{"slug":"stoa0128b.stoa005.opp-lat1","id":"latin:ogl-pl:stoa0128b.stoa005.opp-lat1","title":"De Incarnatione Filii Dei Et Vilium Animalium Auctore Ad Scarilam","title_source":"De Incarnatione Filii Dei Et Vilium Animalium Auctore Ad Scarilam","author":"Fulgentius Ruspensis Episcopus","genre":"treatise","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-v4.1-flash:floor","provider":"Baidu","generated":"2026-11-15T19:34:40Z","cost_usd":0.00653},"source":{"registry_id":"latin:ogl-pl:stoa0128b.stoa005.opp-lat1","work_id":"stoa0128b.stoa005.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/stoa0128b/stoa005/stoa0128b.stoa005.opp-lat1.xml"},"stats":{"passages":71,"english_words":18166,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":69582,"commentary_units":0,"commentary_kinds":0,"derived_notes":2,"ambiguities":0,"work_notes":0,"external_links":0,"timeline":0},"summary":{},"links":[{"kind":"source","label":"Open Greek and Latin Patrologia Latina","url":"https://github.com/OpenGreekAndLatin/patrologia_latina-dev/blob/master/data/stoa0128b/stoa005/stoa0128b.stoa005.opp-lat1.xml"}],"checks":{"work":"stoa0128b.stoa005.opp-lat1","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":71,"translated":71,"commentary_passages":0,"commentary_units":0,"english_words":18166,"source_letters":69189,"commentary_kinds":0},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[],"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 Latin; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: treatise in Latin; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 71 narrative."},{"kind":"scripture","severity":"info","text":"2 scriptural phrase match(es) noted: John 1:1; Luke 1:28."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: ogl-pl."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Licence: Available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License"}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":71},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"FULGENTO DE INCARNATIONE FILII DEI ET VILIUM ANIMALIUM AUCTORE, AD SCARILAM, LIBER UNUS.\n\nLectis litteris quas misisti, fili carissime Scarila, gavisus sum in Domino, et exsultavit anima mea in Deo salutari meo, quia induit vos studium salutis, et cordi vestro desiderium justitiae clementer infudit, quo veram fidem cognoscere cupiatis. Per hanc enim vitae largitas ad homines venit, quod per prophetam Deus ipse testatus est dicens: Justus autem ex fide vivit (Rom. I, 17); fides autem illa vera appellanda est. quæ est vera, non ficta, quam sanctus commendat Apostolus dicens: Finis autem præcepti est caritas de corde puro, et conscientia bona, et fide non ficta (I Tim. i, 5). Nam quia idem beatus Paulus gratia nos dicit salvos factos esse per fidem, quam non ex nobis, sed Dei asserit donum (Ephes. II, 8), utique vera salus non erit ubi vera fides non fuerit; quæ cum divinitus iufunditur, procul dubio gratuita largitate donatur; et ubi per veram fidem veritas fue. rit credulitatis, veritas utique comitabitur et salutis: quisquis autem a vera fide deviaverit, veræ salutis gratiam non habebit. Proinde torpere non debet fidelis animus ad quaerendum si quid in sacramento fidei sibi cernit ambiguum: maxime in mysterio dominicæ incarnationis, per quam justitia impiis, vita mortuis, salus infirmis, et verae libertatis est gratia donata captivis.","english":"FULGENTIUS, BISHOP OF RUSPE, ON THE INCARNATION OF THE SON OF GOD AND ON THE AUTHOR OF VILE ANIMALS, TO SCARILA, ONE BOOK.\n\nHaving read the letter you sent, my dearest son Scarila, I rejoiced in the Lord, and my soul exulted in God my Savior, because a zeal for salvation has clothed you, and he has mercifully poured into your heart a desire for righteousness, by which you long to know the true faith. For through this faith the abundance of life has come to men, as God himself testified through the prophet, saying: But the just man lives by faith (Rom. 1:17); and that faith is to be called true which is true, not feigned, which the holy Apostle commends, saying: Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned (1 Tim. 1:5). For since the same blessed Paul says that we are saved by grace through faith, which he declares to be not of ourselves but the gift of God (Eph. 2:8), true salvation will certainly not exist where true faith has not been; and when this faith is infused by God, it is beyond doubt given by gratuitous bounty; and where there is truth of belief through true faith, the truth of salvation will assuredly accompany it. But whoever has strayed from the true faith will not have the grace of true salvation. Therefore the faithful mind ought not to grow sluggish in seeking, if it perceives anything ambiguous in the sacrament of faith, especially in the mystery of the Lord's incarnation, through which righteousness has been given to the ungodly, life to the dead, health to the weak, and the grace of true liberty to captives.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"Scripsisti ergo, ut tuis utar verbis, quod dum ad mensam Christiani Ecclesiæ catholicæ filii mei Eventi de Dei incarnatione locutio nasceretur, unus ex vobis hoc de ipsa incarnatione asseruit quoniam non Deus Pater carnem induit, sed solum Dei Filius. Et alius dixit: Ipse Deus, qui unus est in tribus, dignatus est carnem assumere, ut nostram servitutem qua per transgressionem patris nostri Adæ obligati detinebæmur, ad libertatem perduceret. Deinde dicis vos scire cupere si ipse Deus Pater descenderit et carnem assumpserit, an ipso residente, Verbo mandaverit quod carnem assumpserit. Dicis nos etiam scire auoniam Verbum caro factum est, ut ipse habitaret in nobis. Ubi etiam hæc verba subvertis dicens: Sed inter Verbum, quod Deus est, et Patrem, qui Deus est, una utrorumque descenderit ad induendam carnem majestas, quia legimus, inquis: « Hic Dem noster, et non æstimabitur alius absque illo: post hæc in terra visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est (Baruch III, 36). » Adhuc addis et dicis, quod cum istud testimonium in medium proferretis, hoc ille econtraria, locutus est: De Filio hoc dixit at non de Patre: et tu ei ad præsens locutus ea, ut quod simul pariter ignoratis ad nos recursum faceretis. Huic interrogationi quam prima pars continet tuarum litterarum reddenda nunc ut a nobis.","english":"You wrote, then, to use your own words, that when at the table of Eventus, my son, a Christian and a son of the catholic Church, a discussion arose concerning the incarnation of God, one of you asserted concerning that very incarnation that God the Father did not put on flesh, but only the Son of God. And another said: God himself, who is one in three, deigned to assume flesh, so that he might bring to freedom our servitude, by which we were bound and held fast through the transgression of our father Adam. Then you say that you wish to know whether God the Father himself descended and assumed flesh, or whether, while he himself remained seated, he commanded the Word to assume flesh. You say that we also know that the Word was made flesh, so that he himself might dwell in us. There you also overturn these words, saying: But between the Word, who is God, and the Father, who is God, the majesty of both descended as one to put on flesh, because we read, you say: «This is our God, and no other will be esteemed besides him: after these things he was seen on earth, and conversed with men (Baruch 3:36).» You further add and say that when you brought this testimony forward in the midst, he spoke this in opposition: This was said of the Son, but not of the Father; and you spoke these things to him for the present, so that what you both equally do not know you might refer back to us. To this question, which the first part of your letter contains, an answer must now be given by us.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"Deo donante atque adjuvante, responsio; qua Unita, alteri quoque respondere, quantum Deus donaverit, non pigebit.\n\nPrincipaliter itaque scire debet omnis catholicus Christianus unum esse Deum sanctam Trinitatem, id est, Patrem, et Filium, etSpiritum sanctum; ipsam vero Trinitatem quæ unus est Deus, unam quidem esse naturam, non tamen unam esse personam. Quia et quod dicitur unus Deus esse Trinitas, verum est; unusDeus est enim Trinitas, quia non aliam naturam habet Pater, et aliam Filius, et aliam Spiritus sanctus, sed una natura est ipsa Trinitas Deus; nec tamen una persona est Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus, sed persona Patris solius Patris est, et persona Filii solius Filii est, et persona Spiritus sancti solius Spiritus sancti est. Personaliter ergo qui est Pater non est ipse Filius, et qui Filius est non est ipse Spirilus sanctus. Quod vcro naturaliter est Pater hoc est Filius, hoc est Spiritus sanctus, quia naturaliter ipsa Trinitas unus est Deus: ubi major minorque non dicitur, quia nec prior alius alio, nec posterior invenitur. Ibi æternitas atque immensitas tanta est uniuscujusque personæ, quanta trium naturaliter perBonarum. Solus tamen Pater est qui Filium genuit; solus est Filius qui de Patre natus; solus est etiam Spiritus sanctus, qui nec natus est de Patre, nec Filium genuit, sed a Patre Filioque processit.","english":"With God giving and helping, the reply; in which, since Unita has been answered, it will not be irksome to respond also to the other, as far as God has granted.\n\nTherefore, first of all, every catholic Christian ought to know that God is one, the holy Trinity, that is, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit; but that this Trinity, which is one God, is indeed one nature, yet is not one person. For both what is said—that the Trinity is one God—is true; for the Trinity is one God, because the Father does not have one nature and the Son another and the Holy Spirit another, but the Trinity itself, God, is one nature; nor yet are the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit one person, but the person of the Father is the Father's alone, and the person of the Son is the Son's alone, and the person of the Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit's alone. Personally, therefore, he who is the Father is not himself the Son, and he who is the Son is not himself the Holy Spirit. But what the Father is naturally, this the Son is, this the Holy Spirit is, because naturally the Trinity itself is one God: where no greater and lesser is spoken of, because neither is one found prior to another, nor posterior. There the eternity and immensity of each person is as great as that of the three naturally through good things. Yet the Father alone is he who begot the Son; the Son alone is he who was born of the Father; the Holy Spirit alone is also he who neither was born of the Father nor begot the Son, but proceeded from the Father and the Son.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":4,"ref":"p4","source":"Pater ergo solius est Paler Filii, et Filius est solius Filius Patris, sanctus autem Spiritus non Patris solius, ncc Filii solius, sed simul Patris et Filii unus et communis est.\n\nIn hac itaque Trinitate sunt quaedam singularum personarum propria. Quid si tamen propriis personæ monstrantur, sed non separantur, quarum natura ut, cum inseparabiles sint, confundi nOn possit, sed ad hoc in singulis personis singula maneant, ut et naturalem unitatem veræ Trinitatis, et personalem Trinitatem verse unitatis ostendat? Proprium est ergo solius Patris, quod non est natus ipse, sed genuit; proprium est et Filii quod non genuit ipse, sed natus est; proprium vero est et Spiritus sancti, quod nec genuit ipse nec natus est, sed de genitore genitoque procediL. Sicut est autem sine initio æterna generatio Patris, et sine initio aLterna nativitas Filii; sic naturaliter sine initio est æterna processo Spiritus sancti. De Dei enim Patris aeternitate quæ sine initio manet, talis est utique nativitas Filii, et processio Spiritus sancti, ut et illa nativitas, et illa processio coæterna sit illi origini, in qua initium nullatenus potuit inveniri.","english":"Therefore the Father is the Father of the Son alone, and the Son is the Son of the Father alone; but the Holy Spirit is not of the Father alone, nor of the Son alone, but is one and common to both Father and Son together.\n\nIn this Trinity, therefore, there are certain properties belonging to each person individually. What then if the persons are shown by their own properties, yet are not separated, since their nature is such that, although they are inseparable, it cannot be confused, but rather in each person individual properties remain, so that it may show both the natural unity of the true Trinity and the personal Trinity of the true unity? It is therefore the property of the Father alone that He Himself was not born, but begot; it is also the property of the Son that He Himself did not beget, but was born; and it is the property of the Holy Spirit that He neither begot nor was born, but proceeds from the Begetter and the Begotten. But just as the eternal generation of the Father is without beginning, and the eternal nativity of the Son is without beginning, so naturally the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit is without beginning. For from the eternity of God the Father, which remains without beginning, such is the nativity of the Son and the procession of the Holy Spirit that both that nativity and that procession are coeternal with that origin in which a beginning could in no way be found.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":5,"ref":"p5","source":"Quoniam ergo hoc in se habet naturalis illa unitas Trinitatis, ut natum esse soli sit proprium Filio, ille qui solus in se habet veram nativitatem humanitatis ex Virgiue; hujus etenim fuit secundum carnem veram habere naturaliter matrem, qui secundum divinitatem verum habet naturaliter Patrem: proinde qui est de æterno Patre sine initio genitus, ipse est de temporali matre temporaliter natus; et idcirco non solum in divinitate, verum etiam in carne veraciter Unigenilus Dei Filius dicitur, qui et secundum divinitatem, ct secu ldum carnem solus genitus invenitur.\n\nSolius itaque unigeniti Dei propria est utraque nativitas, una scilicet ex veritate naturæ divinæ, altera vero ex gratia humanitatis assumptæ. Propter quod evangelista Joannes unigenitum a Patre asserit plenum gratiae et veritatis (Joan. i, 14). Proinde cavenda est illa mortifera et omnimodis diabolica blasphemia qua creditur vel dicitur simul ipsa Trinilas carnem assumpsisse, quod catholica fides non recipit, sed nequitia Sabelliani erroris invenit. Sabellius quippe, qui Patrem et Filium et Spiritum sanctum non tres deos, sed unum Deum verum praedicari cognovit, sic audivit quod verum est, ut sibi generaret ipse quod falsum est.","english":"Since, therefore, that natural unity of the Trinity has this in itself, that to be born is proper to the Son alone, he who alone has in himself the true birth of humanity from the Virgin—for it was his to have truly and naturally a mother according to the flesh, who truly and naturally has a Father according to divinity. Accordingly, he who is begotten of the eternal Father without beginning is himself born in time of a temporal mother; and for this reason not only in divinity but also in the flesh is the only-begotten Son of God truly called, who is found to be begotten alone both according to divinity and according to the flesh.\n\nThus both births are proper to the only-begotten Son of God alone: one, namely, from the truth of the divine nature, the other from the grace of the humanity assumed. For this reason the evangelist John declares the only-begotten of the Father full of grace and truth (John 1:14). Therefore that deadly and in every way diabolical blasphemy must be guarded against, by which it is believed or said that the Trinity itself assumed flesh—which the catholic faith does not accept, but the wickedness of the Sabellian error invented. For Sabellius, who recognized that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are preached not as three gods but as one true God, so heard what is true that he begot for himself what is false.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"scripture","severity":"info","ref":"Luke 1:28","text":"The English carries the scriptural phrase “full of grace”, which matches Luke 1:28. The match is on the English draft; check the Coptic before quoting the verse."}]},{"i":6,"ref":"p6","source":"Denique quia sic unam Patris et Filii et Spiritus sancti cognovit esse naturam, ut ejusdem naturæ unam non dubitaret prædicare personam, ad hoc est insania sui præcipitatus erroris, ut ipsum Patrem natum deYirgine assereret. Necessario autem consequens fuit, ut cui dabat veritatem humanæ nativitatis, ipsi deputaret veritatem passionis et mortis. Unde sectatores ejusdem Sabellii non solum Sabellianos, sed etiam Palripassianos Ecclesia catholica nominavit, et vinculo anathematis cum suo auctore damnavit.\n\nAbsit igitur a fidelibus ista perversitas, nec quemquam redemptum sanguine unigeniti Filii sui permittat Deus isto mortifero sensu perfidiæ profanari. Magnæ quippe impietatis est si aliquis in Patre et Filio et Spiritu sancto, aut propter unam naturam velit unam prædicari personam, aut propter tres personas, tres asserat et naturas. Quandoquidem ille qui unam personam Patris et Filii et Spiritus sane'i, asserit, laqueo Sabelliani erroris innectitur; qui vero tres naturas Patris et Filii et Spiritus sancti esse confirmat, Arianae perfidiæ nexibus obligatur. Et quamvis ulriusque infidelitatis divisa videatur asserlio, una tamen est impietatis utriusque damnatio. Impie namque personarum proprietas propter unitatem Daturæ confunditur; impie nihilominus naturalis unitas propter personas ipsas separatur. Unum habet Pater verum naturaliter Filium, et de se sine initio, et de.","english":"Finally, because he so understood the nature of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit to be one, that he did not doubt to proclaim one person of that same nature, he was driven by the insanity of his headlong error to this point, that he asserted that the Father himself was born of the Virgin. But it necessarily followed that to whom he gave the truth of human birth, to him he assigned the truth of passion and death. Whence the Catholic Church named the followers of this same Sabellius not only Sabellians but also Patripassians, and condemned them with their author by the bond of anathema.\n\nFar be this perversity, therefore, from the faithful, nor let God permit anyone redeemed by the blood of his only-begotten Son to be profaned by this deadly sense of perfidy. For it is of great impiety if anyone in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit either wishes one person to be proclaimed because of the one nature, or asserts three natures because of the three persons. Since indeed he who asserts one person of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is entangled in the snare of the Sabellian error; but he who confirms that there are three natures of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is bound by the chains of Arian perfidy. And although the assertion of each infidelity seems divided, yet the damnation of both is one impiety. For impiously the propriety of persons is confounded because of the unity of nature; impiously nonetheless the natural unity is separated because of the persons themselves. The Father has one true Son naturally, both from himself without beginning, and from","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":7,"ref":"p7","source":"Virgine temporaliter natum. Ipsum misit in mundum ut salvaretur mundus per ipsum. Quod idem Filius ostendens ait: Sic enim Deus dilexit mundum, ut Filium suum unigenitum daret, ut omnis qui credit in eum non pereat, sed habeat vitam æternam. Non enim misit Deus Filium suum in mundum ut judicet mundum, sed ut salvetur mundus per ipsum. Qui credit in eum non judicatur, qui autem non credit jam judicatus est, quia non credit in nomine unigeniti Filii Dei (Joan. III, 16, 17, 18).\n\nEcce isto loco ipse Salvator noster tertio se Filium dicit, et secundo Unigenitum nominavit, et se a Patre, ut mundum salvaret, missum esse asseruit; cum utique si simul ipsa Trinitas in carne venisset, non se Filius missum a Patre dixisset: sed mentiri non potuit Christus: sine dubio personaliter alter misit, et alter est missus. Misit autem verus Patcr Veritatem, quam genuit; misit Sapientiam, in qua omnia iecit; misit. Verbum, quod corde ructavit. Proinde in alia (forte illa) missione non est localiter æstimandus adventus, tanquam Filius Dei de coelo fuerit missus ad terras, ut aut in terra non fuerit prius quam carnem acciperet, aut cœlum deseruerit, quando carnem pro nostra salute suscepit. Cum itaque ipse sit Sapientia Dei de qua diclum est:.Attingit a fine usque ad finem fortiter, et disponit omnia suaviter (Sap.","english":"born of the Virgin in time. Him he sent into the world, that the world might be saved through him. Showing this same thing, the Son says: For God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that everyone who believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not judged; but whoever does not believe is already judged, because he does not believe in the name of the only-begotten Son of God (John 3:16, 17, 18).\n\nBehold, in this passage our Savior himself calls himself Son for the third time, and named himself Only-begotten for the second time, and asserted that he was sent by the Father that he might save the world; whereas surely, if the Trinity itself had come together in the flesh, the Son would not have said that he was sent by the Father. But Christ could not lie: without doubt, in respect of person, one sent and the other was sent. The true Father sent the Truth, which he begot; he sent the Wisdom, in which he cast all things; he sent the Word, which he uttered from his heart. Accordingly, in that other mission the coming is not to be estimated locally, as though the Son of God were sent from heaven to the earth, so that either he was not on the earth before he took flesh, or he deserted heaven when he took flesh for our salvation. Since, therefore, he himself is the Wisdom of God, of which it is said: She reaches mightily from end to end, and disposes all things sweetly (Wisdom","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":8,"ref":"p8","source":"VIII, 1); divinitas illa quæ naturaliter una est Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus sancti, sic non est localiter, sicut non est temporaliter; sic loco non concluditur, sicut nec tempore variatur. Illa divinitas quæ naturaliter immensa est et æterna, nec coepit initio, nec concluditur loco: ideo ipse unus Deus Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus totum implet, totum continet: sic totus in singulis, sic totus in cunctis, sic totus in parvis, sic totus in maximis creaturis: ita per naturam, non ita per gratiam; ita dum homines creat, non ita dum salvat; ita dum facit, non ita dum reficit; ita dum solem istum facit oriri super bonos et malos, non ita dum Sol justitiæ illis oritur, quibus vita non carnis, sed cordis, dono misericordiæ prævenientis infunditur. Non enim sicut cunctorum nasci per naturam, sic cunctorum est renasci per gratiam. Quoniam ergo Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus naturaliter unus est Deus, æternus et immensus, nihil in coelo, nil in terra, nil supra coelum, nil in qualibet natura quam fecit non factus Deus, ubi deesse possit idem nnus Deus, Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus; in quo sicut nulla est mutabilitas temporum, sic nulla est capacitas et locorum. Quod Salomon in dedicatione dixisse veraciter invenitur his verbis: Si enim caelum et cæli cælorum te capere non possunt, quanto magis domus hæc quam ædificavi (III Reg. VIII, 27).","english":"That divinity which is naturally one of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is thus not local, just as it is not temporal; thus it is not confined by place, just as it is not varied by time. That divinity which is naturally immense and eternal neither began with a beginning nor is confined by place; therefore the one God himself, Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit, fills all, contains all: thus whole in individuals, thus whole in all things, thus whole in small creatures, thus whole in the greatest: thus by nature, not thus by grace; thus when he creates men, not thus when he saves them; thus when he makes, not thus when he restores; thus when he makes this sun rise upon the good and the evil, not thus when the Sun of righteousness rises upon those to whom life is poured in, not of the flesh, but of the heart, by the gift of prevenient mercy. For it is not as it is for all to be born by nature, so it is for all to be reborn by grace. Since, therefore, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are naturally one God, eternal and immense, there is nothing in heaven, nothing on earth, nothing above heaven, nothing in any nature which the uncreated God has made, where that same one God, Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit can be absent; in whom, just as there is no mutability of times, so there is no capacity of places. Solomon is truly found to have said this at the dedication in these words: For if heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain you, how much more this house which I have built.