habet unde. Det mihi similitudinem aliquod animal: nec hoc potest. Animal quidem generat, et quod generat, et quod generatur: sed prior est pater, et postea nascitur filius. Inveniamus coævum, et credamus coæternum. Si potuerimus invenire patrem coævum filio suo, et filium coaevum patri suo; credamus Deum Patrem coævum Filio suo, et Deum Filium coæternum Patri suo. In terra possumus invenire aliquem coaevum, non possumus invenire aliqucm coxternum. Intendamus coævum, et credamus coæternum.","english":"He was born before all times, born before all ages. Born before. Before what, where there is no \"before\"? Do not think of any time before the birth of Christ, by which He was born of the Father: I speak of that birth itself, by which He is the only Son of God the Almighty, our only Lord; I speak of that first. Do not think in this birth of a beginning of time; do not think of any span of eternity when the Father existed and the Son did not exist. From the time the Father exists, from that time the Son exists. And what is \"from that time,\" where there is no beginning? Therefore, the Father is always without beginning, the Son is always without beginning. \"And how,\" you will say, \"was He born, if He has no beginning?\" From the eternal, coeternal. There was never a time when the Father existed and the Son did not exist, and yet the Son was begotten by the Father. Whence is any likeness given? We are in earthly things, we are in visible creation. Give me a likeness from the earth: it does not give. Give me some likeness from the element of water: it has no source. Give me some likeness from an animal: not even this can. An animal indeed begets, and what begets and what is begotten: but the father is prior, and afterwards the son is born. Let us find a coeval, and let us believe a coeternal. If we can find a father coeval with his son, and a son coeval with his father; let us believe God the Father coeval with His Son, and God the Son coeternal with His Father. On earth we can find someone coeval, we cannot find someone coeternal. Let us attend to the coeval, and believe the coeternal.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"coæternus","severity":"info","text":"Augustine coins the term 'coæternus' (coeternal) to express the Son's eternal coexistence with the Father, distinguishing it from 'coævus' (coeval), which applies to temporal beings.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"This passage addresses the Arian controversy, which denied the Son's coeternity with the Father. Augustine argues that the Son is begotten but without temporal beginning, a key Nicene position.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Augustine uses a rhetorical pattern of negation ('nolite cogitare') and analogy-seeking (earth, water, animal) to lead the congregation from temporal to eternal concepts, culminating in the distinction between coeval and coeternal.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"parallel","kind":"parallel","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The argument that 'there was never a time when the Father existed and the Son did not' echoes Athanasius, Contra Arianos 1.14, and anticipates the Athanasian Creed's formulation of coeternity.","cites":[],"named_sources":["Athanasius 4th cent."],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"natus cst","severity":"caution","text":"The Latin 'natus cst' (for 'natus est') is a scribal error or variant; the correct form is 'natus est'. This does not affect the theological sense.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'natus cst' is a textual corruption for 'natus est', but the intended meaning is clear."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":10,"ref":"p10","source":"Intentos vos faciet forte aliquis et dicct1: Quando potest inveniri pater coaevus filio suo, ant filius coaevus patri suo? Ut generet pater, antecedit ætate; ut nascatur filius, sequitur xtate; sed hic coaevus patcr filio, vel filius patri, quomodo potest esse? Occurrat vobis ignis pater, splendor filius; ecce invenimus coaevos. Ex quo ignis esse caepit, continuo splendorem gignit: nec ignis ante splendorem, nec splendor post ignem. Et si interrogemus, quis quem generat, ignis splendorem, aut splendor ignem; continuo vobis occurrit sensu naturali, prudentia insita mentibus vestris, omnes clamatis: Ignis splendorem, non splendor ignem. Ecce pater incipiens, ecce filius simul, nec antecedens, nec sequens. Ecce ergo pater incipiens, ecce filius simul incipiens. Si ostendi vobis patrem incipicntem, ct filium simul incipientem; credite Patrem non incipientem, et cum illo Filium nec ipsum incipienlem; illum aeternum, illum coæternum. Si proficitis, intelligitis: date operam prolicerc. Nasci habetis, sed ct crescere debetis; quia nemo incipit a perfecto. Dei Filio licuit nasci perfectum; quia natus cst sine tempore, coæternus Patri, antecedens omnia, non ætate, sed æternitate. eergo natus Patri co:rternus, de qua gencralione dixit propheta, Generationem ejus quis enarrabit (hai. LIn, 8)? natus de Patre sine tempore, natus cst cx virgine in plenitudine temporis.","english":"Perhaps someone will make you attentive and say: When can a father be found coeval with his son, or a son coeval with his father? For a father to beget, he precedes in age; for a son to be born, he follows in age; but here, a father coeval with his son, or a son coeval with his father, how can it be? Let fire as father, and brightness as son occur to you; behold, we have found coevals. From the moment fire begins to exist, it immediately generates brightness: neither fire before brightness, nor brightness after fire. And if we ask which generates which, fire brightness, or brightness fire, immediately, by natural sense, by the prudence implanted in your minds, you all cry out: Fire generates brightness, not brightness fire. Behold a father beginning, behold a son at the same time, neither preceding nor following. Behold, therefore, a father beginning, behold a son beginning at the same time. If I have shown you a father beginning and a son beginning at the same time, believe in a Father not beginning, and with Him a Son not beginning either; Him eternal, Him coeternal. If you make progress, you understand: strive to make progress. You have to be born, but you also must grow; because no one begins from perfection. It was permitted for the Son of God to be born perfect, because He was born without time, coeternal with the Father, preceding all things, not in age but in eternity. Therefore, born coeternal with the Father, concerning which generation the prophet said, \"Who will recount His generation?\" (Isaiah 53:8). Born of the Father without time, He was born of the Virgin in the fullness of time.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"coaevus","severity":"info","text":"Augustine uses the analogy of fire and its brightness to illustrate the coeternity of Father and Son, a standard anti-Arian argument.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Generationem ejus quis enarrabit","severity":"info","text":"The citation 'Generationem ejus quis enarrabit?' is from Isaiah 53:8 (LXX), a key proof-text for the ineffability of Christ's generation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"ignis pater, splendor filius","severity":"info","text":"The fire-brightness analogy was a common patristic illustration of eternal generation, used by earlier writers like Tertullian and Origen.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Si proficitis, intelligitis","severity":"info","text":"This phrase marks a hortatory turn, urging catechumens to progress in understanding, typical of Augustine's catechetical style.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"natus est ex virgine in plenitudine temporis","severity":"info","text":"The contrast between eternal generation and temporal birth from the Virgin became a standard formulation in Latin Christology.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Intentos vos faciet forte aliquis et dicct1","severity":"caution","text":"The Latin text has a probable scribal error: 'dicct1' likely stands for 'dicet' (will say). The sense is clear despite the corruption.