{"slug":"tmp869.tmp869.opp-lat1","id":"latin:ogl-pl:tmp869.tmp869.opp-lat1","title":"Praedestinatus Sive Praedestinatorum Haeresis","title_source":"Praedestinatus Sive Praedestinatorum Haeresis","author":"Anonymus","genre":"polemic","date":"","tradition":"latin","coverage":"not-located","coverage_claim":{"status":"not-located","text":"No English translation is known: a language model asked twice could name none, and the source corpus records none. That is not proof — 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":"2026-11-15T21:12:06Z","cost_usd":0.017457},"source":{"registry_id":"latin:ogl-pl:tmp869.tmp869.opp-lat1","work_id":"tmp869.tmp869.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/tmp869/tmp869/tmp869.tmp869.opp-lat1.xml"},"stats":{"passages":179,"english_words":47638,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":182040,"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/tmp869/tmp869/tmp869.tmp869.opp-lat1.xml"}],"checks":{"work":"tmp869.tmp869.opp-lat1","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":179,"translated":179,"commentary_passages":0,"commentary_units":0,"english_words":47638,"source_letters":180935,"commentary_kinds":0},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"coverage","severity":"info","text":"No English translation is known: a language model asked twice could name none, and the source corpus records none. That is not proof — 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: polemic in Latin; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 179 narrative."},{"kind":"caution","severity":"caution","text":"1 passage(s) are fragmentary in the source; the English bridges each break and says so in the note."},{"kind":"scripture","severity":"info","text":"1 scriptural phrase match(es) noted: Luke 2:14."},{"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":179},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"PRÆDESTINATUS, SIVE PRÆDESTINATORUM HÆRESIS, ET LIBRI S. AUGUSTINO TEMERE ASCRIPTI REFUTATIO. TRES IN LIBROS DISTRIBUTA. (Ex edit. Sirmond., in Galland. Biblioth. t. X )\n\nLIBER PRIMUS.\n\nEpitome Ecdicesios Hygini contra hæresiarchas, et Categoricorum Epiphanii contra sectas, et Expositionum Philastri, qui hos transferens in Latinum sermonem de Græco, cum Ariani damnarentur, edidit. Prior Hyginus, post hunc Polycrates, Africanus, Hesiodus, Epiphanius, Philaster; hi diversis temporibus diversas hæreses pertexuerunt.\n\nPrima hæresis a Simone sumpsit exordium, qui dicebat castitatem ad Deum non pertinere, Deum mundum non iecisse, et his similia. Hic a beato et sancto apostolo Petro ita est publice snperatus, ut ante pedes ejus cadens ultra surgere minime potuisset.\n\nII.\n\nSecunda hæresis a Menandro Menandrianorum, qui mundum non a Deo, sed ab angelis factum esse testantur. Hos sanctus Linus episcopus, secundus apostoli Petri, a consortio conversationis nostræ ejectos, aeterna damnatione multavit: docens rationabiliter, secundum sanctas Scripturas veteris Testamenti, Deum qui cum Moyse locutus est, hunc esse omnium creatorem, et nihil in creaturis omnibus esse quod possit pro sui natura esse vituperabile. Omnia enim quæ culpabilia judicantur, actu, non conditione culpantur.","english":"THE PRAEDESTINATUS, OR THE HERESY OF THE PRAEDESTINATI, AND A REFUTATION OF THE BOOKS RECKLESSLY ASCRIBED TO ST. AUGUSTINE. DIVIDED INTO THREE BOOKS. (From the edition of Sirmond, in Galland's Bibliotheca, vol. X)\n\nBOOK ONE.\n\nAn epitome of the Ecdicesios of Hyginus against the heresiarchs, and of the Categoriae of Epiphanius against the sects, and of the Expositiones of Philaster, which he, translating them from Greek into the Latin tongue, published when the Arians were condemned. First Hyginus, after him Polycrates, Africanus, Hesiodus, Epiphanius, Philaster; these at various times wove together accounts of various heresies.\n\nThe first heresy took its beginning from Simon, who said that chastity did not pertain to God, that God did not make the world, and things similar to these. He was so publicly overcome by the blessed and holy apostle Peter that, falling before his feet, he could not rise up at all.\n\nII.\n\nThe second heresy was that of the Menandrianists, from Menander, who testify that the world was made not by God but by angels. The holy Linus, bishop, the second after the apostle Peter, cast these out from the fellowship of our conversation and punished them with eternal damnation, teaching reasonably, according to the holy Scriptures of the Old Testament, that God who spoke with Moses is the creator of all things, and that there is nothing in all created things that can be blameworthy by its own nature. For all things that are judged culpable are blamed for their act, not for their condition.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"III.