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":9,"ref":"p9","source":"Deus itaque ineffabilis, et omnino mirabilis, ineffabiliter ac mirabiliter ipsa suæ immensitate natura, et est totus in singulis, et non coucluditur universis. Ita solus Pater, ita solus Filius, ita Spiritus sanctus solus, ita simul Trinitas unus Deus Pater et Filius et Spiritus sauctus: quia nec solus Pater sine Filio, aut Spiritu sancto, nec solus Spiritus sanctus sine Pati e, vel Filio. Proinde sollicite cogitandum est, quomodo Filius in mundum mini potuit, qui mundo deesse non potuit; aut quomodo in mundum venit, unde nunquam recedit: cum ulique cui naturale est, totusque implere, nec recedere possit aliquatenus, nec venire. Natura quippe illa divinitatis immensæ, nec extenditur ut impleat quod antea vacuum erat, nec contrahitur ut evacuet quod prius impleverat. Talis autem est virtus Creatoris, talisque conditio totius creaturæ, ut quemadmodum, nisi ille conderet, nulla substantia possit existere, ita nisi ille contineat, nulla possit substantia permanere. Proinde quia secundum divinitatem Deus de loco non transit ad locum, hoc habet veritas fidei Christianæ, ut in fo Filius Dei credatur in mundum venisse, in quo servi formam cognoscitur accepisse.","english":"God therefore, ineffable and altogether wonderful, in an ineffable and wonderful manner, by the immensity of His own nature, is both wholly in each individual thing and is not enclosed by all things together. So the Father alone, so the Son alone, so the Holy Spirit alone, so at once the Trinity, one God, Father and Son and Holy Spirit: because neither is the Father alone without the Son or the Holy Spirit, nor is the Holy Spirit alone without the Father or the Son. Therefore it must be carefully considered how the Son could come into the world, He who could not be absent from the world; or how He came into the world from which He never departs: since surely for Him whose nature it is to fill all things, it is possible neither to depart in any way nor to come. For that nature of immense divinity is neither extended so as to fill what was previously empty, nor contracted so as to empty what it had previously filled. Such is the power of the Creator, and such the condition of the whole creation, that just as, unless He creates, no substance can exist, so unless He sustains, no substance can remain. Therefore, because according to His divinity God does not pass from place to place, this is what the truth of the Christian faith holds: that the Son of God is believed to have come into the world in which He is recognized to have taken the form of a servant.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":10,"ref":"p10","source":"Dei enim Filius tunc in mundum venit, quando salva æqualitate paternæ naturæ, particeps fieri dignatus est maternæ substantiæ, quando factus est salva sua divinitate homo, salva sua æternitate temporalis, salva sua immensitate localis, salva sua incommutabilitat mutabilis, salva sua immortalitate mortalis.\n\nNon autem adventus Filii Dei uno eodemque modo semper accipitur. Aliter namque venit mitlente Patre, aliter dignatur venire cum Patre. Etenim cum Patre venire dignatur æqualis, a Patre autem missus venit minoratus paulo minus ab angelis; missus a Patre semel venisse cognoscitur, cum Patre autem innumerabiliter venire dignatur. Neque enim modum aut numerum veniendi posuit, quando ait: Si quis diligit me sermonem meum servabit, et Pater meus diliget eum, et ad eum veniemus, et mansionem apud eum faciemus (Joan. xiv, 23). Proinde ille adventus quo solus Filius a Patre semel venit in mundum, non solis est bonis exhibitus, sed et malis: aliis nt crederent, aliis ut crucifigerent; aliis ut liberari a peccato possent, aliis ut excusationem de peccato suo habere non possent. Credentes enim a peccato liberatos ostendit Apostolus dicens: Nunc autem a peccato liberati, servi autem facti Deo habetis fructum vestrum in sanctificatione, finem vero vitam æternam (Rom. vi, 22).","english":"For the Son of God came into the world at that time when, with the equality of the Father's nature preserved, He deigned to become a partaker of the mother's substance; when, with His divinity preserved, He was made man; with His eternity preserved, temporal; with His immensity preserved, local; with His immutability preserved, mutable; with His immortality preserved, mortal.\n\nBut the coming of the Son of God is not always understood in one and the same way. For in one way He came when the Father sent Him, in another way He deigns to come with the Father. For indeed, He deigns to come with the Father as equal, but sent by the Father He came made a little lower than the angels; sent by the Father He is known to have come once, but with the Father He deigns to come innumerable times. For He did not set a limit or number to His coming when He said: If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our dwelling with him (John 14:23). Accordingly, that coming by which the Son alone came once from the Father into the world was shown not to the good alone, but also to the evil: to some that they might believe, to others that they might crucify; to some that they might be able to be freed from sin, to others that they might not be able to have an excuse for their sin. For the Apostle shows that those who believe have been freed from sin, saying: But now, freed from sin and made servants of God, you have your fruit in sanctification, but the end, eternal life (Rom. 6:22).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":11,"ref":"p11","source":"Incredulos vero peccati sui excusationem habere nOli posse Salvalor ipse monstravit, dicens: Si non venissem, et locutus eis non fuissem, peccatum non haberent. Nunc autem excusationem non habent de peccato suo (Joan. xv, 22). Neque enim haberent peccatum Judæi incredulitatis, si non etiam eis exhiberetur præsentia Salvatoris. Adventus ergo ille quo a Patre semel in mundum missus est Filius, fuit in ruinam et in resurrectionem multorum; ille autem quo cum Patre venit, ad resurreclionem tantum pertinet multorum, quia caritas eum meretur, quæ operit multitudinem peccatorum. Isto adventu quo a Patre missus est Filius, semel in plenitudine temporum venit; illo autem quo cum Patre venire consuevit, ab initio usque ad finem mundi, quibus oportuit, et oportet, nec destitit venire, nec desinit. Inde est quod priusquam veniret in carne, adventum ejus prophetæ poscebant dicentes: Excita potentiam tuam, et veni ut libere, nos (Psal. LXXIX, 3). Qui utique futurum Filii Dci adventum nullatenus poscerent, si ejusdem tenientis et manentis in se gratiam non haberent.","english":"But the Savior Himself showed that unbelievers cannot have an excuse for their sin, saying: If I had not come, and had not spoken to them, they would not have sin. But now they have no excuse for their sin (John 15:22). For the Jews would not have the sin of unbelief if the presence of the Savior had not also been shown to them. That coming, therefore, by which the Son was once sent by the Father into the world, was for the ruin and the resurrection of many; but that coming by which He comes with the Father pertains only to the resurrection of many, because it is deserved by charity, which covers a multitude of sins. By this coming by which the Son was sent by the Father, He came once in the fullness of times; but by that coming by which He is accustomed to come with the Father, from the beginning even to the end of the world, He has not ceased, nor does He cease, to come to those to whom it was fitting and is fitting. Hence it is that before He came in the flesh, the prophets were asking for His coming, saying: Stir up Your power, and come to set us free (Psalm 79:3). Surely they would in no way ask for the future coming of the Son of God if they did not have the grace of Him who was coming and remaining in them.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":12,"ref":"p12","source":"Istum Filii Dei Patris adventum a se omnino repellunt, qui æqualitatem Patris Filiique non credunt. Apud suum quippe dilectorem, unam venientes faciunt mansionem; non autem potest eorum esse una mansio, si fuerit diversa dilectio. Si autem inæquales sunt, necesse est ut inxqualiterdiligantur. Inæqualibus vero non potest una in corde simplici mansio praeparari. Admonet autem nos Scriptura dicens: Sentite de Domino in bonitate, et in simplicitate cordis quærite illum (Sap. I, i). Quomodo ergo Deus quæritur simplicitate cordis, quando Deo Patri et Dco Filio exhibetur diversitas dilectionis? aut quomodo simplex est homini erga Deum caritas, si in ipsa divinitate putatur esse diversitas? llla utique divinitas simplici corde diligitur, quæ simplex esse naturaliter creditur; ubi autem diversa divinitas colitur, non simplicitas cortis, scd duplicitas exhibetur: fides ergo est ibi non vera, sed ficta. Sanctus autem Spiritus disciplinæ effugiet fictum, et auferet se a cogitationibus quæ sunt sine intellectu (Sap. I, 5). Duplex autem cor esse convincitur, si quando aliquis non unam divinitatem esse colendam a fidelibus putat, aut quando non eamdem naturam Filii quam Patris existimat.","english":"They utterly reject this coming of the Son from the Father who do not believe in the equality of the Father and the Son. For with their own beloved, those who come together make one dwelling; but their dwelling cannot be one if their love is different. If, however, they are unequal, they must be loved unequally. But for those who are unequal, one dwelling cannot be prepared in a simple heart. Yet Scripture admonishes us, saying: Think of the Lord in goodness, and seek him in simplicity of heart (Wisdom 1:1). How, then, is God sought in simplicity of heart, when a diversity of love is shown to God the Father and God the Son? Or how is a man's charity toward God simple, if diversity is thought to exist in the Godhead itself? That Godhead is surely loved with a simple heart which is believed to be simple by nature; but where a diverse Godhead is worshiped, not simplicity of heart but duplicity is displayed: therefore faith there is not true but feigned. But the Holy Spirit of discipline will flee from deceit, and will withdraw himself from thoughts that are without understanding (Wisdom 1:5). But a heart is convicted of being double when someone thinks that not one Godhead is to be worshiped by the faithful, or when he does not think the Son's nature is the same as the Father's.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":13,"ref":"p13","source":"Quod si quis proximo bonitatem sermonibus fingens et corde maliliam gerens, duplex corde dicitur, quomodo ille qui sub figmenlo veritatis falsa de Deo vel credit vel dicit, duplicis cordis crimine non tenetur? Quod enim naturaliter unum est in illa summa divinitate dividere, et Deum minorem ac majorem fingere, certissimum est ad nequitiam cordis duplicis pertinere. Sancta autem Scriptura dicit: Væ duplici corde, et labiis sceleratis, et manibus malefacientibus, et peccatori terram ingredienti duabus viis (Eccli. II, 14)! Et quia diversam putare divinitatem Patris et Filii non est Deo credere (quia ille vere unum Deum colit qui alium omnino non colit, et ille uni Deo credit qui alium Deum esse non credit), ideo sequitur eadem Scriptura dicens: Væ qui non credunt Deo! quia non proteguntur ab eo (Eccli. II, 15). Inde est quod etiam Salvator noster, unam divinitatem dominationemque commendans, ait: Nemo potest duobus dominis servire (Matth. vi, 24). Legimus autem quia Dominus ipse est Deus (Psal. XCIX, 3). Unde certum est, vera fide caritateque sincera, nec dominis quemquam posse servire, nec diis. Unus est enim Deus deorum, et Dominus dominerum: qui propterea solus est colendus, quia solus I est naturaliter verus Dominus Deus, qui est Trixitas, Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus.","english":"But if anyone who frames goodness with his words while harboring malice in his heart is called double-hearted, how is that man who, under a pretense of truth, either believes or speaks false things about God not held guilty of the crime of a double heart? For to divide what is naturally one in that supreme divinity, and to fashion a lesser and a greater God, most certainly belongs to the wickedness of a double heart. But Holy Scripture says: Woe to the double-hearted, and to the wicked lips, and to the hands that do evil, and to the sinner who walks the earth by two ways! And because to think the divinity of the Father and of the Son to be different is not to believe in God (since he truly worships one God who worships no other at all, and he believes in one God who does not believe another to be God), therefore the same Scripture continues, saying: Woe to those who do not believe God! for they are not protected by him. Hence it is that even our Savior, commending one divinity and one dominion, says: No one can serve two masters. But we read that the Lord himself is God. Whence it is certain, by true faith and sincere charity, that no one can serve either masters or gods. For there is one God of gods, and Lord of lords, who for this reason alone is to be worshiped, because he alone is naturally the true Lord God, who is the Trinity, Father and Son and Holy Spirit.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":14,"ref":"p14","source":"Nos itaque, ut Deum in simplicitate cordis quæramus, diversitatem divinitatis in Patre et Filio nec corde credamus. Sed ut possit in nobis vera cordis manere simplicitas, illa in nobis maneat fides, qua sanctæ Trinitatis una creditur ac prædicatur sine diversitate divinitas. Sic in nobis Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus venientes manere dignantur. Unus est apud dilectorem suum sanctæ Trinitatis adventus, quo Deus invisibilis invisibiliter venit, et mansionem invisibiliter facit. Manendo autem apud ditectorem suum, ipsa multiplicat dilectionem, quapropter facit in homine mansionem. Ob hoc quippe venit quia diligitur; hoc autem veniens facit ut amplius diligatur.\n\nHæc ideo dixi, ut noveritis qualis fuit adventus Filii, quando missus est a Patre, et qualis sit adventus Filii, quando dignatur venire cum Patre. Quia sicut in illo adventu homo factus, Patre minor agnoscitur; sic in isto adventu æqualis Patri Deus permaDens invenitur. Dicitur autem et Spiritus sanctus venire: cum sit etiam cum Patre et Filio unus Deus, aLternus naturaliter et immensus, sine quo utique, nec Pater potest venire, nec Filius. Ille (forte illum) enim post Patrem Filiumque cognoscitur diligere, qui caritatem habet in corde. Caritas autem Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris, per Spiritum 'an. ctum, qui datus eat nobis (Rom. v, 5).","english":"We therefore, in order to seek God in simplicity of heart, should not even believe in our heart a diversity of divinity in the Father and the Son. But so that true simplicity of heart may remain in us, let that faith remain in us by which the one divinity of the holy Trinity is believed and preached without diversity. Thus the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, coming to us, deign to remain in us. There is one coming of the holy Trinity to its lover, by which the invisible God comes invisibly and makes his dwelling invisibly. But by remaining with its lover, it multiplies love itself, and therefore makes its dwelling in man. For this reason indeed it comes because it is loved; but coming it brings it about that it is loved more.\n\nI have said these things so that you may know what kind of coming of the Son it was when he was sent by the Father, and what kind of coming of the Son it is when he deigns to come with the Father. For just as in that coming, having been made man, he is acknowledged as less than the Father, so in this coming he is found to be God equal to the Father, remaining. But the Holy Spirit is also said to come: since he is also with the Father and the Son one God, eternal by nature and immeasurable, without whom certainly neither the Father can come nor the Son. For that man is known to love the Son after the Father who has love in his heart. But the love of God has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us (Rom. 5:5).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":15,"ref":"p15","source":"Pater ergo e Filius ad dilectorem suum sine Spiritu sancto nullatenus veniunt: quia ut veniant, caritatem, qua diUguntur, dono sancti Spiritus largiuntur. Invisibiliter itaque communis semper adventus est Patris et. Filii et Spiritus sancti: non transeundo de loco ad locum, sed in eo quod ipsa Triuitas unus Deus Oignatur gratiam caritatis, vel donare quam augeat, vel augere quam donat. Alio autem modo venit Filius, quando pro nobis homo factus est Unigenitus Deus. Ille utique qui in persona propria divinitatis suæ non accepit personam hominis, sed naturam. Scimus etiam Spiritum sanctum visibiliter in columbæ specie advenisse: longe utique alio modo, id est, nec illo quo Pater et Filius ad dilectorem suum non sine SDiritu sancto veniunt, nec isto quo solus Filius in mundum venit, secundum quod naturam nostram mirabiliter ac singulariter in persona suæ divinitatis accepit. Non enim sicut formam servi accepit Filius, ita formam columbae accepit Spiritus sanctus; nec sicut factus est Filius in similitudinem filiorum hominum, ita factus est Spiritus sanctus in similitudinem columbarum. Venit ergo Spiritus sanctus in specie columbae, non utique columbam in unitatem personæ accipiens. Neque enim sic per Spiritum sanctum redimi debuit natura columbarum. sicut per Filium natura redempta est hominum. Hanc enim in unitatem personæ suæ suscepit Filius, quam erat sine dubio redempturus.","english":"Therefore the Father and the Son do not come to their beloved without the Holy Spirit in any way, because in order that they may come, they bestow by the gift of the Holy Spirit the love by which they are loved. Thus the coming of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is always invisibly common: not by passing from place to place, but in that the Trinity itself, one God, is pleased either to give the grace of love, or to increase what it gives. But in another way the Son comes, when for our sake the Only-begotten God was made man—he who in the person of his own divinity did not receive the person of a man, but the nature. We know also that the Holy Spirit came visibly in the form of a dove: certainly in a far different way, that is, neither in that way in which the Father and the Son come to their beloved not without the Holy Spirit, nor in this way in which the Son alone came into the world, according as he wondrously and uniquely received our nature into the person of his divinity. For the Holy Spirit did not receive the form of a dove as the Son received the form of a servant; nor was the Holy Spirit made in the likeness of doves as the Son was made in the likeness of the sons of men. The Holy Spirit therefore came in the form of a dove, certainly not receiving a dove into the unity of his person. For the nature of doves ought not to have been redeemed through the Holy Spirit, as the nature of men was redeemed through the Son. For the Son took into the unity of his person that nature which he was without doubt going to redeem.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":16,"ref":"p16","source":"Et quoniam a Dei Filio humanitas sua nunquam sejungitur, propterea in coelo et in terra omnibus angelis omnibusque hominibus dominatur. Secundum naturam quippe humanam Filius Dei humiliavit se factus obediens usque ad mortem, morlem autem crucis (Philip. II, 8), secundum quam naturam eum Deus exaltavit, et donavit illi nomen quod est super omne nomen: ut in nomine Jesu omne genu flectatur, cœlestium, terrestrium et infernorum; et omnis lingua confiteatur quia Dominus Jesus Christus in gloria est Dei Patris (Ibid., 9). Veniente ergo plenitudine temporis, misit Deus Filium suum factum ex muliere, factum sub lege (Gal. IV, 4). Cur autem hoc fuerit factum, Apostolus subsequenter ostendens ait: Ut eos qui sub lege erant redimeret, ut adoptionem filiorum reciperemus. Suscepta est itaque a Dei Filie humana natura. Ideo autem Deus Unigenitus factus est homo, ut nobis per eum divina donaretur adcptio: ut quia ille horno Deus verus est naturali veritate divinitatis suae, nos quoque, in eo quod fratres ejus essemus, filii Dei, non nostro merito, sed ejus gratia fieremus.","english":"And because his humanity is never separated from the Son of God, therefore in heaven and on earth he rules over all angels and all men. For according to his human nature the Son of God humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, death on a cross; according to that same nature God exalted him and gave him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, and every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father. Therefore, when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law. But why this was done, the Apostle shows in what follows, saying: To redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. Thus the human nature was taken up by the Son of God. For the only-begotten God became man for this reason, that through him divine adoption might be given to us: so that, just as that man is truly God by the natural truth of his divinity, we too, in that we are his brothers, might become sons of God, not by our own merit but by his grace.