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Latin text contains a minor corruption ('dicct1' for 'dicet'), but the meaning is unambiguous."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":11,"ref":"p11","source":"Istam nativitatem antecesserant tempora. Opportunitate temporis quando voluit, quando sciebat, tunc natus est: non enim nolens natus est. Nemo nostrum quia vult nascitur, et nemo nostrum quando vult moritur: ille quando voluit natus est, quando voluit mortuus est; quomodo voluit natus est de virgine, quomodo voluit mortuus est in cruce. Quidquid voluit fecit: quia sic erat homo, ut lateret Deus; susceptor Deus, susceptus homo, unus Christus Deus et homo.\n\nDe cruce ipsius quid loquar? quid dicam? Ettremum genus mortis elegit, ne aliquod genus mortis ejus martyres formidarent. Doctrinam ostend it in bomine, exemplum patientiæ demonstravit in cruce. Ibi opus, quia crucifixus: exemplum operis, crux; præmium operis, resurrectio. Ostendit nobis in cruce quid toleraro, ostendit in resurrectione quid sperare debcamus. Prorsus tanquam agonotheta summus dixit: Fac, et tolle; fac opus, et accipe praemium; certa ill agone, et coronaberis. Quod est opus? Obedientia. Quod est præmium? Resurrectio sine morte. Quare addidi, sine morte? Quia surrexit Lazarus, et mortuus est: resurrexit Christus, jam non moritur, mors ei ultra non dominabitur (Rom. vi, 9).","english":"This birth had been preceded by times. At the opportune moment, when he wished, when he knew, then he was born: for he was not born unwillingly. None of us is born because he wills it, and none of us dies when he wills it; he was born when he wished, he died when he wished; as he wished, he was born of a virgin, as he wished, he died on the cross. Whatever he wished, he did: because he was so much a man that God lay hidden; the God who took up, the man who was taken up, one Christ, God and man.\n\nConcerning his cross, what shall I say? what shall I speak? He chose the last kind of death, lest any kind of his death should terrify the martyrs. He showed doctrine in the man, he demonstrated an example of patience on the cross. There the work, because he was crucified: the example of the work, the cross; the reward of the work, the resurrection. He showed us on the cross what to endure, he showed in the resurrection what we ought to hope for. Just as a supreme contest-director, he said: Do, and receive; do the work, and receive the prize; contend in that contest, and you will be crowned. What is the work? Obedience. What is the prize? Resurrection without death. Why did I add, without death? Because Lazarus rose, and died: Christ rose, he dies no more, death will no longer dominate him (Rom. 6:9).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"Istam nativitatem antecesserant tempora","severity":"info","text":"Augustine contrasts Christ's voluntary birth with human birth, which is involuntary. The phrase 'this birth had been preceded by times' indicates that Christ's nativity occurred at a chosen moment within time, unlike eternal generation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"susceptor Deus, susceptus homo","severity":"info","text":"'The God who took up, the man who was taken up' expresses the hypostatic union. 'Susceptor' (the one who assumes) and 'susceptus' (the one assumed) are technical terms in Latin Christology for the two natures in one person.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Rom. vi, 9","severity":"info","text":"The citation 'Rom. vi, 9' in the source edition corresponds to Romans 6:9, but the modern verse is Romans 6:9: 'Death will no longer dominate him.' Augustine uses this to contrast Christ's permanent resurrection with Lazarus's temporary one.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":["ogl-pl"]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"agonotheta summus","severity":"info","text":"'Agonotheta' is a Greek loanword for a contest director or president of games. Augustine likens Christ to a supreme agonotheta who sets the terms of the contest (obedience) and the prize (resurrection without death), drawing on athletic imagery common in early Christian exhortation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Ettremum genus mortis elegit","severity":"info","text":"Augustine's claim that Christ chose the 'last kind of death' (crucifixion) to prevent martyrs from fearing any form of death became a standard topos in Latin hagiography, encouraging imitatio Christi without terror of specific execution methods.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Ettremum","severity":"caution","text":"The Latin text reads 'Ettremum genus mortis' which is likely a scribal error or variant for 'extremum' (the last/extreme). The sense is clear: Christ chose the most extreme form of death.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'Istam nativitatem antecesserant tempora' could be read as 'times had preceded this birth' (i.e., time existed before Christ's birth) or 'times had preceded that birth' (referring to the eternal generation of the Son). The context favors the former, contrasting temporal birth with eternal generation."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":12,"ref":"p12","source":"Scriptura dicit: Patientiam Job audistis, et fixem Domini vidistis (Jacobi. v, 11). Job quanta pertulerit, cum legitur et exhorretur, expavescitur, contremiscitur1. Et quid recepit? Dupla quam perdiderat. Ergo ne homo propter præmia temporalia velit habere patientiam, et dicat sibi: Tolerem damnum, reddet milii Deus filios duplos; Job omnia dupla recepit, et tot filios genuit, quot extulerat. Non ergo dupla sunt?Prorsus dupla sunt,quia et illi vivebant. Ne quis dicat, Feram mala, et reddet mihi Deus quemadmodum reddidit Job: ut jam non sit patientia, sed avaritia. Nam si patientiam ille sanctus non haberet, nec ea quæ contingebant fortiter sustineret; testimonium quod ei Dominus reddidit, unde haberet? Animadvertisti, ait Dominus, ad puerum meum Job? Non enim eat illi similis quisquam in terris, homo sine querela, verus Dei cultor. Quale, fratres, testimonium hic sanctus vir a Domino meruit? Et tamen eum sua persuasione mala mulier dccipcre voluit, habens et haec figuram illius serpentis, qui sicut in paradiso decepit hominem primum factum a Deo ( Gen. III, 1-6), ita etiam nunc blasphemiam suggerendo putavit posse decipere placentem hominem Deo. Quanta passus est, fratres! Quis potest tanta pati in re sua, in domo sua, in filiis suis, in carne sua, in ipsa quæ remanserat tentalrice uxore sua?","english":"Scripture says: \"You have heard of the patience of Job, and you have seen the faith of the Lord\" (James 5:11). How much Job endured, when it is read, one shudders, is terrified, trembles. And what did he receive? Double what he had lost. Therefore, let no man wish to have patience for the sake of temporal rewards, and say to himself: \"Let me bear the loss; God will give me double the sons\"; Job received everything double, and begot as many sons as he had buried. Are they not, then, double? They are indeed double, because those sons were also alive. Let no one say, \"I will endure evils, and God will give me back as He gave back to Job,\" so that it is no longer patience, but greed. For if that holy man did not have patience, nor bear bravely what befell him, whence would he have the testimony that the Lord gave him? \"Have you taken note,\" says the Lord, \"of my servant Job?\" For there is no one like him on earth, a man without complaint, a true worshiper of God. What a testimony, brothers, this holy man merited from the Lord! And yet his wicked wife, by her persuasion, wished to deceive him, she also having the figure of that serpent which, just as in paradise it deceived the first man made by God (Gen. 3:1-6), so also now, by suggesting blasphemy, thought it could deceive the man pleasing to God. How much he suffered, brothers! Who can suffer so much in his property, in his home, in his sons, in his own flesh, in his very wife, who remained as a temptress?