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":17,"ref":"p17","source":"i3. Sanctus autem Spiritus veniens in specie columbæ, non columba factus est, sicut Filius factus est homo; sed per columbae speciem, donandam nohis ostendit suo munere caritatem. Caritas enim Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris per Spiritum sanctum, qui datus est nobis (Rom. v, 5). Apparuit autem postmodum et in igneis linguis, sed etiam hoc ad significationem fecit ipsius quam nobis largitus est caritatis. Nam quia finis præcepti est caritas de corde puro, et conscientia bona, et fide non ficta (I Tim. I, 5); et in Christo Jesu neque circumcisio aliquid valet, neque præputium, sed fides quæ per caritatem operatur (Gal. v, 6); ipsa est illa simplicitas cordis quæ significata est in columba: quia debemus id quod corde credimus ad justitiam ore confileri tiducialiter ad salutem. Columba itaque simplicitatem ostendit fidei et caritatis, ut recte credamus in Deum, et per Deum diligamus et proximum. Lingua quoque ignea significat confessionem veræ credulitatis, et admonitionem sanctæ caritatis. llla ergo columba in cujus specie super Christum baptizatum venit Spiritus sanctus, ad aliquid significandum facta est, et continuo resoluta. Solus enim Filius humanam carnem animamque suscepit. Ad ipsum solum enim naturaliter divina nativitas pertinebat. Et quia (al. qui) solus natus est de Patre, solus nasci potuit et de Virgine.","english":"But the Holy Spirit, coming in the form of a dove, was not made a dove, as the Son was made man; but through the form of a dove he showed us, by his own gift, the love that was to be given to us. For the love of God has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us (Rom. 5:5). He appeared afterward also in tongues of fire, but this too he did to signify that same love which he bestowed upon us. For since the end of the commandment is love from a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned (1 Tim. 1:5); and in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith that works through love (Gal. 5:6); this is that simplicity of heart which was signified in the dove: because we ought to confess with our mouth, confidently unto salvation, what we believe in our heart unto righteousness. The dove therefore shows the simplicity of faith and love, that we may rightly believe in God, and through God love our neighbor as well. The fiery tongue also signifies the confession of true belief and the admonition of holy love. That dove, then, in whose form the Holy Spirit came upon Christ when he was baptized, was made to signify something, and was immediately dissolved. For the Son alone took up human flesh and soul. For to him alone the divine birth belonged by nature. And because he alone was born of the Father, he alone could also be born of the Virgin.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":18,"ref":"p18","source":"Qui nisi homo ex homine lieret, naturae nostræ particeps non fuisset. Ideo ergo factum est ut veram carnem acciperet de carne Virginis, ut cum illo nobis vera maneret communio naturalis. Quomodo enim vel antiquos Patres, vel cujusquam temporis homines, in consortim suæ divinitatis ascisceret, si cum eis naturale carnis consortium non haberet?\n\nFilius ergo Dei non solum homo, sed etiam ex hominibus dignatus est fieri. Inde est quod ait Apostolus loquens de Christo: Non enim angelos appreliendit, sed semen Abrahæ apprehendit. Unde debuit per ornnia fratribus similari, ut misericors fieret et fide Ii, pontifex ad Deum, ut repropitiaret delicta populi. In eo enim quod (al. quo passus est ipse, et tentatus, potens est eis. qui tentantur auxiliari. Unde, fratres sancti, vocationis cælestis participes, considerate Apostolum et Pontificem confessionis nostræ Jesum, qui fidelis est ei qui fecit illum (Hebr. II, 46; III, ). Hinc est quod alio loco rursus ejusdem Epistolæ dicit: Omnia enim pontifex ex hominibus assumptus pro hominibus constituitur in iis quæ sunt ad Deum, ut offerat dona et sacrificia pro peccatis (Hebr. v, 1). Talis autem erat iste pontifex, ut ad reconciliationem humani generis semetipsum pro nobis offerret oblationem et hostiam Deo in odorem suavitatis. Inde est quod cum inimici essemus, reconciliati sumus Deo per mortem Filii ejus(Rom. v, 10).","english":"Unless he had become man from man, he would not have been a partaker of our nature. Therefore it was brought about that he should receive true flesh from the flesh of the Virgin, so that a true natural communion might remain between him and us. For how would he have taken the ancient Fathers, or men of any time, into the fellowship of his divinity, if he had not had with them the natural fellowship of the flesh?\n\nThe Son of God, therefore, deigned to become not only man, but also [one] from among men. Hence it is that the Apostle says, speaking of Christ: For he did not take hold of angels, but he took hold of the seed of Abraham. Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in all things, so that he might become merciful and faithful, a high priest before God, to make atonement for the sins of the people. For in that he himself suffered and was tempted, he is able to help those who are tempted. Therefore, holy brothers, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Jesus, who is faithful to him who made him. Hence it is that in another place the same Epistle again says: For every high priest taken from among men is appointed on behalf of men in those things that are toward God, that he may offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. Such was this high priest, that for the reconciliation of the human race he offered himself for us as an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet odor. Hence it is that when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":19,"ref":"p19","source":"Ut autem beatusapostolus ostenderet Christum Dei Filium ex illo uno homine traxisse originem carnis, ex quo omnes homines propagavit nnitas naturalis, propterea dicit alio loco: Qui enim sanctificat, et qui sanctificantur ex uno omnes. Propter quam causam non confunditur fratres eos vocare dicens, Nuntiabo nomen tuum fratribus meis (Hebr. II, 11). Ille autem hoc de nobis dicit, qui secundum carnem pro nobis est et natus et passus: imo qui sic naturae nostrae factus est particeps,*ut ex illo uno fieret ex quo omnes facti sumus; ex illo uno carnis originem doceret, ex quo cuncti originem ducimus. Quod si Trinitas pro nobis susciperet carnem, quoniam illi qui incarnatus est, per consortium carnis, fratres facti sumus; jam non solum filii Dei Patris, sed etiam fratres totius Trinitatis essemus; et quem habemus in cælis Patrem, ipsum nobis humana nalivitas fecisset et fratrem.","english":"But so that the blessed apostle might show that Christ the Son of God drew the origin of his flesh from that one man from whom natural unity propagated all men, he therefore says in another place: For he who sanctifies and those who are sanctified are all from one. For this reason he is not ashamed to call them brothers, saying, I will declare your name to my brothers (Heb. 2:11). But he says this concerning us who according to the flesh was both born and suffered for us—indeed, who was so made a partaker of our nature that he should be made from that one man from whom we all were made, and should show the origin of his flesh from that one man from whom we all draw our origin. But if the Trinity had taken up flesh for us, since by the sharing of flesh we have been made brothers to him who was incarnate, then we would be not only sons of God the Father but also brothers of the whole Trinity; and the very human birth would have made him a brother to us whom we have as Father in heaven.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":20,"ref":"p20","source":"Magnæ absurditatis es: illum ex tempore genitum suspicari, cui ex aeternitate non natum esse, sed genuisse sit proprium. Hoc itaque convenit veræ fidei, neque Patrem, neque Spiritum, sed Filium, sicut solum natum de Deo Patre, sic solum natum de Maria Virgine confiteri. Quoniam ergo soIus Filius Deus carnem suscepit, ideo nos Dei filios fecit, et liberatos a servitute peccati, veræ reddidit libertati. Et quia solus est de Virgihe natus, ideo solus pro nobis est traditus: testante Apostolo quia Deus Filio suo proprio non pepercil, sed pro nobis omnibus tradidit illum (Rom. VIII, 52). Nam et deipso Filio dicit: Quod autem nunc vivo in carne, in fide vivo Filii Dei, qui dilexit me, et tradidit semetipsum pro me (Gal. II. 20). Alio quoque loco ait: Gratia vobis et pax a Deo Patre nostro et Domino Jesu Christo, qui dedit semetipsum pro peccatis noslris, ut eriperet nos de præsenti sæculo nequam, secundum voluntatem Dei Patris nostri, cui eSt gloria in specula sæculorum (Gal. I, 5). Sicut ergo tradidit Pater Filium, ita semetipsuin tradidit Filius; et sicut seipsum Filius dedit, sic eum etiam Pater dedit, dicente Filio: Sic enim dilexit Deus mundum, ut Filium suum unigenitum daret, ut omnis qui credit in eum non pereat, sed habeat vitam æternam (Joan. III, 16).","english":"You are guilty of great absurdity: to suspect that he was begotten in time, for whom it is proper not to have been born but to have begotten from eternity. This, therefore, belongs to the true faith: to confess that neither the Father nor the Spirit, but the Son, was born—as the Son alone was born of God the Father, so the Son alone was born of the Virgin Mary. Since, therefore, the Son alone, being God, took up flesh, he has therefore made us sons of God, and having freed us from the slavery of sin, he has restored us to true liberty. And because he alone was born of the Virgin, he alone was handed over for us, as the Apostle testifies: God did not spare his own Son, but handed him over for us all (Rom. 8:32). For he also says of the Son himself: But that I now live in the flesh, I live in faith in the Son of God, who loved me and handed himself over for me (Gal. 2:20). In another place too he says: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins, that he might rescue us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory for ever and ever (Gal. 1:5). Therefore, just as the Father handed over the Son, so the Son handed himself over; and just as the Son gave himself, so the Father also gave him, as the Son says: For God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that everyone who believes in him should not perish but have eternal life (John 3:16).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":21,"ref":"p21","source":"His itaque omnibus cognitis, quibus evidenter ostenditur solum Filium pro nostra salute carnem suscepisse, solumque pro peccatis nostris traditum. et passionis ac mortis.pertulisse supplicium, absitut quisquam fidelium dicat Deum Patrem, aut de Virgine natum, aut pro nobis traditum. Ista enim solius sunt Filii, qui sicut pro nobis temporaliter dignatus est nasci, ita temporaliter mori. Si quis autem Deo Patri susceptionem carnis assignat, illud praecipue attendat in Evangelio, quia Deus qui carnem induit, frequentissime se ipsum non solum filium hominis, sed etiam Dei Filium nominavit. Ipse quippe cæco nato quem illuminaverat dixit: Tu credis in Filium Dei? Respondit ille, et dixit: Quis est Domine, ut credam in eum? Et dixit ei Jesus: Et vidisti eum, et I qui loquitur tecum ipse est. At ille ait: Credo, Domine. Et procidens adoravit eum (Joan. IX, et seq.). Judæis quoque sic ait: Nonne scriptum est in lege vestra, quia ego dixi: Dii estis? Si illos dixit deos ad quos sermo Dei factus est, et non potest solvi Scriptura, quem Pater sanctificavit et misit in mundum, dicitis, Blasphemas, quia dixi, Filius Dei sum (loan. x, 34. Alio quoque loco simul se et Filium hominis, et Dei Filium nuncupavit dicens: Sicut Moyses exaltavit serpentem in deserto, ita oportet exaltari Filium hominis, ut omnis qui credit in ipso non pereat, sed habeat vitam æternam (Joan. III, 14).","english":"Since, then, all these things are known, by which it is clearly shown that the Son alone took flesh for our salvation, and that he alone was handed over for our sins and endured the punishment of his passion and death, far be it from any of the faithful to say that God the Father was either born of the Virgin or handed over for us. For these things belong to the Son alone, who, just as he deigned to be born for us in time, so too in time did he die. But if anyone assigns the taking up of flesh to God the Father, let him especially attend to this in the Gospel, that God who put on flesh very frequently named himself not only the Son of Man but also the Son of God. For he himself said to the man born blind, whom he had enlightened: Do you believe in the Son of God? He answered and said: Who is he, Lord, that I may believe in him? And Jesus said to him: You have seen him, and he who is speaking with you is himself. But he said: I believe, Lord. And falling down, he worshiped him. To the Jews also he spoke thus: Is it not written in your law, that I said: You are gods? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken, do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, You blaspheme, because I said, I am the Son of God? In another place too he named himself at once both the Son of Man and the Son of God, saying: As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may not perish but have eternal life.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":22,"ref":"p22","source":"Ubi continuo iIlud quod in hoc opere a nobis ita positum est, ipse de se Salvator adjunxit, in quo se Dei Filium nominavit dicens: Sic enim dilexit Deus mundum, ut Fi-. lium suum unigenitum daret, ut omnis qui credit in eum non pereat, sed habeat vitam æternam. Non enim misit Deus Filium ut judicet mundum, sed ut salvetur mundus per ipsum. Qui credit in eum non judicabitur; qui autem non credit, jam judicatus est, quia non credit in nomine unigeniti Filii Dei (loan. 111., et seq.). Nam et cam seipse Filium hominis nominaret, dicens discipulis suis: Quem dicunt homines esse Filium hominis (Matth. xvi, 13)? et audita hominum opinionc multimoda, illorum scilicet qui sibi de ipsa Veritate mortiferum fingebant pro sua voluntate mendacium, dixisset: Vos autem quem me esse dicitis? quia respondens Petrus ait, Tu es Christus Filius Dei vivi (Ibid., 15, 16); propterea beatus meruit appellari, sic ipso Domino respondenle: Beatus es, Simon Barjona, quia caro et sanguis non revelavit tibi, sed Pater meus qui est in cœlis (Ibid., 17).","english":"Thereupon the Savior himself immediately added that which has been set down by us in this work, in which he named himself the Son of God, saying: For God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life. For God did not send his Son to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him will not be judged; but whoever does not believe is already judged, because he does not believe in the name of the only-begotten Son of God (John 3, and following). For also when he himself named himself the Son of Man, saying to his disciples: Whom do men say that the Son of Man is (Matthew 16:13)? and when, having heard the manifold opinions of men—namely of those who by their own will fashioned for themselves a deadly lie concerning the Truth itself—he had said: But who do you say that I am? because Peter, answering, said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Ibid., 15, 16); for this reason he deserved to be called blessed, with the Lord himself responding thus: Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood has not revealed it to you, but my Father who is in heaven (Ibid., 17).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":23,"ref":"p23","source":"Inde est quod etiam post resurrectionem ad Patrem suum se ascensurum hoc sermone testatur: Ascendo ad Patrem meum, et Patrem vestrum, Deum meum, et Deum vestrum (Joan. xx, 17). Si ergo Deus qui carnem induit ipse esse Deus Paler asseritur, necosse est ut et ipsius Patris Pater esse alius asseratur; ac per hoc et Deus Pater habuit Patrem, cui dicere: (al. dicitur), Pater, clarifica Filium tuum, ut Filius tuus clarificet te, (Joan. XVII, 1). Et ex hoc sensu sacrilego et blasphemiis pleno. etiam in illud reciditur, ut jam non unus Pater æstimetur esse, sed duo; id est (al. idem), unus Pater Filii, quem veritas novit, et alter Pater Patris, quem vanitas. fingit. Et ubi est quod unum Deum Patrem profitetur Apostolus dicens: Nobis autem unus Deus Pater, ex quo omnia, et nos in ipso (I Cor. VIII, 6). Et alio loco, Unus Deus et Pater omnium qui super omnes, et per omnia, et in omnibus nobis (Ephes. IV, 6). Cum quo licet Filius naturaliter unus sit Deus, tamen secundum personas, alter est Pater, alter est Filius, alter est Spiritus sanctus. Quas personas ostendit evidenler beatus Joannes dicens: Qui diligit genitorem, diligit eum qui natus est ex eo (1 Joan. V, 1). Item dicit: In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum, hoc erat in principio apud Deum (Joan.","english":"Hence it is that even after the resurrection he testifies in this utterance that he will ascend to his Father: I ascend to my Father and your Father, my God and your God (John 20:17). If, therefore, the God who put on flesh is asserted to be God the Father himself, it is necessary that another be asserted to be the Father of that Father himself; and by this reasoning even God the Father had a Father, to whom it is said: Father, glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you (John 17:1). And from this sacrilegious and blasphemy-filled sense it is even fallen into this, that now not one Father is reckoned to be, but two; that is, one Father of the Son, whom the truth knows, and another Father of the Father, whom vanity fashions. And where is that which the Apostle professes, that there is one God the Father, saying: But to us there is one God the Father, from whom are all things, and we in him (1 Cor 8:6). And in another place: One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all (Eph 4:6). With whom, although the Son is naturally one God, yet according to persons, one is the Father, another is the Son, another is the Holy Spirit. Which persons the blessed John clearly shows, saying: Whoever loves the begetter loves him who was born of him (1 John 5:1). Likewise he says: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and God was the Word; this was in the beginning with God (John","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"scripture","severity":"info","ref":"John 1:1","text":"The English carries the scriptural phrase “in the beginning was the word”, which matches John 1:1. The match is on the English draft; check the Coptic before quoting the verse."}]},{"i":24,"ref":"p24","source":"I, 4); et paulo post, ut a solo Verbo carnem acceptam esse monstraret ait: Et Verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis (Ibid., 14).\n\nDeus ergo Verbum faclum est caro, non Deus • apud quem erat Verbum: quia Unigenitus, qui est in sinn Patris, secundum quod caro est, plenus est gratiæ, et secundum quod Verbum est, plenum est veritatis: ipse unus Verbum caro factum quod habitavit in nobis. De ipso etiam dicit propheta: Hic Deus noster, et non aestimabitur alius ad eum, qui adinvenit omnem viam disciplinæ, et dedit eam Jacob puero suo, et Israel dilecto suo. Post hæc in terris visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est (Baruch III, 56). Hoc testimonium de solo Filio dictum vera -fides accepit. Ipse est enim secundum carnem in terris visus, et cum hominibus conversatus. Unde sanctus evangelista Matthæus prophetico omnino congruens sermoni, Jesum dicit cum discipulis conversalum. Sic enim ait: Conversantibus autem eis in Galilæa, dixit illis Jesus: Filius hominis tradendus est in manus hominum, et occident eum, et tertia die resurget (Matth. XVII, 21). Ideo ergo venerat ut occideretur pro nobis. Quomodo autem occideretur, si non traderetur? Aut quomodo traderetur, si non teneretur? Quomo io vero teneretur, si cum hominibus non con* versaretur, vel quomodo cum hominibus conversaretur, si in terris non videretur? Quomodo autem videretur, si non nasceretur?","english":"And a little later, to show that the flesh was received by the Word alone, he says: And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us (Ibid., 14).\n\nTherefore God the Word was made flesh, not the God with whom the Word was: because the Only-begotten, who is in the bosom of the Father, according as he is flesh, is full of grace, and according as he is the Word, is full of truth: he himself is the one Word made flesh who dwelt among us. Of him also the prophet says: This is our God, and no other shall be esteemed beside him, who found out every way of discipline, and gave it to Jacob his servant, and to Israel his beloved. After these things he was seen on earth, and conversed with men (Baruch 3:36-37). This testimony, spoken of the Son alone, the true faith has received. For he himself, according to the flesh, was seen on earth and conversed with men. Whence the holy evangelist Matthew, wholly agreeing with the prophetic utterance, says that Jesus conversed with his disciples. For thus he says: And while they were conversing in Galilee, Jesus said to them: The Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him, and on the third day he shall rise again (Matthew 17:21). Therefore he had come for this purpose, that he might be killed for us. But how would he be killed, if he were not delivered up? Or how would he be delivered up, if he were not held? But how would he be held, if he did not converse with men, or how would he converse with men, if he were not seen on earth? But how would he be seen, if he were not born?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":25,"ref":"p25","source":"Quomodo autem nasceretur, si non caro de carne conciperetur? Si autem omnia hæc non fierent, consilium Domini, quod manet in æternum, nullatenus impleretur. Illo autem vacante consilio, nulla nobis peccatoribus salutis gratia conferretur. Et quomodo esset in eo verum nomen, quo dictus est Jesus? Hic enim interpretamur Salvator. Propter quod angelus dicens ad Josepb quod paritura esset Maria Filium Dei etiam hoc adjunxit: Et vocabis nomen ejus Jesum. Ipse enim salvum faciet populum suum a peccatis eorum (Matth. I, 21). Ad ipsam vero Mariam sic locutus est angetus: Ecce concipies in uterof et paries Filium, et vocubis nomen ejus Jesum. Hic erit magnus, et Filius Altissimi vocabitur (Luc. I,, 32). Non igitur Deus Pater est de Virgine natus, quandoquidem ille quem Virgo peperit, Filius est Altissimi nuncupatus. Ergo quoniam unus est Pater, et unus est Filius, et unus est Spiritus sanctus; propterea ille qui naturaliter est Altissimi Filius, de Patris æterna divinitate, idem FiliusAltissimi, secundum veram fidem, vocatur ex Virgine.","english":"But how would he be born, if flesh were not conceived from flesh? If all these things were not done, the counsel of the Lord, which remains forever, would in no way be fulfilled. But with that counsel set aside, no grace of salvation would be conferred on us sinners. And how would there be in him the true name by which he was called Jesus? For this we interpret as Savior. For this reason the angel, when he said to Joseph that Mary would give birth to the Son of God, also added this: And you shall call his name Jesus. For he will save his people from their sins (Matt. 1:21). But to Mary herself the angel spoke thus: Behold, you shall conceive in your womb and bear a Son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great, and he shall be called the Son of the Most High (Luke 1:32). Therefore God the Father is not the one born of the Virgin, since the one whom the Virgin bore was called the Son of the Most High. Therefore, since there is one Father, and one Son, and one Holy Spirit, for this reason the one who is by nature the Son of the Most High, from the eternal divinity of the Father, the same is called the Son of the Most High, according to the true faith, from the Virgin.