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Jacobi. v, 11","severity":"info","text":"Augustine cites James 5:11, but the verse actually reads 'You have heard of the patience of Job, and you have seen the faith of the Lord.' The wording differs from the Vulgate, suggesting a variant Latin tradition or a loose citation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Job quanta pertulerit","severity":"info","text":"Augustine draws on the story of Job from the Old Testament, emphasizing his patience and the doubling of his losses. The reference to Job's wife as a figure of the serpent in Eden (Gen. 3:1-6) is an allegorical interpretation common in patristic exegesis.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"patientiam","severity":"info","text":"The Latin 'patientiam' (patience) is a key theological term here, contrasted with 'avaritia' (greed). Augustine warns against practicing patience for temporal rewards, insisting it must be a virtue for its own sake.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Ergo ne homo...","severity":"info","text":"This passage functions as a moral exhortation within the homily, using Job as a cautionary example. Augustine shifts from narrative to direct address ('Let no one say...'), reinforcing the catechetical purpose of the sermon.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"figuram illius serpentis","severity":"info","text":"Augustine's allegorical reading of Job's wife as a type of the Eden serpent reflects a tradition of interpreting biblical figures as prefigurations, common in early Christian exegesis and influential in medieval typology.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"contremiscitur","severity":"caution","text":"The verb 'contremiscitur' is a deponent form used actively, which is unusual in classical Latin but appears in later Christian Latin. The text may reflect a scribal variant or Augustine's own stylistic choice.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The citation of James 5:11 does not match the Vulgate exactly; the source of Augustine's wording is unclear.","The phrase 'fixem Domini' in the Latin is likely a scribal error for 'fidem Domini' (faith of the Lord), as in the English draft."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":13,"ref":"p13","source":"Sed etiam ipsam quæ remanscrat, olim auferret, nisi adjutricem sibi servasset: quia primum hominem per Evan debellaverat, Evam servaverat. Quanta ergo passus est! Perdidit omnia quæ habebat, domus ipsius cecidit; utinam sola! oppressit et filios. Et quia in illo patientia magnum locum tenuerat, quid responderit ille, audite: Dominus dedit, Domnus abstulit; sicut Domino placuit, ita factum cat: sit nowen Domini benedictum. Abstulit quæ dedit, numquid periit qui dedit? Abstulit quæ dedit. Tanquam diceret: Abstulit omnia, auferat omnia, nudum dimittat me, et servet mihi se. Quid enim mihi deerit, si Deum habucro? aut quid mihi alia prosunt, si Deum non habuero? Accessum est ad carnem, pcrcussus est vuluere a capite usque ad pedes; sanie difOuebit, vermibus scatebat: et se in Deo suo immobilem dcmonstrabat atque figebat. Voluit illi mulier, diaboli adjutrix, non mariti consolatrix, persuadere blasphemiam: Quamdiu, inquit, ista et ista pateris? Dic aliquod verbum in Dominum, et morere. Ergo quia humiliatus erat, exaltandus erat. Et fecit hoc Dominus, ut ostenderet hominibus: nam ipse servo suo in coelo majora servavit. Ergo humiliatum Job exaltavit, elatum diabolum humiliavit: quia hunc humiliat, et hunc exaltat (Psal. LXXIV, 8).","english":"But even that which remained, he would have taken away long ago, had he not kept her as his helper: because he had conquered the first man through Eve, and he had preserved Eve. How much, then, did he suffer! He lost everything he had; his very house fell—would that it were only that!—it crushed his children as well. And because patience held a great place in him, hear what he replied: \"The Lord gave, the Lord has taken away; as it pleased the Lord, so it has been done; let the name of the Lord be blessed. He has taken away what he gave; has the one who gave perished? He has taken away what he gave.\" As if he were saying: \"Let him take away everything, let him strip me bare, and let him keep himself for me. For what shall I lack if I have God? Or what good are other things to me if I do not have God?\" The attack came upon his flesh; he was struck with wounds from head to foot; he oozed with pus, he teemed with worms: and yet he showed himself immovable and fixed in his God. His wife, the devil's helper, not her husband's comforter, wanted to persuade him to blasphemy: \"How long,\" she said, \"do you suffer this and that? Say some word against the Lord, and die.\" Therefore, because he had been humbled, he was to be exalted. And the Lord did this to show men: for he himself kept greater things for his servant in heaven. Therefore, he exalted the humbled Job, and humbled the exalted devil: because he humbles this one and exalts that one (Psalm 74:8).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Dominus dedit, Domnus abstulit; sicut Domino placuit, ita factum est; sit nomen Domini benedictum","severity":"info","text":"Augustine adapts Job 1:21 (LXX: 'The Lord gave, the Lord has taken away; as it pleased the Lord, so it has been done; blessed be the name of the Lord'). The Vulgate Job 1:21 reads 'Dominus dedit, Dominus abstulit; sicut Domino placuit, ita factum est; sit nomen Domini benedictum.'","cites":[],"named_sources":["Vulgate"],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Psal. LXXIV, 8","severity":"info","text":"The citation 'Psal. LXXIV, 8' refers to Psalm 74:8 (LXX numbering; in modern Bibles, Psalm 75:8): 'quia hunc humiliat, et hunc exaltat' (for he humbles this one and exalts that one). Augustine uses it to frame Job's humiliation and exaltation.","cites":[],"named_sources":["LXX","Vulgate"],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Evan","severity":"info","text":"Augustine identifies Eve as the devil's helper ('adjutrix') in tempting Job's wife, linking the fall of humanity (through Eve) to Job's trial. This reflects a typological reading common in patristic exegesis.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"narrative","severity":"info","text":"This passage is a narrative unit within the homily, recounting Job's sufferings and his wife's temptation. It moves from loss to Job's response, then to physical affliction and the wife's role, concluding with a moral and scriptural application.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Job","severity":"info","text":"Augustine's treatment of Job as a model of patience and faith, with the devil's helper (Eve) and the wife as tempters, influenced later medieval interpretations of Job as a type of Christ and the patient sufferer.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"pcrcussus est vuluere a capite usque ad pedes; sanie difOuebit, vermibus scatebat","severity":"caution","text":"The Latin text shows possible scribal errors: 'pcrcussus' for 'percussus', 'vuluere' for 'vulnere', 'difOuebit' for 'diffluebat', and 'scatebat' for 'scatebat' (or 'scatet'). The sense is clear: Job was struck with wounds, oozed pus, and teemed with worms.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Latin 'Domnus' in 'Domnus abstulit' is a variant spelling of 'Dominus' (Lord), not a separate entity.","The phrase 'sit nowen Domini benedictum' contains 'nowen' for 'nomen' (name), a scribal error."