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":26,"ref":"p26","source":"Nec te moveat quod de solo Filio loquens propheta dixit: Hic Deus noster, et non æstimabitur alius ad eum (Baruch III, 36). Nec ex hoc quod dixit alium non æstimari ad eum, quisquam existimet in persona eumdem Patrem esse quem Filium. Beatus Hieremias sancto Spiritu plenus, Hic Deus noster, ait, et non æstimabitur alius ad eum, ut in eo quod prius dixit, Hic Deus, in hoc cognosceremus non æstimari alium ad eum, quia non est Deus alius absque illo. Naturaliter enim sic non est alius Deus absque Spiritu sancto, quia non est alius Deus Pater, et alius Deus Filius, et alius Deus Spiritus sanctus; sed unus Deus est Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus, et absque hoc Deo nostro non est alius Deus. Proindc ita Deus noster est Pater, ut non aestimetur alius ad eum: ita Deus noster est etiam Filius, ut non æstimelur alius ad eum; nihilominus ita Deus noster est etiam Spirilus sanctus, ut non æstimetur alius ad eum: quia absque hoc uno Deo non est alius Deus, de quo dicit David, Quis Deus præter Dominum, aut quis Deus prceler Deum nostrum (Psal., XVII, 32)? Et ipse Deus dicit: Videte, videte quoniam ego sum Deus, et non est alius præter me (Deut. XXXII, 39). De hoc et beatus Jacobus ait: Tu credis quia unus eat Deus, bene facis; et dæmones credunt, et contremiseunt. (Jac. II,19).","english":"And let it not disturb you that the prophet, speaking of the Son alone, said: This is our God, and no other shall be esteemed beside him. Nor from this, that he said no other is esteemed beside him, let anyone suppose that the Father himself is the same person as the Son. Blessed Jeremiah, full of the Holy Spirit, said, This is our God, and no other shall be esteemed beside him, so that in what he said first, This is God, we might understand in this that no other is esteemed beside him, because there is no other God besides him. For naturally there is thus no other God apart from the Holy Spirit, because there is not one God the Father, and another God the Son, and another God the Holy Spirit; but the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one God, and apart from this our God there is no other God. Therefore the Father is our God in such a way that no other is esteemed beside him; the Son also is our God in such a way that no other is esteemed beside him; nonetheless the Holy Spirit also is our God in such a way that no other is esteemed beside him, because apart from this one God there is no other God, of whom David says, Who is God besides the Lord, or who is God besides our God? And God himself says: See, see that I am God, and there is no other besides me. Of this blessed James also says: You believe that there is one God; you do well; and the demons believe, and tremble.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":27,"ref":"p27","source":"Naturaliter ergo alius Deus non æstimatur ad Filium, quia alius Deus non æstimatur ad Patrem, nec alius Deus æstimatur ad Spiritum sanctum. In personis vero alius est Pater, alius Filius, alius Spiritus sanctus; nec ipse Pater qui Filius, nec ipse Spiritus sanctus qui Pater aut Filius; sed idem Deus unus, Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus. Ostendit autem ipse Filius et Patrem alium in persona, et Spiritum sanctum, dicens: Alius est qui testimoniuM perhibet de me, et scio quia verum est testimonium ejus quod testatur de me (Joan. v, 32). Et ne de Joanne hoc dictum quisquam putaret, paulo post ait: Ego autem habeo testimonium majus Joanne. Opera enim quæ dedit mihi Pater ut perficiam ea, ipsa opera quæ ego facio testimonium perhibent de me, quia Pater me misit. Et qui me misit Pater ipse testimonium perhibet de me (Ibid., 36). Spiritum quoque sanctum personaliter alium ostendit dicens: Si diligitis me, mandata mea servate, et ego rogabo Patrem, et alium Paracletum dabit vobis, ut maneat vobiscum iu æternum, ■ Spiritum veritatis (Joan. XIV, 15): de quo etiam alio loco dicit: Cum venerit Paracletus quem ego mittam vobis a Patre, Spiritum veritatis qui a Patre procedit, ille testimonium perhibebit de me (Joan. xv, 16). Majestas autem Patris et Filii una est, quæ de coelo non descendit ad locum.","english":"Naturally, therefore, another God is not esteemed in relation to the Son, because another God is not esteemed in relation to the Father, nor is another God esteemed in relation to the Holy Spirit. In persons, however, the Father is one, the Son another, the Holy Spirit another; nor is the Father himself the Son, nor is the Holy Spirit himself the Father or the Son; but the same one God, Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But the Son himself showed both that the Father is another in person, and the Holy Spirit, saying: There is another who bears witness of me, and I know that his testimony is true which he testifies of me (John 5:32). And lest anyone should think this was said of John, a little later he says: But I have a testimony greater than John. For the works which the Father gave me to accomplish, these very works which I do bear witness of me, that the Father sent me. And the Father who sent me himself bears witness of me (Ibid., 36). He also shows the Holy Spirit to be personally another, saying: If you love me, keep my commandments, and I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Paraclete, that he may remain with you forever, the Spirit of truth (John 14:15): of whom he also says in another place: When the Paraclete comes whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness of me (John 15:16). But the majesty of the Father and of the Son is one, which did not descend from heaven to a place.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":28,"ref":"p28","source":"Summa quippe ac vera divinitas de loco ad locum transire non potest, quia semper ubique tota est. Eadem quippe Trinitatis est ana majestas, quae naturaliter una est immensa divinitas. Sed, ut superius dixi, sic est Trinitatis una natura, ut non sit una persona. ProindeFilius, manente immensitate majestatis suæ, quam habet eum Patre et Spiritu sancto communem, solus humanam naturam in unitate personæ suæ accepit. Cui propterea non est cum Patre et Spiritu sancto communio susceptæ carnis, quia Patri et Filio et Spiritui sancto Don est persona communis.\n\nIllam itaque servi formam tota Trinitas fecit, quam tamen in personam suam Filius solus accepit. Ipse enim solus est Verbum, et Evangelista veraciler dicit, Verbum curo factum est (Joan. i, 14), cui tamen ut caro fieret non aliquo alio Verbo mandavit Pater: unum enim Verbum habet Pater, per quod omnia fecit et facit, per quod omnia dixit et dicit. Hoc Verbum a Patre missum est, quando Verbum caro factum est: sed utmitteretur non ei aliquibus transeuntibus verbis locutus est Pater. Æternum quippe Verbum de Patre natum, hoc est æternum a Patre mandatum,quia æterna Filii generatio, ipsa est Patris æterna locutio. Hoc Verbum tunc ab unoquoque auditur, quando veritas divinitatis atque incarnationis agnoscitur.","english":"For the highest and true divinity cannot pass from place to place, because it is always wholly everywhere. For the same majesty belongs to the Trinity, which is naturally one immense divinity. But, as I said above, the nature of the Trinity is one in such a way that it is not one person. Hence the Son, while the immensity of his majesty remains, which he has in common with the Father and the Holy Spirit, alone received human nature into the unity of his person. And for this reason he does not have the assumed flesh in common with the Father and the Holy Spirit, because the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit do not have a common person.\n\nTherefore the whole Trinity made that form of a servant, which nevertheless the Son alone received into his own person. For he alone is the Word, and the Evangelist truthfully says, The Word was made (John 1:14), yet the Father did not command it to become flesh through any other Word; for the Father has one Word, through which he made and makes all things, through which he spoke and speaks all things. This Word was sent by the Father when the Word was made flesh; but in order that it be sent, the Father did not speak to it with any passing words. For the eternal Word born of the Father—this is the eternal command from the Father—because the eternal generation of the Son is itself the eternal speaking of the Father. This Word is then heard by each one, when the truth of the divinity and of the incarnation is recognized.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":29,"ref":"p29","source":"Nam sicut unusquisque homo verbum habet in corde, dum cogitat, quod verbum foras non educitur nisi voce corporea vestiatur, quia per vocem acceptam potest in aliorum venire notitiam; cum vero illud verbum voce loquentis ostenditur, nullatenus de cordis intimo separatur, sed hoc mirabiliter fit ut et totum ad alios corporea locutione perveniat, et totum spiritaliter in corda loquentis permaneat; sic eliam Verbum Dei Patris natum de Patre permansit in Patre: quod a nobis nullatenus agnosceretur, nisi carnis substantia, tanquam voce corporea vestiretur. Ita totum ad nos Verbum, quando Verbum caro factum est, venit, totum apud Patrem spiritale permansit: æquale Patri de quo semper est natum, et ut a nobis percipi posset, carnis acceptæ gratia minoratum. Ac per hoc de Domino Dominus in forma Dei Dominus mansit, et ut ad servos veniret, de an cilia veritatem formæ servilfs accepit.","english":"For just as every man has a word in his heart while he thinks, which word is not brought outside unless it be clothed with a bodily voice, because through the voice it receives it can come into the knowledge of others; but when that word is shown forth by the voice of the speaker, it is in no way separated from the inner depths of the heart, but this happens wondrously, that the whole comes to others through bodily speech, and the whole remains spiritually in the heart of the speaker; so also the Word of God the Father, born of the Father, remained in the Father: which would in no way be known by us, unless it were clothed with the substance of flesh as with a bodily voice. Thus the whole Word came to us, when the Word was made flesh, and the whole remained spiritual with the Father: equal to the Father, of whom it is ever born, and, so that it might be perceived by us, made lesser by the grace of the flesh it took up. And through this, the Lord remained Lord in the form of God, and, so that he might come to servants, he took up the truth of the servant's form from the handmaid.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":30,"ref":"p30","source":"Sed hujus formæ servilis acceptae mysterium quidam minus intelligentes, cum a nobis audiunt unam praedicari sanctæ Trinitatis essentiam, vel negant, vel dubitant potuisse fieri ut Filius, qui secundum divinilatem a Patre et Spiritu sancto inseparabilis prædicatur a nobis, et solus pro nobi veritatcm formae servilis acciperet, et nihilominus cum Patre et Spiritu sancto inseparabilis permaneret. Sed illis hoc videretur sine dubio impossibile, qui invisibilia Dei per ea quæ facta sunt, quia non intelli gunt, non conspiciunt. Qui si communem naturae humanæ usum attenderent, etiam in illo magno pietatis sacramento rectas intelligentiae lineas invenirent. Quoniam igitur una est vera divinitas quæ in seipsa tres habet inseparabiles omnino personas, propter quod ipsa Trinitas unus est Deus, et in creaturis nulla natura in tribus personis inseparabilis invenitur, attendamus quid agatur in unoquoque homine, in quo non tres personas in una natura, sed duas naturas invenimus in una persona. Deus quippe mirabili virtutis opere, ex duabus naturis, hoc est anjma rationali et carne, unam naturam bominis composuit, et in anima et carne unam personam hominis manere præcepit. Ecce in homine sunt dux naturae in una persona: sic Trinitatem dicimus tres personas in una natura.","english":"But some, understanding the mystery of this servile form that was assumed less than they should, when they hear from us that one essence of the holy Trinity is preached, either deny or doubt that it could have come about that the Son, who according to divinity is preached by us as inseparable from the Father and the Holy Spirit, both alone for us received the truth of the servile form, and nonetheless remained inseparable with the Father and the Holy Spirit. But this would seem without doubt impossible to those who do not gaze upon the invisible things of God through the things that were made, because they do not understand. If they attended to the common use of human nature, they would find the straight lines of understanding even in that great sacrament of piety. Since, therefore, the one true divinity is that which has in itself three persons altogether inseparable, on account of which the Trinity itself is one God, and in created things no nature is found inseparable in three persons, let us attend to what is done in each individual man, in whom we find not three persons in one nature, but two natures in one person. For God, by the wondrous work of his power, composed one nature of man from two natures, that is, from a rational soul and flesh, and ordained that one person of man remain in soul and flesh. Behold, in man there are two natures in one person: thus we say the Trinity is three persons in one nature.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":31,"ref":"p31","source":"Attendamus ergo hic a duabus istis naturis in una persona manentibus quædam communiter fieri, nec communiler vel accipi, vel haberi. Nempe in nobis ipsis aliquid uno fieri carnis et animæ officio invenimus, quod tamen aut carni tantum, aut animæ deputamus. Certissime namque sicut caro sola cibis corporalihus pascitur, sic anima verbo Dei spiritaliter enutritur. Et tamen ut caro quæ de tefra facta est terrenis pascatur cibis, cooperante anima comedit, quandoquidem ex anima vivit, et ideo comedit quia vivit, utiliter habens in seipsum operantis alterum secum animae coopcrantis officium, cui simul inest et ex vita ut comedat, et ex cibis ut vivat. Cum ergo cibus sumitur, communis est operatio carnis et animæ: qui tamen cibus ad solam in. venitur carnem proprie pertinere. In percipiendo quoque verbo Dei, quo spiritali cibo anima sola pascitur, ut ad eumdem perveniat cibum, utitur officio aut oculorum aut aurium. Ac per hoc ut interius ipsa pascatur, non sine carnis operatione perficitur. Sicut ergo hic utriusque naturæ invenitur operatio, cum sit unius acceptio, ita credamus humanam naturam Unigeniti Dei simul a Patre, et Filio, et Spiritu sancto factam, sed a solo Filio pro nostra misericorditer salute susceptam.","english":"Let us therefore attend here to the fact that from these two natures remaining in one person certain things are done in common, yet are not received or held in common. For indeed in ourselves we find something done by the one office of flesh and soul, which nevertheless we assign to either the flesh alone or the soul alone. For most certainly, just as the flesh alone is fed with bodily foods, so the soul is spiritually nourished by the word of God. And yet, in order that the flesh, which was made from the earth, may be fed with earthly foods, it eats with the soul cooperating, since it lives from the soul, and it eats for this reason, because it lives, usefully having within itself the office of the other working together with the soul, to which it is at once present both from life that it may eat, and from food that it may live. When therefore food is taken, the operation of the flesh and the soul is common; yet that food is found to pertain properly to the flesh alone. In receiving also the word of God, by which spiritual food the soul alone is fed, in order that it may attain to that same food, it uses the office either of the eyes or of the ears. And through this, in order that it may be fed inwardly, it is accomplished not without the operation of the flesh. Just as therefore here the operation of both natures is found, though there is the receiving of one, so let us believe that the human nature of the Only-begotten God was made at once by the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, but was mercifully assumed by the Son alone for our salvation.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":32,"ref":"p32","source":"Addis interea quemdam ex vobis in illo postmodum dixisse convivio, quod muscas, pulices, scorpioncs et cimices Deus non fecit, sed post dejectionem angeli illius indigni diaboli, hæc omnia ab ipso diabolo facta sint. Et dum ceretis quia omnia Deus fecit, et hæc bona valde, dixit quod me de hoc consulere deberetis, ut da hoc eis satisfaciam, si ante transgressionem, quando Deus omnia fecit, tunc ista facta sint; an post transgressionem Alte. Hæc sunt verba quibus tua terminatur epistola. Hujus autem interrogationis duae sunt partes. Nam et utrum Deus illa omnia fecerit, et quando fecerit, inquisistis.\n\nPrius itaque, utrum ea Deus fecerit video diaserendum. Ubi nobis beatus Joannes evangelista quid sentire debeamus ostendit dicens: In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum. Hoc erat in principio apud Deum. Omnia per ipsum facla sunt, et sine ipso factum est nihil (Joan. i, i, 2, 5). Vide sanclum evangelistam Spiritu Dei repletum paucis verbis non solum Creatorem, sed etiam creaturam nobis salubriter intimasse. Nam quod ait, In principio erat Verbum, duobus modis recta fides intelligit: id est, vel quod in Paire erat Filius, quia aturaliter unum principium est, Pater et Filius; vel quod sine initio est non sodum Pater, sed eliam Filius.","english":"Meanwhile you add that someone among you afterwards said at that banquet that God did not make flies, fleas, scorpions, and bugs, but that after the casting down of that unworthy angel, the devil, all these things were made by the devil himself. And while you know that God made all things, and these very good, he said that you ought to consult me about this, so that I might satisfy them on this point: whether these things were made before the transgression, when God made all things, or after the transgression. These are the words with which your letter ends. Now this question has two parts. For you have asked both whether God made all those things, and when he made them.\n\nFirst, therefore, I see that it must be discussed whether God made them. Here the blessed evangelist John shows us what we ought to think, saying: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. This was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was made nothing. See how the holy evangelist, filled with the Spirit of God, has in a few words salutarily made known to us not only the Creator but also the creature. For what he says, In the beginning was the Word, right faith understands in two ways: that is, either that the Son was in the Father, because the Father and the Son are naturally one principle; or that not only the Father but also the Son is without beginning.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":33,"ref":"p33","source":"Hoc enim certissime verum priucipium dicitur, quod nullo existendi principio prævenitur: quidquid autem in principio esse coepit, factum est opere Dei creantis, nec unam potest habere cum Creatore naturam: hoc est enim subdilum initio, quod Dcus creavit ex nihilo. Proinde illud recte dicitur in principio esse, cui na. turale cst absque existendi initio semper esse: quæ sine initio æternitas, ipsa est vera D.vinilas. Hæc autem in uno Filio, qui de Patre natus est, et in uno Spiritu sancto, qui de Patre Filioque procedit, naturaliler invenitur. Tale cst ergo quod evangelista dicit, In principio erat Verbum, quasi diceret, Semper erat Verbum: quodcunque enim valuerit homo principium cogitare, non invenitur aliquando illud Verbum coepisse, sed semper in principio esse. Deinde dicens, erat Verbum apud Deum, ostendit naturam Verbi, nec temporalem esse utique, nec localem. Nihil enim habet de initio temporis Verbum, quod in principio erat: nibil habet de spatio loci, quod ante omnem creaturam temporibus locisve subjectam apud Deum crat. Dicens deinde, Deus erat Verbum, ostendit unam Patris Filiique naturam, dum Verbum quod erat apud Deum non aliud naturaliter dixit esse quam Deum. Evangelista quippe Verbum prius dicens, vocabulum personæ veraciter existentis expressit, quod utique non est Patri Filioque commu. ne. Solus enim Filius dicitur Verbum.","english":"For that is most certainly called the true beginning which is preceded by no beginning of existing; but whatever began to be in a beginning was made by the work of God creating, and cannot have one nature with the Creator; for this is that which was set under the beginning, which God created out of nothing. Accordingly that is rightly said to be in the beginning to which it is natural to be always without a beginning of existing; which eternity without a beginning is itself the true Divinity. But this is found naturally in the one Son, who was born of the Father, and in the one Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. Such, therefore, is what the evangelist says, In the beginning was the Word, as if he were saying, The Word was always; for whatever beginning a man has been able to think of, that Word is never found to have begun, but is always in the beginning. Then, saying, the Word was with God, he shows the nature of the Word, namely that it is neither temporal nor local. For the Word, which was in the beginning, has nothing of the beginning of time; it has nothing of the space of a place, since before every creature subject to times or places it was with God. Then, saying, God was the Word, he shows the one nature of the Father and the Son, in that he declared the Word which was with God to be naturally nothing other than God. For the evangelist, first saying the Word, expressed the name of a person truly existing, which is certainly not common to the Father and the Son. For the Son alone is called the Word.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":34,"ref":"p34","source":"Exigebat autem naturalis significalio ut sicut personæ, sic etiam naturæ nomen ostenderetur in Verbo. ldeo beatus evangelista subsequenter adjunxit: Et Deus erat Verbum, atque ita non solum personali, sed et naturali insinuatione unigeniti Filii Dei officium sanctæ prædicationis explevit; ut et Verbum nuncupans personali nomine, Filium Patris ostenderet; et Deum nominans communi vocabulo, naturae IMMUS esse cum Patre monstraret. Deinde ut ex unitate operis magis commendaretur unitas naturalis, evangelista beatus adjecit: Omnia per ipsum facta sunt, et sine irso factum est nihil. Quis hoc dixit? Nempe ille qui, super pectus Sapientiæ Veritatisque discumbens, veram scientiam incomprehensibilis aestas accepit; qui, sicut noverat unum Deum esse Patrem et Filium, sic etiam omnia facta noverat a Patre per Filium. Unde illa omnia quæ per Filium facta sunt ita sanctus Joannes universaliter comprehendit, ut diceret: Omnia per ipsum facta sunt, et sine ipso factum est nihil. Quisquis ergo muscas, pulices, scorpiones, cimices, vel si quæ alia quibus mortalis sensus offenditur a Deo facta negare contendit, aut dicat ea omnino non facta, aut si facta dicat, non tamen a Patre per Filium, quid aliud restat nisi et evangelistam Joannem dicat in sua prædicatione mentitum? Omnia enim, inquit, per ipsum facta sunt, et sine ipso factum est nihil.","english":"But the natural meaning of the term required that, just as the name of a person was shown forth, so also the name of a nature be shown forth in the Word. Therefore the blessed evangelist added next: And the Word was God, and thus by a personal no less than a natural indication he fulfilled the office of holy preaching concerning the only-begotten Son of God: both by calling him the Word, he showed the Son of the Father by a personal name, and by naming him God with a common term, he demonstrated that he is of one nature with the Father. Then, so that the natural unity might be more commended from the unity of the work, the blessed evangelist added: All things were made through him, and without him was made nothing. Who said this? Surely he who, reclining on the breast of Wisdom and Truth, received the true knowledge of the incomprehensible mystery; who, just as he knew that the Father and the Son are one God, so also knew that all things were made by the Father through the Son. Hence all those things that were made through the Son, Saint John comprehended universally, so as to say: All things were made through him, and without him was made nothing. Whoever, therefore, contends that flies, fleas, scorpions, bugs, or whatever other things offend mortal sense were not made by God, must either say that they were not made at all, or, if he says they were made, that they were not made by the Father through the Son—what else remains but that he also say that the evangelist John lied in his preaching? For, he says, all things were made through him, and without him was made nothing.