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":14,"ref":"p14","source":"Ne quis autem, fratres charissimi, quando aliquas ejusmodi patitur tribulationes, hic exspectet mercedem: verbi gratia, si damna aliqua patiatur, ne forte eo animo dicat, Dominus dedit, Dominus abstulit; sicut Domino placuit, ita factum est: sit nomen Domini benedictum, ut duplum accipiat. Patientia Deum laudet, non avaritia. Si ea quae perdidisti, dupla quaeris recipere, et ideo Deum laudas; de cupiditatc laudas, non de charitate. Non tibi occurrat ipsius sancti viri exemplum: fallis tc. Quando Job omnia tolerabat, dupla non sperabat. Et in prima ejus confessione quando damna pertulit et filios extulit, et in secunda cum jam tormenta vulnerum pateretur in carne, potest adverti quod dico. Prioris ejus confessionis haec verba sunt: Dominus dedit, Dominus abstulit; sicut Domino placuit, ita factum eat: sit nomen Domini benedictum. Poterat dicere: Dominus dedit, Dominus abstulit; potest iterum dare qui abstulit, potest plura revocare quam tulit. Non hoc dixit, sed, sicut Domino placuit, inquit, ita factum est: quia ei placet, placeat mihi; quod placuit bono Domino, non displiceat subdito servo; quod placuit medico, non displiceat ægroto- Aliam ipsius audi confessionem: Locuta ea, inquit uxori suæ, tanquam una ex insipientibus mulieribus. Si bona percepimus de manu Domini, mala quare non sustinebimus (Job. i et II)?","english":"Let no one, however, dearest brothers, when he suffers tribulations of this kind, expect a reward here: for example, if he suffers some losses, let him not say with that intention, \"The Lord gave, the Lord has taken away; as it pleased the Lord, so it has happened; blessed be the name of the Lord,\" in order to receive double. Let patience praise God, not avarice. If you seek to receive double what you have lost, and for that reason praise God, you praise from covetousness, not from charity. Do not let the example of that holy man occur to you: you deceive yourself. When Job endured everything, he did not hope for double. And in his first confession, when he bore losses and buried his children, and in the second, when he already suffered the torments of wounds in his flesh, what I say can be observed. These are the words of his first confession: \"The Lord gave, the Lord has taken away; as it pleased the Lord, so it has happened; blessed be the name of the Lord.\" He could have said: \"The Lord gave, the Lord has taken away; he who took away can give again, he can restore more than he took.\" He did not say this, but, \"as it pleased the Lord,\" he says, \"so it has happened\": because it pleases him, let it please me; what has pleased the good Lord, let it not displease the subject servant; what has pleased the physician, let it not displease the sick man. Hear another confession of his: he said this to his wife, as one of the foolish women: \"If we have received good things from the hand of the Lord, why should we not endure evil things?\" (Job 1 and 2).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Job 1 and 2","severity":"info","text":"Augustine quotes Job 1:21 and 2:28 (Vulgate) as Job's first confession, and paraphrases Job 2:9-10 as his second confession to his wife.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"patientia","severity":"info","text":"Patientia (patience) is contrasted with avaritia (avarice) and cupiditas (covetousness), emphasizing that true praise of God arises from endurance, not from hope of material reward.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Job's example","severity":"info","text":"Augustine warns against misusing Job's patient words as a pretext for expecting double compensation, a concern reflecting contemporary pastoral issues with superstitious or mercenary interpretations of Scripture.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"prioris ejus confessionis","severity":"info","text":"Augustine distinguishes two confessions of Job: the first after loss of property and children (Job 1), the second after physical torments (Job 2), to show Job's patience was not motivated by hope of restitution.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Job as model of patience","severity":"info","text":"Augustine's interpretation of Job as a model of disinterested patience, not of hope for reward, became influential in Western monastic and pastoral traditions, shaping the virtue's definition.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Latin text has 'eat' for 'est' in 'sicut Domino placuit, ita factum eat', likely a scribal error or variant spelling; the sense is clear."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":15,"ref":"p15","source":"Non addidit, quod si diceret, verum diceret, Potens est Dominus et meam carnem in pristinum revocare, et quod nobis abstulit multiplicare: ne ista spe illa tolerassc videretur. Ista non dixit, ista non speravit. Sed ut nos docerentur, non speranti Dominus praestitit, quo nos doceremur, quia Deus illi adfuit: quia si ct illa illi non redderet, occultam coronam ejus videre minime poteramus. Et ideo quid ait Scriptura divina, exhortando ad patientiam et spem futurorum, non mercedem præseutium? Patientiam Job audistis, et finem Domini vidistis. Quare patientiam Job, et non, Finem ipsius Job vidistis? Fauces aperires ad dupla; diceres, Deo gratias, sustineam, duplum recipio sicut Job. Patientiam Job, finem Domini. Patientiam Job novitius, ct Hincm Domini novimus. Quem finem Domini? Deut, Deus meus, utquid me dereliquisti (Psal. XXI, 2)? Verba sunt Domini pendentis in ligno. Quasi reliquit illum ad præsentem felicitatem, sed non eum reliquit ad æternam inmortalitatem. Ibi est finis Domini. Tenent Judxi, insultant Judæi, ligant Judaci, spinis coronant, sputis dehonestant, flagellant, opprobriis obruunt, ligno suspendunt, lancea fodiunt, postremo sepeliunt: quasi relictus est. Sed quibus? Illis asultantibus. Idco ergo habeto patientiam, ut resurg is et non moriaris, id est, nunqnam moriaris, sicut Christus. Sic enim legimus: Christus surgens ex mortuis, jam non moritur (Rom. VI, 9).","english":"He did not add—and if he had said it, he would have spoken truly—\"The Lord is able to recall my flesh to its former state and to multiply what he has taken from us,\" lest he seem to have endured those things because of that hope. He did not say these things, he did not hope for them. But so that we might be taught, the Lord granted to one who did not hope what would teach us that God was with him; because if he had not restored those things to him, we could not at all see his hidden crown. And therefore what does the divine Scripture say, exhorting to patience and hope for future things, not for a reward of present things? You have heard the patience of Job, and you have seen the end of the Lord. Why \"the patience of Job,\" and not \"you have seen the end of Job himself\"? You would open your mouth for double; you would say, \"Thanks be to God, I will endure, I will receive double like Job.\" The patience of Job, the end of the Lord. We know the patience of Job, and we know the end of the Lord. What end of the Lord? \"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?\" (Psalm 22:1). These are the words of the Lord hanging on the cross. He seemed to have abandoned him with regard to present happiness, but he did not abandon him with regard to eternal immortality. There is the end of the Lord. The Jews hold him, the Jews insult him, the Jews bind him, they crown him with thorns, they dishonor him with spittle, they scourge him, they overwhelm him with insults, they hang him on the cross, they pierce him with a lance, finally they bury him: he seems to have been abandoned. But to whom? To those who were exulting. Therefore, have patience so that you may rise again and not die, that is, never die, just as Christ. For thus we read: \"Christ rising from the dead, dies no more\" (Romans 6:9).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Psal. XXI, 2","severity":"info","text":"Augustine cites Psalm 22:1 (Vulgate numbering) as the cry of Christ on the cross: 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?' This is a standard Christological reading of the psalm.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Rom. VI, 9","severity":"info","text":"The citation 'Christ rising from the dead, dies no more' is not from Romans 6:9 but likely a conflation or misremembering; Romans 6:9 speaks of sin and death, not Christ's resurrection. The reference may be corrupt or Augustine's memory.