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":35,"ref":"p35","source":"Non cst ergo aliquid quod Pater non fecit, qui omnia fecit: nec est aliquid quod Pater non per Filium fecerit, sine quo factum est nihil. Proindc quid. quid est naturaliter aliquid, necesse est ut inter ejus opera dcputetur per quem facta sunt omnia, et sine quo factum est nihil. Plenus veritatis evangelista testatur quod in doctrina sancti Spiritus nihilominus etiam Paulus vas electionis et doctor gentium in fide et veritate nobis non destitit intimare, dicens quod superius jam posuimus: Nobis autem unus Deus Pater, ex quo omnia, et nos in ipso; el unus Dominus Jesus Christua, per quem omnia, et nos per ipsum (I Cor. VIII, 6). Eadem (al. Et adhuc) omnia curavit alio loco manifestius explicare, dicens: Quia in ipso condita sunt omnia in cælo et in terra, visibilia et invisibilia, sive Throni, sive Dominationes, sirA Principatus, sive Potestates, omnia pcr ipsum et in ipso creata sunt, et ipse est ante omnes, et omnia in ipso constant (Coloss. I, 16, 17). Ne quis autem audiens, in cœlo et in terra omnia per Christum et in Christo creata, quia hic mare non nominatur, et ea quæ in aquis sunt ab opcre divinae creationis æstimet aliena, primitus ipsius Genesis attendat initium, ubi præcipiente Domino produxerunt aquæ reptilia animarum, et aves quæ volant super terram (Genes.","english":"There is therefore nothing that the Father did not make, who made all things; nor is there anything that the Father did not make through the Son, without whom nothing was made. Accordingly, whatever is something by nature must necessarily be counted among his works through whom all things were made and without whom nothing was made. The evangelist, full of truth, testifies that in the teaching of the Holy Spirit Paul also, the vessel of election and teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth, did not fail to make known to us, saying what we have already set down above: But to us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him (1 Cor. 8:6). He took care to explain these same all things more clearly in another place, saying: For in him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether Thrones, or Dominations, or Principalities, or Powers: all things were created through him and in him, and he is before all, and all things consist in him (Col. 1:16-17). But lest anyone, hearing that all things in heaven and on earth were created through Christ and in Christ, should think that, because the sea is not named here, the things that are in the waters are alien to the work of divine creation, let him first attend to the very beginning of Genesis, where, at the Lord's command, the waters produced the creeping things of living souls and the birds that fly over the earth (Gen.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":36,"ref":"p36","source":"I, 20), et agnoscat ipsum esse in aquis creatorem piscium et avium, qui creator est in terra lignorum et herbarum, similiter in cælo luminarium ct sLellarum; et sicut cognoscit Dcum prius fecisse cœlum in quo luminaria et stellas faceret, prius fecisse terram quæ ipso jubente herbas lignaque produceret; ita fecisse aquas, de quibus ipso dicente reptilia et volatilia pariter exstilissent. Nec enim de aquis aliquid Verbo creasset, si casdem aquas Verbo antea non fecisset. Inde est quod beatus David universaliter caelum, terram, mare, cum omnibus quæ in eis sunt a Deo facta esse non tacuit dicens: Beatus vir cujus Deus Jacob adjutor ejus, spes ejus in Domino Deo ipsius qui fecit cælum et terram, mare, et omnia quæ in eis sunt (Psal. CXLV, 4, 5). Quomodo (forte Cum) ergo prophetica testetur auctoritas cœlum et terram, mare, et omnia quæ in eis sunt, a Dco facta esse, Paulus quoque aposlolus asserat in Christo creata esse omnia in cœlo et in terra, visibilia et invisibilia, sive Thronos, sive Dominationes, sive Prin cipatus, sive Potestates; qua raticnc aut qua veritate a Deo aliquis non vult credere crealas in terra muscas atque scorpiones, pulices et cimices, a quo negare non potest creatos esse in cælestibus Thronos, Dominationes, Principatus et Poteslates? Er.","english":"And let him acknowledge that the same one is the creator of fish and birds in the waters who is the creator of trees and plants on the earth, and likewise of lights and stars in the heaven; and just as he knows that God first made the heaven in which he would make the lights and stars, and first made the earth which at his command would bring forth plants and trees, so he made the waters, from which at his word the creeping things and flying things alike came forth. For he would not have created anything from the waters by the Word if he had not first made those same waters by the Word. Hence it is that blessed David did not keep silent that heaven, earth, and sea, with all things that are in them, were made by God, saying: Blessed is the man whose helper is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the Lord his God, who made heaven and earth, the sea, and all things that are in them. How then, since prophetic authority testifies that heaven and earth, the sea, and all things that are in them were made by God, and the apostle Paul also asserts that all things were created in Christ, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether Thrones, or Dominations, or Principalities, or Powers—by what reasoning or by what truth does anyone refuse to believe that flies and scorpions, fleas and bugs were created on earth by God, by whom he cannot deny that Thrones, Dominations, Principalities, and Powers were created in the heavens?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":37,"ref":"p37","source":"gone Dcus ille qui super coelum creans constituit angelicas legiones, negandus est in terra facere scorpiones, in qua fecit homines, fecit bestias et pecora, fecit aves et pisces?\n\nQuid, quæso, in iis scorpionihus displicet, ut eos quisquam existimet a Deo non factos? Nihil es! enim in corpore scorpionis quod non laudem insinuet Creatoris. Primitus ipsa compages adunala et modificata membrorum, congruentia et parilitas parIi ITI, deinde anima vivificans, et sensilicans corpus; quæ omnia bona esse quis ambigat? Sed profecto vis illa veneni quæ invenitur hominibus perniciosa, ut putatur in corpore scorpionis horrenda, ubi utinam discerent homines pœnam suæ transgressionis attendere, et desinerent bona Dei opera diabolo mendacitcr assignare! Minus enim attendunt quantum inter opera Dei valeat congruentia naturalis, quantumque prosit rebus singulis modus, vel quantum noceat immoderationis excessus: (textus depravatus) quæ cum multum non sivit esse omnipotens Deus, qui non etiam in ipsis famulis (forte flagellis) laudet opera Dei, quando videt peccatorem divino verbere castigari? Fecit enim Deus, sicut scriptum est (Eccle. VII, 50), hominem rectum, quem rerum omnium quas in terra et mari creaverat ita dominum constituit, ut suæ tantum faccret potestati subjectum; ab ipso exigens obsequium debitum servitutis, cui liberum donavit arbilrium voluntatis.","english":"Was that God, who, creating above the heaven, established the angelic legions, to be denied to make scorpions on the earth, in which he made men, made beasts and cattle, made birds and fish?\n\nWhat, I ask, in these scorpions is displeasing, such that anyone should think them not made by God? There is nothing, indeed, in the body of a scorpion that does not suggest praise of the Creator. First, the very joining together and measured arrangement of the members, the harmony and equal proportion of parts; then the soul giving life and sensation to the body; and who would doubt that all these things are good? But surely that power of venom which is found harmful to men, as it is thought, is dreadful in the body of a scorpion—would that men might learn there to attend to the punishment of their transgression, and cease to assign the good works of God to the devil falsely! For they attend too little to how much the natural harmony of things avails among the works of God, and how much measure profits each individual thing, or how much the excess of immoderation harms: (text corrupted) which, since he did not permit it to be much, almighty God, who even in these very servants (perhaps scourges) praises the works of God, when he sees the sinner chastised by the divine rod? For God made, as it is written (Eccles. 7:30), man upright, whom he so constituted lord of all things that he had created on earth and sea, that he made subject to his own power alone; from him exacting the due obedience of servitude, to whom he granted free choice of will.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":38,"ref":"p38","source":"Qui donec suo Domino congrua devotione servivit, etiam in his quibus fuit ipse superior potestatem inconcussæ dominationis obtinuit; nec aliquid perdidit eorum quae acceperat, donec ipse plene reddidit quod debebat. Offendens autem Dominum transgressione mandati, contumeliam quam Deo exhibuit, in suo corpore statim contemptor invenit: ut disceret quam malum esset boni Creatoris præcepta contemnere, quando ipse, postquam malus esse crepisset, potestatem suam in membris genitalibus perdidisset. Quomodo ergo illorum omnium quae a Deo acceperat permanere dominus posset, qui Dominum contemnens dominationis jura in suo primo corpore perdidisset? Hinc jam ipsum quoque corpus habere coepit infirmitatibus mortique. subjectum: unde justa consequente vindicta factum est ut qui mortem animæ non Iimuit in peccato, mortem corporis metueret in supplicio; et amissa requie qua beatus potiebatur, a minUtissimis auimalibus miserrimus turbaretur.","english":"As long as he served his Lord with fitting devotion, he also retained the power of unshaken dominion even over those things in which he himself was superior; nor did he lose anything of what he had received, until he himself fully rendered what he owed. But when he offended the Lord by transgressing the commandment, the contempt he showed to God he immediately found in his own body as a despiser, so that he might learn how evil it is to despise the precepts of the good Creator, since he himself, after he had begun to be evil, had lost his power over his genital members. How, then, could he remain lord of all those things which he had received from God, when he, despising the Lord, had lost the rights of dominion in his own first body? Hence he also began to have that same body subject to infirmities and death; whence, by a just and consequent vengeance, it came about that he who did not fear the death of the soul in sin should fear the death of the body in punishment; and having lost the rest which he had enjoyed as blessed, he, most wretched, was disturbed by the tiniest animals.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":39,"ref":"p39","source":"Hinc est quod post peccatum primi hominis, quo est humana natura universaliter regno peccati mortisque subjecta, camclis, equis, bobus, elephantis, cæterisque grandibus quadrupedibus homo dominatur, et morsu cimicis pulicisque concutitur; cumque omnia illa quæ sunt grandiora corpore et fortiora virtute mansueta serviant homini, hæc minutissima, quæ facillime possunt duobus tantum digitis compressa interimi, nullatenus possunt ad mansuetudinem pervenire, id est revocari. Hoc autem propterea divino factum constat esse judicio, ut ex iis quibus dominatur homo, cognoscerel quantam di. gnitatem ante transgressionem habuit; etex iis a quibus turbatur et læditur, agnosceret ad quantam dejectionem transgressione pervenit; in cujus potestate Deus majora dimisit, minora subtraxit: simul ostendens quid contulit Creatoris bonitas homini, et* quid intulit iniquilas propria peccatori. Per transgressionem itaque primorum hominum, ex merito tanti criminis accidit humano generi vehemens infirmitas naturalis; ut non quibusdam naturis malis homo cederet, scd ex bonarum inconvenientia naturarum supplicia et pcricula infirmitas humana sentiret. Quod ergo pulcx hominem cruciat, et scorpius necat, non crealio malorum est, sed bonarum inconvrnientia naturarum, quæ subsecuta est ex requitate judicis, quando præcessit iniquitas hominis contuma'cis.","english":"Hence it is that after the sin of the first man, by which human nature was universally subjected to the kingdom of sin and death, man rules over camels, horses, oxen, elephants, and the rest of the great quadrupeds, and yet is shaken by the bite of a bug or a flea; and while all those things that are greater in body and stronger in power serve man tamely, these tiniest creatures, which can most easily be crushed by only two fingers and killed, can in no way be brought to tameness, that is, be recalled to it. But this is established to have been done by divine judgment for this reason, that from those things over which man rules he might recognize how great a dignity he had before transgression; and from those things by which he is disturbed and injured he might acknowledge to how great a degradation he came through transgression; in whose power God left the greater things and withdrew the lesser, at once showing what the goodness of the Creator conferred on man, and what his own iniquity inflicted on the sinner. Through the transgression, therefore, of the first men, by the desert of so great a crime, a violent natural infirmity befell the human race, so that man did not yield to certain evil natures, but from the incompatibility of good natures human infirmity felt punishments and dangers. That a flea therefore torments man, and a scorpion kills, is not the creation of evils, but the incompatibility of good natures, which followed from the equity of the judge, when the iniquity of rebellious man preceded it.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":40,"ref":"p40","source":"Deus enim, cujus vera opera, et rectæ viæ suut, sanectus Zacharias in sua oratione rectissime confitetur quia qui summe bonus est, omnia quæcunque facit a.\n\ninde est quod mirabili opere etiam ipsa inconvenientia naturarum, qua puniuntur humana peccata, convenienter utitur, dum hoc agit justitia iucommutabilis, quae sua cuique tribuit, ut inconvenicntiarr alterius ad alterum cujusque naturæ suis faciat universaliter operibus convenire. Natura vero quælibet. dum naturae alteri minus convenit ad salutem. non ex illo mala putanda est quia nocet (omnis enirr. natura secundum quod natura est bona est), sed plerumque ideo ex natura qualibet atteri naturæ infertur adversitas, quia incongruentiæ cedit et succumbit inlirmitas. Nam plerumque etiam res ipsæ, id es ipsæ naturæ in quibus solis indubitata solet pernicies inveniri, si moderatiore congrua ex aliis temperetur, ex periculo mortis in salutis remedia convertantur: quod in ipsis primitus venenosis animalibut invenimus. Dicunt enim quidam quod ignis acei quotiens in corpore nascitur, scorpionibus tunsis et appositis celeriter exstingualur. Sed etsi hoc forsitan ab aliquibus aut ambiguum putetur, aut falsum, illud certe nemo negare permittitur, quod admirabile in serpentibus invenitur. Viperas quippe naturalite venenosas esse nullus ignorat, quam venenoso aculeo scorpiones occidant (forte cum....","english":"For God, whose works are true and whose ways are right, is most rightly acknowledged by the holy Zacharias in his prayer, because he who is supremely good does all things whatsoever he does.\n\nHence it is that by a wondrous work he even makes use of the very incongruities of natures, by which human sins are punished, in a fitting manner, while the unchangeable justice does this, which renders to each his own, so that the incongruity of one nature may universally be made to fit with another's own works. But any nature, while it is less suited to another nature for its health, is not therefore to be thought evil because it harms (for every nature, insofar as it is a nature, is good), but for the most part adversity is brought upon one nature by any other nature for this reason, that weakness yields and succumbs to incongruity. For for the most part even the things themselves, that is, the very natures in which undoubted destruction is wont to be found alone, if they are tempered by a more moderate fit from others, are converted from the danger of death into remedies of health: which we find first in the venomous animals themselves. For some say that the fire of sharpness, as often as it is born in the body, is quickly extinguished when scorpions are crushed and applied. But even if this is perhaps thought by some to be either doubtful or false, that at least no one is permitted to deny, which is found wonderful in serpents. For no one is ignorant that vipers are naturally venomous, which scorpions kill with a venomous sting (perhaps when....","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":41,"ref":"p41","source":"occidant); et tamen ut ostendatur quod non naturarum malitia, sed incongruenlia noceat, novimus viperarum carni. bus, aliarum rerum congruentia temperatis, contra viperarum morsus medicamina confici; nec solum his qui a scorpionibus percutiuntur, verum etiam illis qui mordentur a viperis salubriter adhiberi. Quis hic Dei sapientiam non miretur? Quis non ejus bonitatem magnificet, prudentiamque collaudet? qui non continens in ira misericordia suas, unde pericula fecit peccatoribus nasci, inde statuit auxilia periclitantibus subrogari: ut qui incommoda pro nostra iniquitate sentimus, ex ejus bonitate commoda sentiremus. Quis laudem Creatoris sufficientibus explicet verbis, quando unam eamdemque viperam sic creavit, ut simul in se et exitium et remedium gerat; et quæ vivens ingerit mortem, mortua reparet sanitatem; perniciemque vitæ et inferat ct repellat; et venenum quod dente serpentis infunditur, ejusdem serpentis carnibus exstingualur? quo fit ut vipera quae vivens infirmitati humanæ militavit ac morti, mortua vitæ militet et saluti. Quis, quæso, ista facit, nisi cui misericordiam et judicium (Psal. c., 1) canlat Ecclesia?","english":"(they kill); and yet, to show that it is not the malice of natures but incongruity that harms, we know that from the flesh of vipers, tempered by the congruence of other things, remedies against viper bites are made; and these are applied beneficially not only to those who are struck by scorpions, but also to those who are bitten by vipers. Who here would not marvel at the wisdom of God? Who would not magnify his goodness and join in praising his prudence? He who does not hold back his mercies in anger, from the very source whence he made dangers arise for sinners, has ordained that aids be supplied to those in peril: so that we, who feel hardships because of our iniquity, might feel benefits from his goodness. Who could set forth the praise of the Creator in words sufficient, when he so created one and the same viper that in itself it bears at once both destruction and remedy; and what, while living, brings death, when dead restores health; and it both inflicts and repels the ruin of life; and the venom that is poured in by the serpent's tooth is extinguished by the flesh of the same serpent? Hence it comes about that the viper which, while living, served human weakness and death, when dead serves life and health. Who, I ask, does these things, except he to whom the Church sings mercy and judgment?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":42,"ref":"p42","source":"Species quæ dicitur scammonia, quis ignorat quantum obsit sanis, si sola sumatur; et quantum prosit infirmis si speciebus aliis congrue misceatur? Et ut de his loquar quæ semper ab omnibus appetuntur, et quorum quotidiano usu non solum infirmitas, sed etiam ipsa invenitur vitæ humanæ sanitas indigere, panem attendamus et vinum, quorum neutrum convenit febricitanti. Nam videmus a medicis quod semper quidem polus, nonnunquam vero etiam panis cibus interdicatur ægrotis. Ideo autem hoc fit, non quia panis aut vinum mala sint, sed quia infirmo non congruunt. Nam consequenter cum congruere cœperint, et nutriunt fortitudinem, et custodiunt sanitatem: quorum tamen immoderata perceplio fortibus virlutem adimit, dum sanus inlirmari compellit.","english":"Who does not know how harmful the species called scammony is to the healthy if it is taken alone, and how beneficial it is to the sick if it is properly mixed with other species? And to speak of those things which are always desired by all, and by whose daily use not only infirmity but even the very health of human life is found to be in need, let us consider bread and wine, neither of which is suitable for one with a fever. For we see that by physicians broth is always forbidden to the sick, and sometimes even bread as food. This is done, then, not because bread or wine are evil, but because they are not suitable for the infirm. For consequently, when they begin to be suitable, they both nourish strength and preserve health; yet an immoderate consumption of them takes away strength from the strong, while it compels the healthy to become infirm.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":43,"ref":"p43","source":"Ecce quantum valet in Dei creaturis modus et congruentia rerum, quibus immoderatio atque incongruentia inveniuntur esse contraria: quibus dum naturale dicitur, non naturalis malitia, sed accidens infirmitas invenitur, quod in omnibus creaturis facile reponit quisquis a summo bono creata bona Sic considerat, ut in cis inexplicabilem atque inenarrabilem laudem Creatoris agnoscat; ac per hoc sit ipse præ omnibus diligendus qui etiam in his quæ poenalia pro nostra iniqnitate sentimus et misericors invenitur et justus, dum inde sublevat fragiles, unde comprimit contumaces; et quia præcedente superbia continuo est in homine consecuta miseria, misericors Dominus et juslus, unde superbiæ pondus imponit, inde misericordiæ levamen apponit.\n\nVerumtamen quisquis est Ecclesiæ filius qui, ut dicis, illa proposuit, asserens muscas, scorpiones, pulices et cimices, non a Deo, sed a diabolo facta, cautelam gerat ne Manichæorum mortifera fallatur ac decipiatur astutia, qui deum lucis, et deum teuebrarum, ipsi in tenebris constituti nituntur inducere, et duo naturaliter sibi contraria principia prædicare.","english":"Behold how much the measure and harmony of things prevail in God's creatures, to which immoderation and incongruity are found to be contrary; and when these things are called natural, it is not a natural malice but an accidental infirmity that is found in them, because in all creatures whoever considers the good things created by the highest good as they were created, so as to recognize in them the inexplicable and ineffable praise of the Creator, easily restores this; and through this he himself is to be loved before all things, who even in those things which we feel as punitive because of our iniquity is found both merciful and just, since from the same source he lifts up the frail and crushes the obstinate; and because misery immediately followed pride in man, the merciful and just Lord, from the same source where he imposes the weight of pride, adds the relief of mercy.\n\nYet whoever is a son of the Church who, as you say, set forth those things, asserting that flies, scorpions, fleas, and bugs were made not by God but by the devil, let him take care not to be deceived and ensnared by the deadly cunning of the Manichaeans, who, themselves placed in darkness, strive to introduce a god of light and a god of darkness, and to preach two principles naturally contrary to each other.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":44,"ref":"p44","source":"Unde quia naturam Lucis dicunt bonam, naturam vero tenebrarum malam, illuc proprio ducuntur errore, ut in omnibus rebus quæ in mundo sunt, quasdam bonas, quasdam vero malas naturas non cunctentur asserere: illas dicentes malas quibus sensus eorum offenduntur, illas bonas quarum dilecLione mulcentur: non intelligentes, sicut Aposiolus ait, neque quæ loquuntur, neque de quibus affirmant (I Tim. i, 7). Ut enim de luce ac tenebris, quarum priucipaliler naturas putant esse contrarias, aliquid dicam, nonne primum in eo mendax illorum invenitur assertio, in quo tenebræ, quas luci naturaliter dicunt esse contrarias, nullam inveniuntur habere naturam? Neque enim dux naturæ sunt lux et tenebrae; sed ubi lux non est, ibi ipsa lucis absentia tenebrarum nomine nuncupatur; sicut vocis absentia silentium dicitur, sicut vestimenti absentia nuditas appellalur, sicut inane vas dicitur cui nulla substantia sive liquoris sive rei alicujus infunditur: sic in nobis ipsis famesappellalur, ubi cibus non est; sitis dicitur, ubi pOLus nullus est.","english":"Hence, because they say the nature of light is good and the nature of darkness evil, they are led by their own error to the point that, in all things that are in the world, they do not hesitate to assert that some natures are good and some evil: calling those evil by which their senses are offended, and those good by whose love they are delighted; not understanding, as the Apostle says, neither what they say nor of what they affirm (1 Tim 1:7). For, to say something about light and darkness, whose natures they chiefly think to be contrary, is not their assertion first found false in this very point, in that darkness, which they say is naturally contrary to light, is found to have no nature at all? For light and darkness are not two natures; but where light is not, there that very absence of light is called by the name of darkness; just as the absence of voice is called silence, just as the absence of clothing is called nakedness, just as a vessel is called empty into which no substance, whether of liquid or of any thing, is poured: so in ourselves it is called hunger where there is no food; it is called thirst where there is no drink.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":45,"ref":"p45","source":"Hæc itaquc omnia quæ commemoravi, et his similia quæ pro custodienda disputationis moderatione nunc tacui, sunt quidem sine,dubitatione contraria, non tamen per proprias naturas, sed per habitum et privationem, id est per eam contrarietatem qua vel habetur aliquid, vel aliquid non habetur. Proinde licet sint contraria, non tamen eorum contrarii semper inveniunlur effectus: nam lux ista corporis, quam Manichaei principale bonum æstimant, cum bona sit quidem, quoniam a summo bonocreata est, in tantum tamen fit bona, ut ei naturaliter vitæ sit præferenda substantia; licet ergo sit bona, nonnunquam tamen illis qui ea incongrue utuntur non salubris enicitur, sed pœnalis: sanos quippe oculos vegetat, inUrmos excruciat; incolumes reficit, dolentes obtundit. Econtrario autem oculi. in dolore positi ex tenebris aliquam consequuntur requiem, et clausis januis ac fenestris sentiunt aliquod levamen illius doloris quem ex lumine patiuntur, et ad videodam lucem quadam tenebrarum congruentia nutriuutur. Ecce lux quanto minus congruit, tanto magis lædit; et tenebrae quanto magis congruunt, tanto magis prosunt; et sicut oculos sanos lucis adjuvat claritas, ita dolentes adjuvare tenebrarum consuevit obscuritas; ac per hoc dum congrue utrumque accipitur, lucis ac tenebrarum effectus in juvandis oculis invenitur. Sicut enim lumine juvantur sani, sic tenebris reficiuntur intirmi.","english":"All these things, therefore, which I have mentioned, and others like them which for the sake of preserving the moderation of the discussion I have now passed over in silence, are without doubt contraries, yet not through their own natures, but through state and privation—that is, through that contrariety by which something is either had or not had. Accordingly, although they are contraries, their contrary effects are not always found: for this bodily light, which the Manichaeans reckon the principal good, although it is indeed good, since it was created by the highest good, is yet good to such a degree that by nature the substance of life is to be preferred to it; although therefore it is good, nevertheless it is sometimes shown to be not healthful but penal to those who use it improperly: for it invigorates healthy eyes, it tortures inflamed ones; it restores the sound, it dulls the aching. And on the contrary, eyes placed in pain obtain some rest from darkness, and with doors and windows closed they feel some relief from that pain which they suffer from the light, and they are nourished for seeing the light by a certain correspondence with darkness. Behold, the more light is unsuited, the more it harms; and the more darkness is suited, the more it profits; and just as the brightness of light helps healthy eyes, so the obscurity of darkness is accustomed to help aching ones; and through this, while each is received in a fitting way, the effect of light and darkness is found in aiding the eyes. For just as the healthy are helped by light, so the weak are refreshed by darkness.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":46,"ref":"p46","source":"Nam et cum fatigati clauduntur in somnum, quodammodo tenebris adjuvantur ut videndae luci denuo validi fortesque reddantur. Tale est autem oculis infirmis ac fatigatis a bouo lumiue pro reparanda salute ac fortitudine removeri, quale est toto corpori, si quando infirmatur, a consueta ciborum perceptione suspendi: qui non propterea contrarii sunt infirmis et noxii quia naturaliter mali sunt, sed quia eorum infirmitati non congruunt: non enim omnia quæ capit sanitas sustentat infirmitas. Unde nonnunquam in iisdem rebus quibus sanum corpus reficitur, infirmitas corporis praegravatur: ita ut aliquando ipsum quoque sanum corpus rerum quarum juvatur usu laedatur excessu, et dum aliquid incongrue accipitur, ubi custodienda quæritur sanitas, infirmitas invenitur. Ipse quoque vestimentorum usus si fuerit incongruus, non salubris invenitur esse, sed noxius. Quis enim, sive qualibet inopia, sive infirmitate corporis, non perniciose vel cum æstuat hiemalibus indumentis, vel cum alget utatur æstivis?","english":"For when they are tired and close their eyes in sleep, they are in a certain way aided by darkness, so that they may be made strong and vigorous again to see the light. Now, for weak and tired eyes to be removed from the good light for the sake of restoring health and strength is like the whole body, when it is weak, being withheld from its customary intake of food: these things are not contrary and harmful to the weak because they are naturally evil, but because they do not suit their weakness; for not all things that health takes in does weakness sustain. Hence sometimes the body's weakness is weighed down by the very things by which a healthy body is refreshed, so that sometimes even a healthy body is harmed by the excessive use of things by which it is helped, and while something is taken in improperly, where health is sought to be preserved, weakness is found. The use of clothing too, if it is unsuitable, is found to be not healthful but harmful. For who, whether from any want or from bodily weakness, does not harmfully either wear winter garments when he is hot, or summer garments when he is cold?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":47,"ref":"p47","source":"Longum ost autem congruentia judiciunt multis exemplis ostendere, cum intuentibus deesse non possint. Proinde omnes naturæ quæ sunl, quæ vivunt, quæ senliunt, quæ intelligunt, quoniam a Deo, id est a summo hono factæ sunt, bonae sunt: quae si a summo bono non fierent, bonæ non essent; et si bonae non essent, in seipsis boni aliquid non haberent. Ac primum, quia vita bonorum aliquid est, et tale bonum quod ab hominibus viventibus diligitur, si aliqua natura esset quæ a summo bono non fleret, nullatenus viveret. Hoc autem de animalibus dico, id est de substantia quæ vivit et sentit; sed et-illæ naturæ quae nec vivunt nec sentiunt, hoc ipsum quod sunt ex illius creatione habent qui summe est: quia non solum vivere, sed etiam esse bonum est, et quod summe est, summum bonum est.\n\nNulla est itaque natura mala sive vivens, sive non vivens; ac per hoc omnes natune in eo quod naturæ sunt bonæ sunt. Sed quædam earum cum bona; sint ex creatione Dei, pœnales factae sunt homini, ex punitione peccati; non propter suam naturam, sed propter hominis culpam. Ubi ostensum est homini facto ad imaginem Dei quantum sibi intulerit malum, qui ad hoc perductus est, ut ei a brevibus bestiolis inferatur mortis exitium.","english":"But it is a long task to show by many examples the congruity of these judgments, since they cannot be lacking to those who consider them. Accordingly, all natures that exist, that live, that feel, that understand, since they were made by God, that is, by the highest good, are good; and if they were not made by the highest good, they would not be good; and if they were not good, they would have nothing of good in themselves. And first, because life is something of good, and such a good as is loved by living men, if any nature existed that was not made by the highest good, it would in no way live. But I say this of animals, that is, of the substance that lives and feels; but even those natures which neither live nor feel have this very thing that they are from the creation of him who supremely is: because not only to live, but also to be is good, and what supremely is, is the highest good.\n\nTherefore no nature is evil, whether living or non-living; and by this all natures are good in that they are natures. But some of them, although they are good from God's creation, have been made penal to man from the punishment of sin; not on account of their own nature, but on account of man's fault. Where it has been shown how great an evil man, made in the image of God, brought upon himself, who was brought to this point, that the destruction of death should be inflicted on him by the smallest little beasts.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":48,"ref":"p48","source":"Quapropter in omnibus animalibus, in omnibus herbis, et cunctis universaliter creaturis, quidquid sibi homo cernit esse mortiferum, non illis malam naturam inesse dicat, sed ultionem in eis suae iniquitatis agnoscat. Facti enim sumus pulicibus et cimicibus similes, postquam Deo exstitimus contumaces; et scorpionis aculeus mortalis factus est homini, postquam spoute maluit mortis acpleo vulnerari. Aculeus enim mortis peccatum est (I Cor. xv, 56): quo aculeo sic se prius homo percussit ad mortem, ut eum faceret per suam quoque pertransire progeniem: ita ut etiam illis in quibus gratia Dei facit non regnare peccatum, non desit frequens et multiplex ex poena peccati periculum. Inde est enim quod etiam justi homines, sancteque viventes, in hac vita mortali ab hujuscemodi non sunt molestiis ac periculis alieni: quia quandiu mortaliter vivunt, sine peccato non sunt. Unde dicit beatus Joannes: Si dixerimus quia peccatum non habemus, ipsi nos seducimus, et veritas in nobis non est (I Joan. I, '8). Sanctus quoque apostolus Jacobus testatur quia in multis offendimus omnes (Jac. III, 2).","english":"Wherefore in all animals, in all plants, and universally in all creatures, whatever man perceives to be deadly to himself, let him not say that an evil nature is in them, but let him recognize in them the vengeance of his own iniquity. For we have been made like fleas and bugs after we became rebellious against God; and the scorpion's sting became deadly to man after he willingly chose to be wounded by the sting of death. For the sting of death is sin (I Cor. 15:56); with which sting man first struck himself unto death, so that he made it pass through his own offspring as well: so that even in those in whom the grace of God does not let sin reign, the frequent and manifold danger from the punishment of sin is not absent. Hence it is that even righteous men, living holy lives, are not free in this mortal life from troubles and dangers of this kind: because as long as they live mortally, they are not without sin. Whence blessed John says: If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us (I John 1:8). The holy apostle James also testifies that we all offend in many things (James 3:2).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":49,"ref":"p49","source":"Sed non talia sunt peccata sanctorum qualia sunt iniquorum. Peccata enim sanctorum levia, peccata iniquorum gravia sunt. In peccatis iniquorum, aut de Deo male sentit humana perversitas, aut hominem ad (al. per). desideria carnis ducit humana cupiditas, aut proximum lædit humana crudelitas. De his enim qui in Deum peccant Sapientia dicit: Qui autem in me peccant, impie faciunt in animas suas; et qui me oderunt diligunt mortem (Prov. VIII, 36). De his autem qui luxuriose vivunt dicit Apostolus: Si quis autem templum Dei violaverit, disperdet illum Deus. Templum enim Dei sanctum est, quod estis vos. Nemo vos seducat (1 Cor. III, 17, 18). De odio quoque fratris beatus Joannes loquens ait: Qui dicit se in lumine (al. lucc) esse, et fratrem suum odit, in tenebuis est usque adhuc. Nam qui diligit fratrem suum, in lumine permanet, et scandalum in eo non est. Qui autem odit fratrem suum, in tenebris est, et in tenebris ambulat, et nescit ubi ambulat, quoniam tenebræ obcæcaverunt oculos ejus (I Joan. II, 9, 10, 11).","english":"But the sins of the saints are not such as are the sins of the wicked. For the sins of the saints are light, the sins of the wicked are grave. In the sins of the wicked, either human perversity thinks wrongly of God, or human cupidity leads a man to the desires of the flesh, or human cruelty harms a neighbor. For concerning those who sin against God, Wisdom says: But they who sin against me do wickedly against their own souls; and they who hate me love death (Prov. 8:36). But concerning those who live luxuriously, the Apostle says: If anyone violates the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which you are. Let no one deceive you (1 Cor. 3:17-18). Concerning hatred of a brother as well, blessed John says: Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is in darkness even until now. For whoever loves his brother remains in the light, and there is no stumbling block in him. But whoever hates his brother is in darkness, and walks in darkness, and does not know where he walks, because the darkness has blinded his eyes (1 John 2:9-11).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":50,"ref":"p50","source":"Peccata ergo iniquorum, tribus (al. omnibus) modis fiunt. Aut enim sacrilegiis, aut flagitiis, aut facinoribus implicantur. Sacrilegia admittunt quando de Deo non recte sentiunt, et a vera tide sive timore temporalium commodorum a, sive sola cordis cæcitate ac perversitate discedunt. In flagitiis vero peccant quando in seipsis immoderati atque obsceni turpiter vivunt. In facinoribus vero tunc peccant quando alios aut damnis, aut quibuslibet oppressionibus crudeliter lædunt. Utrosque autem, sive in fide, sive in operibus capitaliler peccantes, reprobos appellat beatus Apostolus, dicens de illis qui verse lidei contradicunt: Sicut autcm Jamnes et Mambres restiterunt Moysi, ita et hi qui resistunt veritati, homines corrupti mente, reprubi circa fidem (II Tim. ut, 8). Illos autem qui sub professione verae lidei in malis operibus et criminibus vivunt similiter objurgans, ait: Omnia munda tnundis: coinquinatis autem et infidelibus nihil est mundum; sed poltuta sunt eorum et mens et conscientia. Confitentur se nosse Deum, factis autem negant, cum sint abominati, et incredibileS, et ad omne opus bonum reprobi (Tit. I, 15, 16). Dum autem peccant sancti, sic in quolibet peccato humana infirmitate aut humana delectatione (at.","english":"Therefore the sins of the wicked come about in three ways. For they are entangled either in sacrileges, or in shameful acts, or in crimes. They commit sacrileges when they think wrongly about God, and depart from the true faith either through fear of temporal advantages, or through mere blindness and perversity of heart. In shameful acts, however, they sin when they live immoderately and obscenely within themselves in a disgraceful manner. In crimes, however, they sin when they cruelly harm others either by losses or by any oppressions whatsoever. But both kinds—those sinning capitally either in faith or in works—the blessed Apostle calls reprobate, saying of those who contradict the true faith: But as Jannes and Mambres resisted Moses, so also these who resist the truth, men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith (II Tim. 3:8). But those who, under the profession of the true faith, live in evil works and crimes, he likewise rebukes, saying: All things are clean to the clean; but to the defiled and unbelieving nothing is clean; but both their mind and their conscience are polluted. They confess that they know God, but in deeds they deny him, since they are abominable, and unbelieving, and reprobate to every good work (Tit. 1:15, 16). But when the saints sin, thus in any sin whatsoever by human infirmity or human delight","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":51,"ref":"p51","source":"dilectione succumbunt, ut nec verae fidei pertinaciter contradicant, nec seipsos flagitiis połłuant, nec preximos facinoribus lædant: quod ostendit beatus Apostolus dicens: Apparuit enim gratia Dei Salvatoris omnibus hominibus, erudiens nos, ut abnegantes impietatem, et sæcularia desideria, sobrie, et juste, et pie vivamus in hoc sæculo (Tit. u, 11, 12). Admonet nos quidem alio loco idem beatus apostolus, dicens: Non plus sapere quam oportet sapere, sed sapere ad sobrietatem (Rom. XII) 3). Verumtamen in hac tripartita divisione in qua dicit ut sobrie, et juste, et pie vivamus in hoc saeculo, videtur mihi quia ille sobrie vivit qui non sequitur delectamenta luxuriæ; iuste vivit qui proximum nullatenus lædit, et ei beneficia in quantum valet impendit; pie vivit, qui a societate ecclesiasticae unitatis nulla ratione discedit, et intra Ecclesiam positus, ea quae certissime novit ad scientiam veræ fidei pertinere indubitanter tenet; ea vero quæ ignorat aut de quibus dubitat, humiliter ac patienter explorat, donec, si quid aliter sapit, Deo sibi revelante cognoscat.","english":"they succumb to love, so that they neither stubbornly contradict the true faith, nor defile themselves with shameful acts, nor harm their neighbors by crimes. This the blessed Apostle shows, saying: For the grace of God our Savior has appeared to all men, instructing us that, denying impiety and worldly desires, we should live soberly and justly and piously in this world (Tit 2:11-12). The same blessed Apostle indeed admonishes us in another place, saying: Be not wise beyond what is proper, but be wise unto sobriety (Rom 12:3). Yet in this threefold division in which he says that we should live soberly and justly and piously in this world, it seems to me that he lives soberly who does not pursue the delights of luxury; he lives justly who in no way harms his neighbor and bestows benefits on him as far as he is able; he lives piously who by no means departs from the fellowship of ecclesiastical unity, and, placed within the Church, holds without doubt those things which he most certainly knows to belong to the knowledge of the true faith; but those things which he does not know, or about which he doubts, he examines humbly and patiently, until, if he is wise otherwise in anything, he may know it by God's revelation to him.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":52,"ref":"p52","source":"Hacc autem sobrietas,. justitia, et pietas (al. et pax), quae cunctis debent inesse fidelibus, ita sibi connexae sunt, ut si una earum deTuerit, alia quæ videtur inesse, nullalenus prosit. Neque enim salvat (al. salva est) sobrietas qua quisque a flagitiis in seipso abstinet, nisi pia et justa fuerit, id est, ut et in Deum recte credat, et quod caritas poscit proximo libenter impendat: ncc fructuosa justitia est, qua unusquisque hoc impendit proximo quod sibi delectatur impendi, si sobria piaque non fuerit: pietas quoque mortua est, qua in Deum recte creditur, si vel morum sobrietas, vel proximi caritas non tenetur. Tunc igitur animæ vera salus acquiritur si et pictas in fide, et justitia in caritate, ct sobrietas in castitale ac parcimonia teneatur.\n\nAliter vero sanctos, et aliter peccare iniquos divinis docemur eloquiis. Nam et Agar ancilla Saræ, nisi superbiret non expelleretur (Genes. xxi, 11); et ipsa Sara nisi rideret non culparelur (Genes. XVIII, 11). llla enim superba facta est, concepisse se v!dens; illa risit, concepturam se ambigens. Invenitur utraque peccasse, sed non æquale invenitur utriusque peccatum: nam in una earum humana dubitavit inlirmilas; in altera vero contumaciter se extulit humana temerites. Ideo Agar præcepto meruit divinæ severitatis expelli, Sara vero divinæ vocis meruit placida lenitate culpari.","english":"But this sobriety, justice, and piety (or peace), which ought to be in all the faithful, are so connected with one another that if one of them is lacking, the other which seems to be present is of no benefit at all. For neither does the sobriety by which one abstains from shameful acts within himself save him, unless it be pious and just—that is, that he both believe rightly in God and willingly bestow on his neighbor what love demands; nor is that justice fruitful by which each one bestows on his neighbor what he delights to have bestowed on himself, if it be not sober and pious; piety also is dead, by which one believes rightly in God, if either sobriety of morals or love of neighbor is not held. Then, therefore, is true salvation acquired for the soul, if both piety is held in faith, and justice in love, and sobriety in chastity and frugality.\n\nBut we are taught by the divine utterances that the saints sin in one way and the wicked in another. For even Hagar, the handmaid of Sarah, would not have been cast out unless she had been proud (Gen. 21:11); and Sarah herself would not have been blamed unless she had laughed (Gen. 18:11). For the former became proud, seeing that she had conceived; the latter laughed, doubting that she would conceive. Both are found to have sinned, but the sin of each is not found to be equal: for in one of them human weakness doubted; but in the other human recklessness proudly exalted itself. Therefore Hagar deserved to be cast out by the command of divine severity, but Sarah deserved to be blamed by the gentle mildness of the divine voice.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":53,"ref":"p53","source":"Et quia leve fuit in illa dubitatione peccatum, divinæ promissionis sermone firmata abjecit dubitationem, recepit certissimam fidem, per quam sumpsit eliam concipiendi virtutem: quod aposLolica testatur auctoritas, dicens: Fide et ipsa Sara sterilis virlutem in conceptione seminis accepit, etiam praeter tempus ætatis, quoniam fidelem credidit esse qui promiserat (Hebr. XI, 11).