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Patientiam Job, finem Domini","severity":"info","text":"Augustine contrasts Job's patience with Christ's 'end' (passion and resurrection) to discourage hope for earthly reward. The phrase echoes a liturgical or catechetical formula used in exhortations to martyrdom.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Non addidit... Ista non dixit, ista non speravit","severity":"info","text":"Augustine uses a rhetorical pattern of negation and correction: Job did not hope for restoration, so the faithful should not either. This builds the argument against expecting present reward.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Patientiam Job novitius, ct Hincm Domini novimus","severity":"info","text":"The text likely contains a scribal error: 'novitius' may be a corruption of 'novimus' (we know) or 'novitius' (novice). The sense is that both Job's patience and the Lord's end are known to the audience.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Rom. VI, 9","severity":"caution","text":"The citation 'Rom. VI, 9' does not match the quoted text. Romans 6:9 reads 'for you are not under the law but under grace.' The verse may be a misattribution or a variant in Augustine's manuscript tradition.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The citation 'Rom. VI, 9' is likely erroneous; the quoted text does not correspond to any known verse in Romans.","The word 'novitius' may be a scribal error for 'novimus' or a rare form; the intended meaning is 'we know'."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":16,"ref":"p16","source":"CAPUT IV. — 11. Sedere ad dexteram Patris, quid ait. Dextera Patris, beatitudo. Ascendit in caelum: credite. Sedet ad dexteram Patris: credite. Sedere, intelligite habitare: quomodo dicimus de quocumque homine, In illa patria scdit per tres annos. Dicit illud et Scriptura, sedisse quemdam in civitate tantum tempus (III Reg. II, 38, sec. LXX). Numquid scdit, et nunquam surrexit? Ideo hominum habitationcs sedes dicuntur. Ubi habentur sedes, numquid semper sedetur? non surgitur, non ambulatur, non jacetur? et tamen sedes vocantur. Sic ergo credite habitare Christum in dextera Dei Patris: ibi est. Nee dicat vobis cor vestrum, Quid agit? Nolite quærere quod non licct invenire: ibi est; sufficit vobis. Beatus est, et a beatitudine, quac dextera Patris vocatur, ipsius beatitudinis nomen est, dextera Patris. Nam si carnaliter acceperimus; quia sedet ad dexteram Patris, ille erit ad sinistram. Numquid fas est ut sic illos componamus, Filium ad dexteram, Patrem ad sinistram? Ibi omnis dextera est, quia nulla ibi est miseria.","english":"CHAPTER IV. — 11. What does it mean that He sits at the right hand of the Father? The right hand of the Father is blessedness. He ascended into heaven: believe it. He sits at the right hand of the Father: believe it. Understand \"to sit\" as \"to dwell,\" just as we say of any man, \"He sat in that country for three years.\" Scripture also says that someone sat in a city for a certain time (3 Kings 2:38, according to the LXX). Did he sit and never rise? For this reason, human dwellings are called \"seats.\" Where there are seats, is one always sitting? Does one not rise, not walk, not lie down? Yet they are called seats. So believe that Christ dwells at the right hand of God the Father: He is there. And do not let your heart say to you, \"What is He doing?\" Do not seek what it is not permitted to find: He is there; that is enough for you. He is blessed, and from blessedness, which is called the right hand of the Father, the name of that blessedness itself is the right hand of the Father. For if we take it carnally, because He sits at the right hand of the Father, the Father would be on the left. Is it fitting to arrange them thus, the Son on the right, the Father on the left? There, everything is right, because there is no misery there.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"dextera Patris","severity":"info","text":"Augustine interprets 'right hand of the Father' not as a spatial location but as a metaphor for blessedness (beatitudo), a spiritual reading that avoids anthropomorphic implications.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"III Reg. II, 38, sec. LXX","severity":"info","text":"The reference to 3 Kings 2:38 (LXX) describes a man sitting in a city for a time, used by Augustine to illustrate that 'sitting' can mean dwelling, not permanent posture.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"sedere ad dexteram","severity":"info","text":"In early Christian creeds, 'sitting at the right hand' was a standard article; Augustine here counters literal interpretations by redefining it as a state of blessedness, a common patristic strategy.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"sedere","severity":"caution","text":"Augustine's equation of 'sedere' with 'habitare' (to dwell) is a semantic stretch; the Latin verb normally implies a seated posture, but he relies on idiomatic usage ('sedere per tres annos') to justify the spiritual reading.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"narrative","severity":"info","text":"This passage is part of the narrative section of the sermon, where Augustine explains creedal phrases by moving from literal to figurative interpretation, a common catechetical method.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Latin 'sedere' is ambiguous between 'to sit' and 'to dwell'; Augustine chooses the latter to avoid a spatial reading of the Father's right hand."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":17,"ref":"p17","source":"Inde venturus judicare vivos et mortuos. Vivos, qui superfuerint; mortuos, qui præcesserint. Potest et sic intelligi: Vivos, justos; mortuos, injustos. Utrosque enim judicat, sua cuique retribuens. Justis dicturus est in judicio: Venite, benedicti Patris mei, percipite regnum quod vobis paratum at ab initio mundi. Ad hoc vos parate, haec sperate, propterea vivite, et sic vivite, propterea credite, propterea baptizamini, ut possit vobis dici: Venite, benedicti Patris mei, percipite regnum quod vobis paratum eat a constitutione mundi. Sinistris quid? Ite in ignem æternum, qui paratus est diabolo et angeli ejus(Matth. xxv, 34, 41). Sic judicabuntur a Christo vivi ct mortui. Dicta est prima sine tempore nativitas Christi, dicta est alia in plenitudine temporis de virgine nativitas Christi, dicta cst passio Christi, dictum cst judicium Christi. Totum dictum est, quod dicendum erat de Christo, Filio Dei unico, Domino nostro: sed nondum perfecta est Trinitas.","english":"From there He will come to judge the living and the dead. The living, those who survive; the dead, those who have gone before. It can also be understood thus: the living, the just; the dead, the unjust. For He judges both, giving each his due. To the just He will say at the judgment: Come, blessed of my Father, receive the kingdom that has been prepared for you from the beginning of the world. Prepare yourselves for this, hope for this, live for this, and live in such a way, believe for this, be baptized for this, so that it may be said to you: Come, blessed of my Father, receive the kingdom that has been prepared for you from the foundation of the world. And to those on the left? Go into the eternal fire, which has been prepared for the devil and his angels (Matt. 25:34, 41). Thus the living and the dead will be judged by Christ. The first birth of Christ without time has been spoken, the other birth of Christ from the Virgin in the fullness of time has been spoken, the passion of Christ has been spoken, the judgment of Christ has been spoken. All that was to be said about Christ, the only Son of God, our Lord, has been said; but the Trinity is not yet complete.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Inde venturus judicare vivos et mortuos","severity":"info","text":"The phrase echoes the Creed's clause on Christ's return to judge, but the immediate source is Matt. 25:31-46, especially vv. 34, 41 quoted below.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"Vivos, justos; mortuos, injustos","severity":"info","text":"Augustine offers a spiritual interpretation: 'living' = the just, 'dead' = the unjust, a moral reading common in patristic exegesis.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Venite, benedicti Patris mei, percipite regnum quod vobis paratum est ab initio mundi","severity":"info","text":"Not a direct biblical quotation but a paraphrase of Matt. 25:34, where the king invites the blessed to the kingdom. Augustine adapts it to the Father's blessing.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ite in ignem æternum, qui paratus est diabolo et angeli ejus","severity":"info","text":"Quotes Matt. 25:41, with 'eternal fire' prepared for the devil and his angels, applied here to the unjust.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Dicta est ... dicta est ... dictum est ... dictum est ... sed nondum perfecta est Trinitas","severity":"info","text":"Augustine recapitulates the Creed's Christological articles (eternal birth, virgin birth, passion, judgment) and signals that the Trinity clause remains to be treated.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Sinistris quid?","severity":"info","text":"'Those on the left' refers to the damned, a spatial metaphor from judgment scenes (cf. Matt. 25:33). Augustine uses it to contrast the blessed on the right.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Latin 'vivos' and 'mortuos' are ambiguous between temporal (survivors vs. predecessors) and moral (just vs. unjust) senses; Augustine explicitly offers both."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":18,"ref":"p18","source":"CAPUT V. — 15. Spiritum sanctum esse Deum. Sequitur in Symbolo, Et in Spiritum sanctum. Ista Trinitas unus Deus, una natura, una substantia, una potentia, summa æqualitas, nulla divisio, nulla diversitas, perpetua charitas. Vultis nosse quod Deus est Spiritus sanctus? Baptizamini, et templum ejus eritis. Apostolus dicit, Nesciti. quia corpora vestra templum in vobit est Spiritus sancti, quem habetis, a Deo ( I Cor. VI, 49)? Templum habet Deus: nam et Salomon rex et propheta jussus est ædificare templum Deo. Si aedificaret templum soli, aut lunae, aut stellae alicui, aut alicui angelo, nonne damnaret illum Deus? Quia ergo templum ædificavit Deo, ostendit se colere Deum. Et unde ædificavit? De Iignis et lapidibus: quia dignatus est Dcus facere sibi per servum suum domum in terra, ubi rogaretur, ubi memorarctur 1. Unde dicit beatus Stephanus: Salomon aedificavit illi domum, sed Altissimus nou in manu factis templis inhabitat (Act. VII, et 48). Si ergo corpora nostra templum est Spiritus sancti, qualis Deus est qui ædificavit templum Spiritui sancto? Sod Deus. Si enim templum Spiritus sancti sunt corpora nostra, ille Spiritui sancto ædificavit templum, qui et corpora nostra. Attendite Apostolum dicentem, Deus temperavit corpus, ei cui deerat majorem honorem dans ( I Cor. XII, 2A); cam loqueretur de diversis membris, ut non essent scissurae in corpore. Deus creavit corpus nostrum.","english":"Chapter V.—15. That the Holy Spirit is God. In the Creed follows: \"And in the Holy Spirit.\" This Trinity is one God, one nature, one substance, one power, supreme equality, no division, no diversity, perpetual love. Do you wish to know that the Holy Spirit is God? You are baptized, and you will be His temple. The Apostle says, \"Do you not know that your bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit in you, whom you have from God\" (1 Cor. 6:19)? God has a temple: for Solomon, both king and prophet, was commanded to build a temple for God. If he were building a temple for the sun, or the moon, or some star, or some angel, would not God condemn him? Therefore, because he built a temple for God, he shows that he worships God. And from what did he build it? From wood and stones: because God deigned to make for Himself, through His servant, a house on earth, where He might be prayed to, where He might be remembered. Whence the blessed Stephen says: \"Solomon built Him a house, but the Most High does not dwell in temples made by hand\" (Acts 7:48). If, therefore, our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit, what kind of God is He who built a temple for the Holy Spirit? He is God. For if the temple of the Holy Spirit is our bodies, then He who built a temple for the Holy Spirit is the same who built our bodies. Attend to the Apostle saying, \"God tempered the body, giving greater honor to the part that was lacking\" (1 Cor. 12:24), when he spoke about the different members, so that there would be no divisions in the body. God created our body.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"CAPUT V. — 15. Spiritum sanctum esse Deum.","severity":"info","text":"This section heading marks a new argument within the sermon, asserting the divinity of the Holy Spirit as a distinct point in the Creed exposition.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"I Cor. VI, 49","severity":"info","text":"Augustine cites 1 Cor 6:19, but the verse number in the source edition (VI, 49) is a scribal error; the correct reference is 1 Cor 6:19, where Paul speaks of the body as a temple of the Holy Spirit.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Act. VII, et 48","severity":"info","text":"The citation of Acts 7:48 is attributed to Stephen, but the verse is from Stephen's speech in Acts 7:48-49, where he says God does not dwell in man-made temples.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"I Cor. XII, 2A","severity":"info","text":"The reference to 1 Cor 12:24 is garbled; the likely intended passage is 1 Cor 12:12-26, where Paul discusses the unity of the body and the honor given to weaker members.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Salomon rex et propheta jussus est ædificare templum Deo","severity":"info","text":"Augustine refers to Solomon building the Temple in Jerusalem, a common typological example in patristic literature for the proper worship of God, contrasting with pagan idolatry.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Ista Trinitas unus Deus, una natura, una substantia, una potentia, summa æqualitas, nulla divisio, nulla diversitas, perpetua charitas","severity":"info","text":"This Trinitarian formula reflects the Nicene-Constantinopolitan orthodoxy of the late fourth century, emphasizing consubstantiality and equality, which Augustine consistently defends against Arianism.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Latin text has several scriptural citation errors (e.g., 1 Cor 6:19 misnumbered as VI, 49; Acts 7:48 as Act. VII, et 48; 1 Cor 12:24 as XII, 2A), likely from manuscript transmission. The reading taken follows the intended canonical references."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":19,"ref":"p19","source":"Herbam Deus creavit, corpus nostrum quis creavit? Unde probamus quia herbam Deus creat? Qui vestit, ipse creat. Evangelium lege: Si ergo fenum agri, ait, quod hodie est, et cras in clibanum mittitur, Deus sic vestit (Matth. VI, 30). Ille ergo creat, qui vestit. Et Apostolus: Stulte, quod seminas non vivificatur, nisi moriatur I: et quod seminas, non corpus quod futurum eat seminas, sed nudum granum, ut forte tritici, aut alicujus cæterorum; Deus autem illi dat corpus quomodo voluerit, et unicuique seminum proprium corpus ( I Cor. xv. 56-38). Si ergo Deus corpora nostra aedifieat, si Deus membra nostra ædificat, et corpora nostra templum sunt Spiritus sancti; nolite dubitare Deum esse Spiritum sanctum. Et nolite addere quasi tertium Deum; quia Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus unus est Deus. Sic credite.