\n\nInvenimus alio loco sanctorum et iniquorum non æqualia esse peccata; sed illorum levia, quæ temporali egeant correptione purgari; illorum ve o gravia, quæ mereantur ignis æterni perpetua combustione puniri. Ad aquam enim contradictionis aliter filii Israel peccaverunt (Num. xx, 13), rebelles adversus Deum omnimodis existentes; alitcr Moyses, qui non per temeritatem Deo contradixit, sed per Infirmitatem minus de Dei operatione præsumpsit; similis factus beato Petro, qui audivit a Domino, Modicæ fidei, quare dubitasti (Matth. xiv, 51)? Unde Israclilarum contumacia meruit æterna punitione damnari; in Moyse vero usque ad hoc fuit illius pcccati ultio, ut ei sola terræ repromissionis negaretur ingressio. Nam et ipse Moyses non propter suuan peccatum, sed propter illos sibi iratum Dominum fuisse testatus est, dicens in Deuteronomio: Nec mira indignatio in populum, cum mihi quoque iratus Dominus propter vos dixerit: Nec tu ingredieris illuc (Deut. i, 57).","english":"And because the sin in that doubt was light, once the word of the divine promise had been confirmed, she cast away doubt and received most certain faith, through which she also took on the power of conceiving; as the apostolic authority testifies, saying: By faith even Sarah herself, being barren, received power for the conception of seed, even beyond the time of her age, because she believed him faithful who had promised (Heb. 11:11).\n\nWe find in another place that the sins of the saints and of the wicked are not equal; but those are light, which need to be purged by temporal correction; while these are grave, which deserve to be punished by the perpetual burning of eternal fire. For at the water of contradiction the children of Israel sinned in one way (Num. 20:13), being utterly rebellious against God; and Moses in another way, who did not contradict God through rashness, but through weakness presumed too little concerning God's working; made like the blessed Peter, who heard from the Lord, O you of little faith, why did you doubt (Matt. 14:31)? Hence the stubbornness of the Israelites deserved to be condemned to eternal punishment; but in Moses the vengeance of that sin went only so far that the entrance into the promised land alone was denied him. For Moses himself also testified that the Lord was angry with him not because of his own sin, but because of them, saying in Deuteronomy: Nor is my indignation against the people, when the Lord also said to me, being angry with me because of you: You also shall not enter there (Deut. 1:37).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":54,"ref":"p54","source":"Nam et sanctus David propter ipsum peccatum populi ostendit Moysen fuisse vexatum dicens: Et irritaverunt eum ad aquas contradictionis, et vexatus est Moyses propter eos (Psal. cv, 32). Populus ergo Dominum irritavit, Moyses de Domini opere dubitavit; et quia illius irritationis atque dubitationis non fuit aequale peccatum, ideo sanctus Moyses, quamvis fuerit pro eis vexatus, non tamen cum eis æterna punitione damnatus est.\n\nEt ut breviter aliquid etiam in ipso usu attendamus conversationis humanæ, unde facilius sumamus exemplum, sic accipiamus baptizatorum hominum animas, sicut mulieres conjugio copulatas. Nam et ipsius conjugii magnum sacramentum in Cbristo et in Ecclesia commendat Apostolus (Ephes. v, 32). Sic est ergo quælibet anima fideliter cohærens Cbristo, sicut uxor vivens fideliter cum marito: quæ in ipsa conjugii castitate animum quidem viri sui plerumque contristat, sed tori fidem pura castitate conservat, et mariti substantiam prudenter temperanter que dispensat; ac per hoc et peccat marito, et vivit tamen caste ac lideliter cum marito; et quam facit humana infirmitas aliquando apud maritum delinquere, conjugalis caslilas facit marito dulciter inhærere. Illa vero mulier quæ sivc de domo mariti egressa,sive in eodem mariti habitaculo constituta, adulterio mixta fuerit, substantiam mariti disperserit, non venia judicatur digna, sed mortifero rea1u tenetur obnoxia.","english":"For holy David too, on account of that very sin of the people, shows that Moses was troubled, saying: And they provoked him at the waters of contradiction, and Moses was troubled because of them (Ps. 105:32). The people, then, provoked the Lord; Moses doubted concerning the Lord's work; and because the sin of that provocation and of that doubt was not equal, therefore holy Moses, although he was troubled on their behalf, was not nevertheless condemned together with them to eternal punishment.\n\nAnd that we may briefly consider something also in the very practice of human conduct, whence we may more easily take an example, let us understand the souls of baptized persons as women joined in marriage. For the Apostle also commends the great sacrament of marriage itself in Christ and in the Church (Eph. 5:32). Any soul, then, faithfully cleaving to Christ is as a wife living faithfully with her husband: who, in the very chastity of marriage, often indeed grieves the mind of her husband, but preserves the fidelity of the marriage bed with pure chastity, and prudently and temperately dispenses her husband's substance; and thereby she both sins against her husband and yet lives chastely and faithfully with her husband; and the things which human weakness sometimes makes her to offend in before her husband, conjugal chastity makes her to cleave sweetly to her husband. But that woman who, whether having gone out from her husband's house, or established in the same dwelling of her husband, has been joined in adultery, has scattered her husband's substance, is not judged worthy of pardon, but is held liable to a deadly charge.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":55,"ref":"p55","source":"Sic est anima quæ diabolo consentiens, aut infidelitate subvertitur, aut criminibus implicatur.\n\nDe talibus dicit Apostolus, quia neque fornicarii, neque idolis servientes, neque adulteri, neque molles, neque masculorum conrubitores, neque fures, neque avari, neque ebriosi, neque maledici, neque rapaces, regnum Dei possidebunt ( I Cor.. VI, 9,10). Do his autem qui leviler peccant dicitur: Septies cudit justus, et resurgit ( Prov XXIV, 16). Iste talis et peccare dicitur, et tamen justus veraciter appellatur. Non enim sic cadit, ut justus esse desiliat, quia scriptum est: Dum ceciderit justus, non conturbabitur, quoniam Dominus confirmat manum ejus (Psal. XXXVI, 24). Adest ergo Dominus etiam cadenti juslo, quia non sic peccat, ut Dominus ab eo discedat. Habet enim concupiscentiam ex infirmitate carnis, sed concupiscentiæ non consentit, firmatus virtute gratæ spiritalis. Ipsa concupiscenlia est lex peccati etiam in membris constituta sanctorum; a qua tamen juslos suos liberat gratia Dei per Jesum Christum Dominium nostrum: qui propterea peccata nos'ra perluit in corpore suo super lignum, ut a peccatis nostris separa. cum justitia vivamus (I Petr. II, 24). Cum ergo cadit juslus, debita contrahit; sed talia sunt debita justi quæ possint in quotidiana oratione limiti, quando veraciter dicit: Dimitte nobis debita nostra, sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris (Matth. vi, 12).","english":"Thus it is with the soul that consents to the devil: it is either overthrown by unbelief or entangled in crimes.\n\nOf such people the Apostle says that neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor those who lie with males, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will possess the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9–10). But of those who sin lightly it is said: The just man falls seven times, and rises again (Prov. 24:16). Such a person is said both to sin and yet is truly called just. For he does not fall in such a way as to cease being just, because it is written: When the just man falls, he shall not be troubled, for the Lord strengthens his hand (Ps. 36:24). The Lord is therefore present even to the just man when he falls, because he does not sin in such a way that the Lord departs from him. For he has concupiscence from the weakness of the flesh, but he does not consent to concupiscence, being strengthened by the power of spiritual grace. This very concupiscence is the law of sin, established even in the members of the saints; yet the grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord sets his just ones free from it, who for this reason washed away our sins in his own body on the tree, that, separated from our sins, we might live in justice (1 Pet. 2:24). When, therefore, the just man falls, he contracts debts; but such are the debts of the just man that they can be remitted in daily prayer, when he truly says: Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors (Matt. 6:12).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":56,"ref":"p56","source":"Peccata ergo justorum sunt ex necessitate infirmitatis; peccata iniquorum sunt ex intentione pessimæ voluntalis. In illis sic peccati repcritur exortus, ut non subsequatur effectus. Quia etsi per infirmitatem nascitur, per Dei gratiam superatur. Illos autem gratiæ (al. congrue) privatos auxilio præcipitat mala voluutas, quo duxerit prava cupiditas. Ideo culpæ sanctorum peccata dicuntur esse, non crimina: pro quibus sic corripiuntur a patre, ut non condemnentur a judice: quæ tamen correptio perlinet ad judicium, sed paternum, quo Deus filios suos misericorditer et judicat et tlagellat, ut eos a supplicio sempiternæ damnationis eripiat. Hoc beatus ostendens Apostolus ait: Si nosmetipsos judicaremus, non utique judicaremur; dum judicamur autem, a Domino corripimur, ut non cum hoc mundo damnemur (I Cor. xi, 51, 52). Hoc etiam beatus Pelrus affirmat, dicens: Quoniam tempus inchoationis judicii ex domo Dei. Si ergo initudilla nobis, quis finis eorum qui non credum Dei Evangelio? Et si justuo quidem vix salvabitur, peccator et impius ub parebunt (al. parebit) (I Petr. IV, 47,18)? '","english":"The sins of the righteous, then, come from the necessity of weakness; the sins of the wicked come from the intention of a most evil will. In the former, the arising of sin is so checked that its effect does not follow, because even if it is born through weakness, it is overcome through God's grace. But those deprived of the help of grace, a wicked will hurries headlong wherever depraved desire leads. Therefore the faults of the saints are called sins, not crimes, for which they are so reproved by the Father that they are not condemned by the Judge; yet that reproof pertains to judgment, but a fatherly one, by which God mercifully both judges and scourges his sons, so as to snatch them from the punishment of eternal damnation. Showing this, the blessed Apostle says: If we judged ourselves, we would certainly not be judged; but while we are judged, we are reproved by the Lord, so that we may not be condemned with this world. The blessed Peter also affirms this, saying: For the time of the beginning of judgment is from the house of God. If, then, it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not believe the Gospel of God? And if the righteous one is scarcely saved, where will the sinner and the ungodly appear?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":57,"ref":"p57","source":"Nullus ergo fidelis ac sapiens sanctorum fidem dicat infirmam, si quando eis in hujus vitae tempore cujuslibet adversitatis viderit accidisse molestiam. Communiter enim accidunt fidelibus et infidelibus, bonis et malis, corpora lis sanitas atque infirmitas; et ideo communiter utrosque tangit corporeas infirmitatis adversitas, quia nonnunquam communiter utrisque temporaliter donatur et sanitas. Justi enim ab iniquis non qualitate corporea, sed fide discernuntur et vita. Simul ergo molestias et pericula vitæ praesentis corporaliter tolerant, quas tamen diversa prorsus intentione supportant. Ideo autem in malis hujus vitx non æqualiter gemunt, quia bona vitæ hujus non æqualiter diligunt. Iniqui enim ad hoc volunt vitam præsentem sine molestiis habere' tranquillam, ut bonis caducis temporalibusque non careant: justi autem ideo pcricula et molestias vitæ præsentis oderunt, ut Debm (forte Deo), quem diligunt, perfruantur: in ipso appetentes requiem veram, in quo habituri sunt beatitudinem sempiternam. Proinde nec bona lemporalia diligunt, quæ citius desitura cognoscunt; et ob hoc in usu eorum non appetunt unde cupiditas expleatur, sed unde reficiatur caritas et sustentetur pnrmitas; nec ex eis tanquam ex domestica delectatione gaudium, sed tanquam ex viatica sustentatione modestum quærunt pro rerum (al. reorum) opportunitate solatium.","english":"No faithful and wise person, then, should call the faith of the saints weak if at some time during this life he sees them suffer the distress of any adversity. For health and sickness of body fall alike to the faithful and the unfaithful, the good and the evil; and therefore the adversity of bodily infirmity touches both alike, because sometimes health in time is granted alike to both. For the just are distinguished from the wicked not by bodily quality but by faith and life. Together, then, they bodily endure the troubles and dangers of the present life, yet they bear them with an entirely different intention. But the reason why they do not groan equally in the evils of this life is that they do not love the goods of this life equally. For the wicked desire to have the present life tranquil without troubles for this end, that they may not lack fleeting and temporal goods; but the just hate the dangers and troubles of the present life for this reason, that they may fully enjoy God, whom they love, seeking true rest in him in whom they are to have eternal blessedness. Accordingly, they do not love temporal goods, which they know will soon perish; and for this reason, in their use they do not seek that whereby cupidity may be satisfied, but that whereby charity may be refreshed and purity sustained; nor do they seek joy from them as from a domestic delight, but as from a provision for the journey they seek modest consolation according to the opportunity of circumstances.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":58,"ref":"p58","source":"Et quia de illius nunc sententia disputamns qui muscas et scorpiones, pulices et cimices, a Deo potuisse fieri non credit, hoc quoque præcavendum est, ne hunc sensum cathol ica fide omnimodis alienum, non ex Manichaeorum errore, seJ ex divinarum Scripturarum lectione conceperit. Bona est enim lex, si quis ea legitime utatur (I Tim. I, 8). Ille autem lego non legitime utitur qui de verbis legis non hoc sentit quod oportet ut sentiat. Hoc ideo dixi, quia legimus In Exodo (Cap. VII, 10) virgam Moysis quam portabat Aaron in serpentem divina operatione conversam; ubi dicitur (Ibid., 12) etiam magos Pharaonis, quos Jamnem et Mambrem Apostolus vocat, fecisse similiter ut virgas corum in serpenles magicis incantationibus verterentur (11 Tim. III, 8). Deinde cum Aaron aquas fluminis percuteret, et verterentur in sanguinem (Exod. VII, 20), etiam iUorum incanlationibus similiter factum sacra Scriptura commemorat (Ibid., 22). Postmodum quoque cum percussis aquis Aaron ranas educeret, quæ terram Ægypti protinus operirent; illi quoque malefici nefandis artibus obnilentibus similia fecisse narrantur (Exod. VIII, 6, 7). Sed postquam ventum est ut percussa terra produeerentur ciniphes (Ibid., 17, 18), nihil tale potuit magicæ artis operari nequitia. Ubi primum iste qui.","english":"And since we are now disputing about the opinion of that man who does not believe that flies and scorpions, fleas and bugs could have been made by God, this too must be guarded against: that he should not have conceived this view, wholly alien to the catholic faith, not from the error of the Manichaeans but from the reading of the divine Scriptures. For the law is good, if a man use it lawfully (1 Tim. 1:8). But he uses the law unlawfully who does not understand from the words of the law what he ought to understand. I have said this because we read in Exodus (ch. 7:10) that the rod of Moses, which Aaron carried, was turned into a serpent by divine operation; where it is said (ibid., 12) that even the magicians of Pharaoh, whom the Apostle calls Jannes and Mambres, did likewise, so that their rods were turned into serpents by magic incantations (2 Tim. 3:8). Then, when Aaron struck the waters of the river and they were turned into blood (Exod. 7:20), sacred Scripture records that this was done similarly by their incantations as well (ibid., 22). Afterward, too, when Aaron, having struck the waters, brought forth frogs that immediately covered the land of Egypt, those sorcerers also are said to have done similar things by their abominable arts (Exod. 8:6–7). But after it came about that, when the earth was struck, gnats were produced (ibid., 17–18), the wickedness of magic art could work nothing of the kind. Here first this man who—","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":59,"ref":"p59","source":"muscas a diabolo factas asserit, mendacem se esse cognoscat, quandoquidem diabolus et angeli ejus, etiamsi alia facere permissi sunt, in muscarum tamen opere defecerunt. Ubi quis non videat sive serpentes ex virgis, sive ranas productas ex acuis ideo pravaricatores fecisse, quia Deus permisit; ciniphes autem, id est muscas, ideo facere non potuisse,, quia Deus non permisit?\n\nAliquando autem occulto et incomprehensibili judicio Dei permittuntur quædam facere mali angeli, ad probandos bonos et ad seducendos malos; non. tamen ipsi creant quæ faciunt, sed de occulto Creatoris Dei sinu, quem nos videre non possumus, permittuntur aliquid producere quod videre possimus. Sic autem nec serpentum nec ranarum diabolus potuit esse creator, quamvis ea Deo permittente produxerit; sicut (al. sic) non fuit creator ignis, quando ad probandum Job, oves ejus cum pastoribus igne de coelo cadente consumpsit (Job I, 16); sicu: nec venti fuit crealor, quando spiritus magnus irruens a deserto tetigit quatuor angulos domus, et omnes filios sancti Job una simul ruina compressit.","english":"he asserts that flies were made by the devil, let him recognize that he is lying, since the devil and his angels, even if they were permitted to do other things, nevertheless failed in the work of flies. Where would anyone not see that the transgressors produced serpents from rods, or frogs from staves, for the very reason that God permitted it; but that they could not make gnats, that is, flies, for the reason that God did not permit it?\n\nBut sometimes by the hidden and incomprehensible judgment of God the evil angels are permitted to do certain things, to test the good and to seduce the evil; yet they themselves do not create what they do, but from the hidden bosom of God the Creator, which we cannot see, they are permitted to bring forth something that we can see. Thus the devil could not be the creator of either serpents or frogs, although he produced them with God's permission; just as he was not the creator of fire, when, to test Job, he consumed his sheep together with their shepherds by fire falling from heaven; just as he was not the creator of the wind, when a great spirit rushing from the desert struck the four corners of the house, and crushed all the sons of holy Job together in one ruin.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":60,"ref":"p60","source":"Naturas ergo diversas, hoc est elementa hujus mundi, solus Deus omnipotens creavit; in quorum secreto et abdito quædam rerum semina nobis occulta, sed angelis mauifesta, constituit: ex quibus quaedam, proutopportunitas operis deposcit et temporis, occulto sapientiæ sive consilio, ant per bonos angelos Deus produci præcipit, aut per malos ostendi permittit. Ista (al. Ita) autem permittendo demonstrat Deus quantam sanctis angelis fecerit inesse virtutem, quando etiam malis ex ipsa creatura corporali quaedam mira faciendi tribuit facultatem. lude est quod etiam Salvator noster suos fideles praemonere non desistit, dicens: Surgent enim pseudochristi et pseudoprophetæ, et dabunt signa magna et prodigia, ita ut in errorem inducantur (si fieri potest) etiam electi (Marc. xit, 22). Nam et beatus Apostolus de Antichristo loquens ait: Revelabitur ille iniquus quem Dominus noster Jesus Christus interficiet spiritu oris sui, et destruet illustratione adventus sui: cujus est adventus secundum operationem Satanæ, in omni virtute, et signis et prodigiis mendacibus, et in omni seductione iniquitatis, his qui pereunt, eo quod caritatem veritatis non receperunt ut salvi fierent. Ideo mittet illis Deus operationem erroris, ut credant mendacio, et judicentur omnes qui non crediderunt (al. credunt ) veritati, sed consenserunt iniquitati (II Thess. II. et seq.).","english":"Therefore almighty God alone created the diverse natures, that is, the elements of this world; and in their secret and hidden depth he established certain seeds of things, hidden from us but manifest to the angels. From these, as the opportunity of the work and the time demands, by the hidden counsel of his wisdom, God either commands certain things to be produced through good angels, or permits them to be shown through evil angels. By thus permitting, God demonstrates how great a power he has made to be in the holy angels, since he even grants to evil angels, from the bodily creation itself, the ability to perform certain wonders. Hence it is that our Savior also does not cease to forewarn his faithful, saying: For false christs and false prophets shall arise, and shall give great signs and wonders, so that even the elect (if it were possible) may be led into error. For the blessed Apostle also, speaking of the Antichrist, says: That wicked one shall be revealed, whom our Lord Jesus Christ shall kill with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming; whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and in all seduction of iniquity, for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the working of error, that they may believe a lie, and that all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but consented to iniquity.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":61,"ref":"p61","source":"His atque hujusmodi testimoniis cognoscemus omnes naturas opere divino creatas, et ex quocunque nocemur, non natura malum debere dici, sed. nobis propter infirmitatem inconveniens inveniri. Ex quo tamen nobis conveniens adhibetur monitus, ut humili corde divinae virtutis justitiam formidemus. Naturarum vero, non solum malos, sed nec bonos angelos esse creatores, quisquam sapiens aut credit aut dicit. Deus enim, sicut superius diximus, omnia in sapientia fecit, quæ sapientia attingit a fine usque ad finem fortiter, et disponit omnia suaviter (Sap. VIII, 4). Ideo autem omnia disponit, quia in ipsa Pater omnia fecit. Sicut ergo in sapientia Deus creavit in coelis angelos, sic in ipsa creavit in terra vermiculos; et qui in superioribus Thronos, Dominationes, Princioatus et Potestates coudidit, ipse in terra scorpio. nes, pullices et cimices fecit. Qui creavit gallinam, ipse creavit muscam: sed illam dedit qua confundatur homo superbus, istam qua reficiatur infirmus. Inde est quod de ista volens recipit escam, de illa nolens patitur nauseam: ut saltem non sic solum in ista solatium Dei, sed etiam in illa compellatur meritum sui videre peccati.","english":"By these and similar testimonies we shall recognize that all natures were created by the divine work, and that from whatever source we are harmed, evil ought not to be called a nature, but is found to be inconvenient to us because of our weakness. From this, however, a fitting warning is given to us, that with a humble heart we should fear the justice of divine power. But that any wise person either believes or says that angels—not only bad ones, but not even good ones—are creators of natures, who would assert? For God, as we said above, made all things in wisdom, which wisdom reaches mightily from end to end and disposes all things sweetly (Wis. 8:4). And therefore it disposes all things, because the Father made all things in it. Just as, therefore, God created the angels in heaven in wisdom, so in that same wisdom he created the little worms on earth; and he who established Thrones, Dominations, Principalities, and Powers in the higher realms, himself made scorpions, fleas, and bugs on earth. He who created the hen, himself created the fly: but the one he gave by which proud man might be confounded, the other by which weak man might be refreshed. Hence it is that from the one, when he wishes, he receives food; from the other, when he does not wish, he suffers nausea: so that at least not only in the one is he compelled to see God's consolation, but also in the other the desert of his own sin.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":62,"ref":"p62","source":"Proinde attendat iste, ut nec illo nomine seducatur quo princeps dæmoniorum Beelzebub in Evangelio nuncupatur, quod interpretatur princeps inuscarum. Hoc enim non ideo dictum est quod diabolus potuit muscas creare: nam et Danieli prophetae loquens angelus dicit: Et ecce Michael unus de principibus primus venit in adjutorium meum (Dan. x, 13); et paulo post: Nemo est adjutor meus in omnibus his, nisi Michael princeps vester (lbid., 21). Nec solum angelos, sed etiam homines invenimus principes nominari. Scriptum est enim: Principes populorum convenerunt cum Deo Abraham (Psal. XLVI, 18); et Ecclesiæ dicitur: Pro patribus tuis nati sunt tibi filii, constitues eos principes super omnem terram (Psal. XLIV, 17). Et in libro Moysi (Genes. xxv, 16) novimus principes tribuum nominari.. Nec tamen quia homines aut angeli dicuntur principes, ideo non solum angelorum aut hominum, sed etiam quarumlibet irrationabilium animarum, vel quorumlibet corporum dicendi sunt creatores. Nam et ipse Beelzebub, cujus nomen interpretatur princeps muscarum, utique princeps dæmoniorum dicitur: quibus tamen principatur, ut primus auctor incentorque nequitiæ, non ut creator sit conditorque naturæ. Mali enim angeli Deum habent suæ naturæ factorem; suae vero nequitiæ habent diabolum principem.","english":"Therefore let that man take heed, lest he be seduced even by that name by which the prince of the demons is called Beelzebub in the Gospel, which is interpreted as prince of flies. For this was not said because the devil was able to create flies; for even the angel speaking to the prophet Daniel says: And behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me (Dan. 10:13); and a little later: There is none that helpeth me in all these things, but Michael your prince (ibid., 21). Nor do we find only angels but also men called princes. For it is written: The princes of the peoples are gathered together with the God of Abraham (Ps. 46:18); and to the Church it is said: Instead of thy fathers, sons are born to thee; thou shalt make them princes over all the earth (Ps. 44:17). And in the book of Moses (Gen. 25:16) we know that the princes of the tribes are named. Nor yet, because men or angels are called princes, are they therefore to be called creators not only of angels or men, but even of any irrational souls whatsoever, or of any bodies whatsoever. For Beelzebub himself, whose name is interpreted as prince of flies, is certainly called the prince of the demons: yet he rules over them as the first author and instigator of wickedness, not as the creator and maker of nature. For evil angels have God as the maker of their nature; but of their wickedness they have the devil as their prince.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":63,"ref":"p63","source":"Tota namque refugarum angelorum multitudo bona facta est a Deo, cujus gratuita benignitate exstitit, ut esset; propria vero voluntate diabolo adhæsit, ut caderet. Proinde princeps eorum dicitur, non quia eos creavit, sed quia secum in præcipitium perditionis attraxit. In eo igitur quod diabolus dicitur princeps muscarum, princeps ostenditur iniquorum, quos alia Scriptura significat dicens: Muscæ morituræ exterminant oleum suavitatis (Eccle. x, 1). Qui exterminant, nisi qui Spiritum sanctum aut infidelitatis crimine aut sordida immundorum operum obscenitate (al. obscuritate) contristant, dum seipsos aut perversa credulitate aut prava conversatione commaculant? Quod sollicite Apostolus inlerdicens ait: Nolite contristare Spiritum sanctum Dei, in quo signati estis in diem redemptionis (Ephes. iv, 30).\n\nExterminant ergo in se oleum suavitatis qui non recto vitæ ordine utuntur sacramento gratiæ spiritalis. Sic autem illis exterminantibus, ipsum oleum non potest exterminari, sicut iisdem contristantibus secundum malam voluntatem suam, non potest aliquam Spiritus sanctus sentire tristitiam. Nam et de ipso Dei Filio dicitur ad Hebneos: Quanto magis putatis deteriora mereri supplicia qui Filium Dei conculcaverit (Hebr. x, 29)! Filius autem Dei Chrislus est, Dei virtus, et Dei sapientia, quæ nullatenus conculcatur, quia nullatenus inquinatur. De ipsa quippe dicitur in libro (al.","english":"For the whole multitude of rebel angels was made good by God, whose gratuitous kindness caused it to exist, so that it might be; but by its own will it clung to the devil, so that it might fall. Hence he is called their prince, not because he created them, but because he dragged them with him into the precipice of perdition. In that, therefore, the devil is called prince of flies, he is shown to be the prince of the wicked, whom another Scripture signifies, saying: Dead flies cause the oil of sweetness to stink (Eccles. 10:1). Who cause it to stink, except those who grieve the Holy Spirit either by the crime of unbelief or by the foul obscenity of unclean works, while they defile themselves either by perverse belief or by depraved conduct? The Apostle, forbidding this earnestly, says: Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in whom you were sealed unto the day of redemption (Eph. 4:30).\n\nThey therefore cause the oil of sweetness to stink in themselves who do not use the sacrament of spiritual grace by a right order of life. But while they cause it to stink, that oil itself cannot be caused to stink, just as, while they grieve according to their own evil will, the Holy Spirit cannot feel any grief. For also concerning the very Son of God it is said to the Hebrews: How much more do you think they deserve worse punishments who have trampled the Son of God (Heb. 10:29)! But the Son of God is Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God, which is in no way trampled, because it is in no way defiled. Concerning it indeed it is said in the book","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":64,"ref":"p64","source":"libris) Sapientiæ: Attingit enim ubique propter suam munditiam; et ideo nihil inquinatum in illam incurrit. Splendor est enim lucis æterna, et speculum sine macula Dei majestatis, et imago bonitatis illius (Sap. VII, et aeq.). Mali ergo coi. tristant Spiritum sanctum, sed Spiritus sanctus contristari non potest; mali conculcant Filium Dei, sed Filius Dei nullatenus conculcatur.\n\nTale est autem quod dicuntur mali Spiritum sanctum contristare, et Filium Dei conculcare, cum et Filius Dei et Spiritus sanctus (al. Dei) incontristabilis inconculcabilisque permaneat; sicut ait Salvator in Evangelio: Qui viderit mulierem ad concupiscendum eum, jam mœchatus est eam in corde suo (Matth. v, 28). Si aulem illo moechante illa permanet casta, quanto magismalis contristantihus et conculcantibus, sine tristitia et beata manet Filii Dei et Spiritus sancti divina substantia!","english":"in the books of Wisdom: For she reaches everywhere because of her purity; and therefore nothing defiled enters into her. For she is the splendor of eternal light, and the spotless mirror of the majesty of God, and the image of his goodness (Wisdom 7, and elsewhere). The evil, therefore, grieve the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit cannot be grieved; the evil trample the Son of God, but the Son of God is in no way trampled.\n\nSuch, then, is what is meant when the evil are said to grieve the Holy Spirit and to trample the Son of God, although both the Son of God and the Holy Spirit remain incapable of grief and incapable of being trampled; just as the Savior says in the Gospel: Whoever has looked at a woman to desire her has already committed adultery with her in his heart (Matthew 5:28). But if, while he commits adultery, she remains chaste, how much more, while the evil grieve and trample, does the divine substance of the Son of God and of the Holy Spirit remain without grief and blessed!","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":65,"ref":"p65","source":"Nullus ergo fidelium dicat. aliquam naturam potuisse originaliter a diabolo creari: ne dum quælibet animalia creante diabolo exstitisse confirmat, etiam illas res de quibus originem ducunt operibus diaboli consequenter ascribat. Quaedam enim genera muscarum, aut de corporum purgamentis, aut de putrefactis herbis vel carnibus oriuntur. Plerumque videmus aliquas muscas etiam ex leguminibus nasci. Nam et gurgulio solet existere de frumento. Quisquis ergo hujusmodi animalia non a Deo, sed a diabolo asserit creata, cur non etiam ligna, frumenta, legumina, herbas et carnes, de quibus nascuntur, asserat facta? Ubi consequenter cum vermes viderit non solum de humanis cadaveribus, verum eLiam de vivis corporibus habere originem, qui in vermibus humanae mortalitatis nonnunquam carnalis ostenditur sensus, etiam humanorum corporum sine dubio diabolum prædicabit auctorem. Sed cum bonis recte credens recteque intelligens, nec ipsis angelis bonis originem cujuslibet creaturæ audeat assignare, quomodo isti, angelo dejecto, et a sua dignitate vitio propriae pravitatis excluso, virtutem aut potestatem creandi cujuslibet animalis assignat? quod ei assignare nullus auderet, etiamsi in angelica dignitate ac bonitate sine aliquo vilio permaneret.","english":"Let no one of the faithful therefore say that any nature could have been originally created by the devil, lest, while he affirms that certain animals came into being by the devil's creating, he consequently ascribes even those things from which they derive their origin to the works of the devil. For certain kinds of flies arise either from the refuse of bodies or from rotted herbs or flesh. Very often we see some flies born even from legumes. For the weevil too is accustomed to come forth from grain. Whoever therefore asserts that animals of this kind were created not by God but by the devil, why does he not also assert that the woods, grains, legumes, herbs, and flesh from which they are born were made by him? Whereupon, consequently, when he sees that worms have their origin not only from human corpses but even from living bodies—since in worms the carnal sensation of human mortality is sometimes shown—he will without doubt proclaim the devil the author even of human bodies. But since one who believes rightly and understands rightly does not dare to assign the origin of any creature even to the good angels, how do these men assign to a fallen angel, excluded from his dignity by the vice of his own depravity, the power or authority of creating any animal? Which no one would dare to assign to him even if he remained in angelic dignity and goodness without any blemish.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":66,"ref":"p66","source":"Non autem inaniter in ipso principio Genesis, de omnibus quæ facta sunt loquens Scriptura, Deum omnia fecisse confirmat, dicens per singula: Et fecit Deus, et vidit Deus quod bonum est ( Gere. I): quæ omnia die sexto perfecit, in quibus nihil deesse potuit quod postea fieret. Quia Deus præscius futurorum, sicut hominem noverat peccaturum, sic ei ex omnibus quæ fecit non solum solatia, sed etiam flagella salubriter præparavit. Una est enim boni patris manus quæ filio et cibum tribuit et flagellum: aliud ut vivat, aliud ut bene vivat; aliud ne infirmitate deficiat, aliud ne indisciplinatus paterna praecepta contemnat: Quem enim diligit Dominus corripit, flagellat autem omnem filium quem recipit (Hebr. XII, 6). Nec aliquid prodest abundare temporalibns bonis, si quis male vivendo careat sempiternis: quibus cum carucrit, necesse esl eum malis perennibus deputari, quibus carere non possit.","english":"Not in vain, however, does Scripture, speaking in the very beginning of Genesis of all things that were made, confirm that God made all things, saying of each one: And God made, and God saw that it was good (Gen. 1); all these things he completed on the sixth day, in which nothing could be lacking that would afterward come to be. For God, foreknowing things to come, just as he knew that man would sin, so also from all the things he made he prepared for him not only consolations but also chastisements, for his health. For it is one hand of a good father that gives the son both food and a rod: one thing that he may live, another that he may live well; one thing that he not fail through weakness, another that, undisciplined, he not despise his father's precepts: For whom the Lord loves he corrects, and he scourges every son whom he receives (Heb. 12:6). Nor does it profit anyone to abound in temporal goods if, by living badly, he lacks eternal ones; and when he lacks these, it is necessary that he be assigned to everlasting evils, which he cannot escape.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":67,"ref":"p67","source":"Cohibeat igitur unusquisque temeritatem cogitationis suae; et sicut ea quibus delectatur, sic etiam ea quibus offenditur naturaliter a Deo facta non dubitet: cujus sapientia attingens a fine usque ad finem fortiter, et disponens omnia suaviter, etiam de his rebus quas corruptio exterminat, pulchritudinem sui operis monstrat; in ipsis quoque minutissimis animalibus ostendens sui uniuscujusque generis decus, qui fecit minutissimas muscas magnis elephantis quanto breviores, tanto agiliores, et cum sit in utrisque dispar quantitas memhrorum, non tamen dispar et operum laudatio divinorum. Quis enim sanum sapiens, et invisibilia Dei per ea quae facta sunt intellecta conspiciens, non ipsum Deum opificem laudet in vermiculo, quem laudat in elephanto? aut non eumdem laudet in pulice, quem laudat in bove? Cum etiam illa signa quae in gemmis artificum formare consuevit industria tanto magis laudare soleat animus, quanto minutiora intuetur aspectus.","english":"Let each one therefore restrain the rashness of his own thought; and as he does not doubt that the things in which he delights were made by God, so too let him not doubt that the things by which he is offended were made naturally by God. By whose wisdom, reaching mightily from end to end and ordering all things sweetly, even from those things which corruption destroys, the beauty of his work is shown; displaying in the very smallest animals the glory of each one of its kinds—he who made the tiniest flies, in proportion as they are shorter than great elephants, so much the more agile; and though there is a disparate quantity of members in both, yet the praise of the divine works is not disparate. For who, being sound and wise, and beholding the invisible things of God understood through the things that are made, would not praise God the craftsman in the little worm whom he praises in the elephant? Or would he not praise the same one in the flea whom he praises in the ox? Since even those marks which the industry of craftsmen is accustomed to form in gems, the mind is accustomed to praise all the more, the more minutely the eye beholds them.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":68,"ref":"p68","source":"Omnia itaque Deum creasse fatendum est; sed ista quibus nutu divino vapulat humana transgressio, dum quæritur utrum antequam peccaret Adam, an postquam peccavit, fuerint a Deo creata, congrue respondetur, illa quae vel ex aquis vel ex terra gignuntur, Deo tunc creante primordialiter instituta, ab illo utique creatore qui non solum naturam hominis quam faciebat noverat, sed etiam ipsum hominem peccaturum mirabiliter præsciebat. Nec sic illa fecit, ut ea bomo ante peccatum, vel sentiret noxia, vel timeret. Sic enim eum nullius terreni animantis lædere poterat quilibet actus, sicut ipse cunctorum fuerat dominus divino munere constitutus. Hæc itaque homini noxia atque perniciosa transgressio fecit ipsius hominis, non conditio Creatoris. Neque enim hoo operata est benignitas creantis, sed æquitas judicantis.\n\nIlla vero quae de corruptione carnium videmus oriri vel fructuum, non quidem tunc dicimus exstitisse quando in illis sex diebus fecit Deus omnia bona valde; sed sic illa temporaliter facta sunt, ut de illis ista postmodum nascerentur. Ad quam corruptionem etiam humana devoluta est caro, quando sic scriptum est: Homo cum in honore esset, non intellexit; comparatus est jumentis insipientibus, et similis factus est illis (Psal.","english":"Therefore it must be confessed that God created all things; but as for those things by which human transgression is scourged at the divine nod, when it is asked whether they were created by God before Adam sinned or after he sinned, the fitting answer is that those things which are born either from the waters or from the earth were established primordially at the time when God was creating, by that Creator who certainly not only knew the nature of the man whom he was making, but also wondrously foreknew that the man himself would sin. Nor did he make them in such a way that man before sin would either feel them as harmful or fear them. For no action of any earthly living creature could harm him, just as he himself had been established by divine gift as lord of all things. Thus it was human transgression that made these things harmful and pernicious to man, not the Creator's condition. For the kindness of the Creator did not bring this about, but the equity of the Judge.\n\nBut those things which we see arise from the corruption of flesh or of fruits, we do not indeed say existed then when God in those six days made all things very good; but they were made temporally in such a way that these things would afterwards be born from them. To which corruption human flesh also has descended, since it is thus written: Man, when he was in honor, did not understand; he was compared to senseless beasts, and became like them (Ps.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":69,"ref":"p69","source":"XLVIII, 13); ut jam corpus peccatoris hominis necessitas obtineret corruptionis et mortis: a quibus duobus malis corpora sunt per Dei gratiam liberanda justorum; non in hoc tenipore, in quo, sicut Deus solem suum facit oriri super bonos et malos, et pluit super justos et injustos (Matth. v, 45), non solum Herodem incredulum vermibus consumi fecit (Act. XII, 23), sed etiam servum suum Job sanie ac vermibus ebullire permisit (Job II, 8); sed in futuro justorum corpora nullam sentient corruptionis mor. talitatisque molestiam, quando in eis corruptibile hoc induet immortalitatem (1 Cor. XV, 53). In illa bonorum vita, malorumque miseria, sive bopis,sive malis quidquid erit, plenum æternumque erit. Non ibi cruciatibus solatia miscebuntur, latiis inserentur. Ibi æternitas gaudiorum ao suppli. ciorum sine fine manebit; nec mali gaudia sperabunt, nec boni tristitiam formidabunt: in bonis aeterna exsultatio manens semper erit, in malis autem iletus et stridor dentium semper manebit; iniquos in æternum miseros retinebit societas dæmoniorum, justos autem in æternum beatos æqualitas sanctorum suscipiet angelorum.","english":"(48, 13); so that the body of a sinful man would already be held by the necessity of corruption and death: from these two evils the bodies of the righteous are to be freed by the grace of God; not in this time, in which, just as God makes his sun rise upon the good and the bad, and rains upon the just and the unjust (Matt. 5:45), he not only caused the unbelieving Herod to be consumed by worms (Acts 12:23), but also permitted his servant Job to boil over with sores and worms (Job 2:8); but in the future the bodies of the righteous will feel no distress of corruption and mortality, when this corruptible will put on immortality (1 Cor. 15:53). In that life of the good and the misery of the wicked, whatever there will be, whether for good or for evil, will be full and eternal. There comforts will not be mingled with torments, nor will joys be inserted. There the eternity of joys and of punishments will remain without end; neither will the wicked hope for joys, nor will the good fear sadness: in the good an eternal exultation will always remain, but in the wicked weeping and gnashing of teeth will always remain; the fellowship of demons will hold the unrighteous in eternal misery, but the equality of the holy angels will receive the righteous in eternal blessedness.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":70,"ref":"p70","source":"— 56. Proinde misericordiam Deo judiciumque cantantes, tempus misericordiæ non contemnamus, ut ad judicium sine formidine veniamus. Speremus judicem, quem novimus Redemptorem. Talia sint opera nostra quibus reddantur praemia sempiterna. In eo quod molestias praesentis temporis me tuimus et vitamus, inde nobis considerandum est quantum poenas aeternas fugere debeamus. Declinemus ergo a malis, et faciamus bona: hoc enim omnis homo inveniet in tempore divinæ retributionis quod hic habuerit in operibus suis, dicente Apostolo: Quæcunque enim seminaverit homo, hæc et metet: quoniam qui seminat in carne sua, de carne metet corruptionem; qui autem seminaverit in spiritu, de spiritu metet vitam æternam (Gal. vi, 8). Propter quod idem nos apostolus admonet, dicens: Si enim secundumcarnem vixeritis, moriemini; si autem spiritu facta carnis mortificaveritis, vivetis (Rom. VIII, 13). Hic ergo spiritu facta carnis mortificemus, et mortui peccato, Deo vivamus. Nec nos saeculi prosperitas corrumpat, nec adversitas frangat. Corde migremus de habitatione hujus mundi, de qua sumus celeriter etiam corpore migraturi: ut illa nos coelestis domus excipiat, de qua dicit Apostolus quod ædificationem habemus ex Deo, domum non manufactam, æternam in cœlis (11 Cor. v, 1). De hac scriptum est: Beati qui habitant in domo tua, Domine; in sæcula sacculorum laudabunt te (Psal. LXXXV, 5).","english":"— 56. Therefore, singing of mercy and judgment to God, let us not despise the time of mercy, so that we may come to judgment without fear. Let us hope in the Judge whom we know to be our Redeemer. Let our works be such that eternal rewards may be rendered for them. From the fact that we dread and avoid the troubles of the present time, we must consider how much we ought to flee eternal punishments. Let us therefore turn away from evil and do good: for every man will find in the time of divine retribution what he has had here in his works, as the Apostle says: For whatever a man has sown, that he will also reap: because he who sows in his flesh will reap corruption from the flesh; but he who has sown in the spirit will reap eternal life from the spirit (Gal. 6:8). For this reason the same apostle admonishes us, saying: For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the spirit you put to death the deeds of the flesh, you will live (Rom. 8:13). Here, then, let us by the spirit put to death the deeds of the flesh, and, dead to sin, live to God. Let neither the prosperity of the world corrupt us, nor adversity break us. Let us depart in heart from the dwelling of this world, from which we are soon to depart even in body: so that that heavenly home may receive us, of which the Apostle says that we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens (2 Cor. 5:1). Of this it is written: Blessed are those who dwell in your house, O Lord; they will praise you for ever and ever (Ps. 85:5).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":71,"ref":"p71","source":"Ibi sicut est æterna habitatio, sic est aeterna laudatio. Ibi qui habitant, semper Deum laudant, quia de Domino et in Domino semper exsultant; et sicut laudantibus suavis sanctae habitationis æternitas, sic habitantium æterna natne. laudandi suavitas.","english":"There, just as there is an eternal dwelling, so there is eternal praise. There those who dwell always praise God, because they always rejoice in the Lord and in the Lord; and just as the eternity of the holy dwelling is sweet to those who praise, so the eternal sweetness of praising is sweet to those who dwell.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]}]}