\n\nCAPUT VI. — 14. De sancta Ecclesia. Sequitur post Trinitatis commendationem, sanctam Ecclesiam. Demonstratus est Deus et templum ipsius. Templum enim Dei sanctum est, ait Apostolus, quod estis vos (Id. III, 17). Ipsa est Ecclesia sancta, Ecclesia una, Ecclesia vera, Ecclesia catholica, contra omnes hæreses pugnans: pugnare potest, expugnari tamen non potest. Hæreses omnes de illa exierunt, tanquam sarmenta inutilia de vite praecisa: ipsa autem manet in radice sua, in vite sua, in charitate sua. Portae inferorum non vincent eam (Matth. xvi, i8).","english":"God created grass. Who created our body? How do we prove that God created grass? He who clothes, creates. Read the Gospel: \"If then the grass of the field,\" it says, \"which is today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, God so clothes it\" (Matthew 6:30). Therefore, He who clothes, creates. And the Apostle: \"Fool, what you sow does not come to life unless it dies; and what you sow, you do not sow the body that will be, but the bare grain, as of wheat or some other; but God gives it a body as He wills, and to each seed its own body\" (1 Corinthians 15:36-38). Therefore, if God builds our bodies, if God builds our limbs, and our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit, do not doubt that the Holy Spirit is God. And do not add a third God, as it were; because the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are one God. Believe thus.\n\nChapter VI.—14. On the Holy Church. After the commendation of the Trinity follows the Holy Church. God and His temple have been shown. For the temple of God is holy, says the Apostle, which you are (1 Corinthians 3:17). This is the Holy Church, the one Church, the true Church, the Catholic Church, fighting against all heresies: it can fight, yet it cannot be conquered. All heresies have gone out from it, like useless shoots cut from the vine; but it remains in its root, in its vine, in its love. The gates of hell will not overcome it (Matthew 16:18).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Matth. VI, 30","severity":"info","text":"Augustine cites Matthew 6:30, but the Vulgate reads 'fenum agri' for 'grass of the field'; the verse is actually Matthew 6:30 in the Vetus Latina, differing from modern versification.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"I Cor. xv. 56-38","severity":"info","text":"The reference to 1 Corinthians 15:36-38 is a conflation; the Vulgate has verses 36-38, but the Latin text here (I Cor. xv. 56-38) is a scribal error for 36-38.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"templum Spiritus sancti","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'temple of the Holy Spirit' echoes 1 Corinthians 3:16-17, where Paul calls the body a temple of God; Augustine applies it to the Holy Spirit to affirm his divinity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"CAPUT VI. — 14. De sancta Ecclesia","severity":"info","text":"This passage marks a transition from the Creed's article on the Holy Spirit to the article on the Church, following the catechetical structure of the Old Roman Creed.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Ecclesia catholica","severity":"info","text":"Augustine's description of the Church as 'catholica' and 'fighting against all heresies' reflects the anti-Donatist context of his episcopate, emphasizing unity and indefectibility.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Matth. xvi, 18","severity":"info","text":"The citation 'Portae inferorum non vincent eam' alludes to Matthew 16:18, but the phrase 'gates of hell' is not in the Vulgate; it may derive from a liturgical or patristic paraphrase.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Latin 'I Cor. xv. 56-38' is a clear scribal error for 36-38; the exact verse numbering in Augustine's source is uncertain.","The phrase 'Portae inferorum' in Matthew 16:18 is not verbatim in the Vulgate, suggesting a loose citation or variant text."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":20,"ref":"p20","source":"CAPUT VII. — 15. Peccata etiam immania dimittuntur in Baptismo; et venialia, in oratione dominica. Pænitentiæ publicæ actio propter immania peccata, non propter levia. Remissionem peccatorum. HabetisSymbolum perfecte in vobis, quando baptizamini. Nemo dicat: Illud feci, forte non mihi dimittitur. Quid fecisti? quantum fecisti? Dic immane aliquid quod commisisti, grave, horrenduin, quod etiam cogitare horres: quidquid vis feceris, numquid Christum occidisti? Non est isto facto aliquid pejus, quia et Christo nihil est melius. Quantum nefas est occidere Christum? Judaei tamen eum occiderunt, et multi in eum postea crediderunt, et biberunt ejus sanguinem: dimissum est illis peccatum quod commiserunt. Cum baptizati fueritis, tenete vitam bonam in præceptis Dei, ut Baptismum custodiatis usque in finem. Non vobis dico quia sine peccato.hic vivetis: sed sunt ve, nialia, sine quibus vita ista non est. Propter omnia peccata Baptismus inventus est; propter levia, sino quibus esse non possumus, oratio inventa. Quid habct oratio? Dimitte nobis debita nostra, sicut et noa dimittimus debitoribus nostris (Id. VI, 12). Semel abluimur Baptismate, quotidie abluimur oratione. Sed nolite illa committere, pro quibus necesse est ut a Christi corpore separemini: quod absit a vobis.","english":"CHAPTER VII. — 15. Even monstrous sins are forgiven in Baptism; and venial sins, in the Lord’s Prayer. Public penance is performed for monstrous sins, not for light ones. The remission of sins. You have the Creed perfectly in yourselves when you are baptized. Let no one say: I did that, perhaps it is not forgiven me. What did you do? How much did you do? Name some monstrous thing you have committed, grave, horrible, which even to think of makes you shudder: whatever you may have done, have you killed Christ? There is nothing worse than that deed, because there is nothing better than Christ. How great a crime is it to kill Christ? Yet the Jews killed him, and many afterward believed in him and drank his blood: that sin which they committed was forgiven them. When you have been baptized, keep a good life in the commandments of God, so that you may preserve your Baptism to the end. I do not tell you that you will live without sin. But there are venial sins, without which this life cannot be. For all sins Baptism was instituted; for light sins, without which we cannot exist, prayer was instituted. What does prayer have? Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors (Matt. 6:12). We are washed once by Baptism, we are washed daily by prayer. But do not commit those sins for which it is necessary that you be separated from the body of Christ—which may that never happen to you.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"CAPUT VII","severity":"info","text":"This chapter heading is editorial, not original to Augustine. It marks a transition from the preceding narrative on creation to a new topic: the scope of forgiveness in baptism.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"immania peccata","severity":"info","text":"Augustine distinguishes 'immania' (monstrous) sins from 'levia' (light) sins. The former require public penance; the latter are remitted by the Lord's Prayer. This reflects a pastoral taxonomy of sin.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Dimitte nobis debita nostra","severity":"info","text":"Augustine quotes the Lord's Prayer (Matthew 6:12) as the prayer for daily remission of venial sins. The citation is from the Vetus Latina, which reads 'debita' (debts) rather than 'peccata' (sins).","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"biberunt ejus sanguinem","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'drank his blood' refers to Eucharistic communion. Augustine argues that even the Jews who killed Christ could be forgiven upon conversion and reception of the Eucharist.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Semel abluimur Baptismate, quotidie abluimur oratione","severity":"info","text":"This maxim became a standard patristic formulation for the unique, unrepeatable character of baptism versus the repeatable cleansing of daily prayer. It influenced later sacramental theology.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Habetis Symbolum perfecte in vobis","severity":"caution","text":"The claim that catechumens 'have the Creed perfectly in yourselves' when baptized is rhetorical. Augustine does not mean they recite it perfectly, but that the Creed's content is fully conferred in the rite.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Latin 'Symbolum' could refer to the Creed or to the baptismal symbol (a token of faith). The context favors the Creed, as the passage addresses catechumens learning the Creed before baptism."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":21,"ref":"p21","source":"IlIi enim quos videtis agere pœnitentiam, scelera commiserunt, aut adulteria, aut aliqua facta immania: inde agunt poenitentiam. Nam si levia peccata ipsorum essont, ad hæc quotidiana oratio delenda sufficeret.\n\nCAPUT VIII. — 16. Peccata tribus modis dimittuntur. Ergo tribus modis dimittuntur peccata in Ecclesia; in Baptismate, in oratione, in humilitate majore poenitentiæ: tamen Deus non dimittit peccata, nisi baptizatis. Ipsa peccata quæ primum dimittit, non nisi baptizatis dimittit. Quando? Quando baptizantur. Peccata quae postea orantibus dimittuntur, et poenitentibus, quibus dimillit, baptizatis dimittit. Nam quomodo dicunt, Pater noster, qui nondum nati sunt? Catechumeni quamdiu sunt, super illos sunt omnia peccata eorum. Si catechumeni, quanto magis Pagani? quanto magis haeretici? Sed haereticis Baptismum non mutamus. Quare? Quia sic habent Baptismum, quomodo desertor habet characterem: ita et isti habent Baptismum; habent, sed unde damnentur, non unde coronentur. Et tamen si desertoripse correctus incipiat militare, numquid audet quisquam ei characterem mutare?","english":"Those whom you see doing penance have committed crimes, either adulteries or some monstrous deeds; for that reason they are doing penance. For if their sins were light, the daily prayer would suffice to blot them out.\n\nCHAPTER VIII. — 16. Sins are remitted in three ways. Therefore sins are remitted in the Church in three ways: in Baptism, in prayer, in the greater humility of penance. Yet God does not remit sins except to the baptized. The sins which He first remits, He remits only to the baptized. When? When they are baptized. The sins which are afterwards remitted to those who pray and to those who do penance—to whom does He remit them? To the baptized. For how can those who are not yet born say the Lord's Prayer? As long as they are catechumens, all their sins are upon them. If catechumens, how much more pagans? how much more heretics? But we do not change the Baptism of heretics. Why? Because they have Baptism just as a deserter has the brand-mark: so too these have Baptism; they have it, but as something by which they are condemned, not by which they are crowned. And yet if that deserter himself, when corrected, begins to serve as a soldier, does anyone dare to change his brand-mark?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Augustine distinguishes three modes of remission: Baptism, daily prayer, and the greater humility of penance. The latter refers to public penance for grave sins, as described in the previous chapter.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"poenitentiam","severity":"info","text":"Poenitentiam here denotes public penance, a formal ecclesiastical discipline for grave sins (scelera, adulteria, facta immania), distinct from the daily prayer that suffices for light sins.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The analogy of the deserter's brand-mark (characterem) reflects Roman military practice: a tattoo or brand identified soldiers, and even deserters retained it, though it brought condemnation rather than honor.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"parallel","kind":"parallel","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Augustine's threefold remission echoes earlier patristic teaching, e.g., Tertullian's De Paenitentia, but he uniquely insists that all remission is for the baptized, excluding catechumens, pagans, and heretics from full forgiveness.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"This passage influenced medieval sacramental theology, particularly the distinction between mortal and venial sins and the necessity of Baptism for remission, as codified in Gratian's Decretum and Peter Lombard's Sentences.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The Latin text has 'dimillit' for 'dimittit' (line 5), a scribal error or variant spelling. The sense is clear: 'remits'.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'in humilitate majore poenitentiæ' could be read as 'in the greater humility of penance' (as translated) or 'in the greater penance of humility'; the former is preferred given the context of public penance."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":22,"ref":"p22","source":"CAPUT IX. — 17. De resurrectione carnis in vitam æternam. Credimus etiam resurrectionem carnis, quæ praecessit in Christo: ut hoc etiam speret corpus, quod præcessit in capite. Caput Ecclesiae Christus, Ecclesia corpus Christi (Ephes. V, 23). Caput nostrum surrexit, ascendit in caelum: ubi caput, illic et meMbra. Quomodo carnis resurrectionem? Ne forte putet aliquis quomodo Lazari, ut scias non sic esse, additum est, In vitam aeternam. Regeneret vos Deus, conservet et tueatur vos Deus; in se, qui est ipsa vita aeterna, perducat vos Deus. Amen.\n\nSequuntur alii de SYMBOLO sermones tres, Augustinum, cui hactenus adscripti in ante editis fueruut, haudquaquam nobis repræsentantes, sed oratorem genere dicendi, eruditione et ingenio multo inferiorem.","english":"CHAPTER IX. — 17. On the resurrection of the flesh into eternal life. We also believe in the resurrection of the flesh, which preceded in Christ: so that this body may hope for what preceded in the head. The head of the Church is Christ, the Church is the body of Christ (Ephes. 5:23). Our head has risen, has ascended into heaven: where the head is, there also are the members. How is the resurrection of the flesh? Lest anyone perhaps think it is like that of Lazarus, so that you may know it is not so, it has been added, Into eternal life. May God regenerate you, may God preserve and protect you; may God lead you into himself, who is eternal life itself. Amen.\n\nThere follow three other sermons on the Creed, which, although previously attributed to Augustine in earlier editions, do not represent him at all, but rather an orator much inferior in style, learning, and talent.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"CAPUT IX. — 17. De resurrectione carnis in vitam æternam.","severity":"info","text":"This passage is the final chapter of the sermon, concluding the exposition of the Creed with the article on bodily resurrection.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ephes. V, 23","severity":"info","text":"The citation Ephesians 5:23 is used to support the analogy of Christ as head of the Church, which is his body.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"quomodo Lazari","severity":"info","text":"The reference to Lazarus recalls the Gospel account (John 11) of his temporary resurrection, which Augustine distinguishes from the eternal resurrection promised in the Creed.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Sequuntur alii de SYMBOLO sermones tres","severity":"info","text":"The editor notes that three following sermons, previously attributed to Augustine, are now considered spurious and by an inferior author.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"In vitam aeternam","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'into eternal life' is added to the resurrection clause to distinguish it from a mere return to mortal life, as in the case of Lazarus.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Regeneret vos Deus, conservet et tueatur vos Deus; in se, qui est ipsa vita aeterna, perducat vos Deus. Amen.","severity":"caution","text":"The final blessing may be a liturgical formula appended to the sermon; its precise origin and relation to Augustine's text are uncertain.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Latin 'meMbra' (with capital M) is a typographical variant for 'membra' (members).","The phrase 'quomodo carnis resurrectionem?' is elliptical; it is interpreted as a rhetorical question about the nature of the resurrection."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]}]}