\n\nTertia hæresis a Basilide Basilidianorum. Hi Irecentos sexaginta et quinque coelos esse dicentes, contra Moysem suscipiunt, et Deum horum coelorum Abrasu commemorant. Quod nomen * Græca ratio litterarum in hanc summam supputando pertingit. ABPAIAS, id est, A, unum, et B, duo, et P, centum, et A, unum, et 2, ducenta, et A, unum, et, sexaginta, fiunt in summa 565. Hos Ecclesia ut energumenos computans, non altercando, sed projiciendo damuavit.\n\nIV.\n\nQuarta Nicolaitarum a Nicolao hæresis est adinventa, qui unus ex septem diaconibus ab apostolis ordiualus est. Iste cum de zelo pulcherrimæ conjugis culparetur, docere coepit indifferenter debere uti conjugibus, non solum laicis, sed etiarn his qui sacerdotii fungerentur officio. Hos damnavit sanctus Joannes apostolus et evangelista, et jussit ut quicunque cum eis vel sermonemcolloquii miscuissent, ex hoc ipso communione privarentur: docens rationabiliter a mundi ori0ine Deo castitatem plurimum placuisse; nunc autem etiam in seipso Christum Dei Filium castitatis gloriam dedicasse, cum virginem possidens matrem, virgo mansurus, nullum discipulorum suorum commixtioneru etiam legitimi conjugii uti permisit, dicens: Si quis vult venire post me, nbneget seipsum sibi, et tollat crucem suam, et sequatur me (Matth. XVI, 24).","english":"III.\n\nThe third heresy is that of the Basilidians, from Basilides. These, saying that there are three hundred and sixty-five heavens, set themselves against Moses, and call the god of these heavens Abrasax. For the reckoning of the Greek letters, when calculated, reaches this total. ABRASAX, that is, A, one, and B, two, and R, a hundred, and A, one, and S, two hundred, and A, one, and X, sixty, make in sum 565. The Church, counting these men as possessed, condemned them not by arguing but by casting them out.\n\nIV.\n\nThe fourth heresy, that of the Nicolaitans, was devised by Nicolaus, who was ordained one of the seven deacons by the apostles. When this man was reproached for jealousy over a most beautiful wife, he began to teach that wives ought to be used indifferently, not only by laymen but also by those who performed the office of the priesthood. The holy John, apostle and evangelist, condemned these men, and ordered that whoever had mingled even a word of conversation with them should for that very reason be deprived of communion; teaching reasonably that from the beginning of the world chastity was most pleasing to God; and that now Christ, the Son of God, had also dedicated in Himself the glory of chastity, since, having a virgin for His mother, He was to remain a virgin, and permitted none of His disciples to have intercourse even in lawful marriage, saying: If anyone wishes to come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me (Matthew 16:24).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"Quinta hæresis Saturninianorum est, a Saturnino. Hic docuit septem angelos mundum fecisse, quibus cordi fuit libidines inserere, ut dum sese concupiscit ex alterutro diversitas sexus, mundus a sui fine refrenatus possit esse perpetuus. Hos anathematizavit beatus Thomas Christi apostolus, docens rationabiliter mundum initium habuisse, et quia initium habuit, ad finem esse venturum. Angelos autem omnipotentiam habere non posse, et ideo mundum eos non potuisse constituere. Conditorem autem mundi unum esse Deum, quem Moyses prædicavit fecisse coelum et terram, et mare et omnia quæ in eis sunt.\n\nVI.\n\nSexta hæresis Gnosticorum, qui Gnosticos. se appellare voluerunt, quasi propter scientiam cxcellentem, cum miseriores superioribus esse, quos memoravimus, haberentur. Docet eos rationabiliter beatus Paulus apostolus non Deo servire, sed suo ventri et libidini, inflatos esse, et nihil scire, et ægrotare circa quæstiones et verborum pugnas.","english":"The fifth heresy is that of the Saturninians, from Saturninus. He taught that seven angels made the world, and that it was their concern to implant lusts, so that while the diversity of sex desires one another, the world, held back from its end, might be able to be perpetual. The blessed Thomas, apostle of Christ, anathematized these, teaching reasonably that the world had a beginning, and because it had a beginning, it would come to an end. But the angels could not have omnipotence, and therefore they could not have established the world. But the creator of the world is the one God, whom Moses proclaimed to have made heaven and earth, and the sea and all things that are in them.\n\nVI.\n\nThe sixth heresy is that of the Gnostics, who wished to call themselves Gnostics, as if on account of excellent knowledge, although they were held to be more wretched than the earlier ones whom we have mentioned. The blessed apostle Paul teaches them reasonably that they do not serve God but their own belly and lust, that they are puffed up, and know nothing, and are sick concerning questions and word-battles.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":4,"ref":"p4","source":"VII.\n\nCarpocratianorum septima est hæresis, a Carpocrate inventa, qui docebat potestates tenebrarum transire non posse, nisi solos eos qui omni sc turpitudini miscuissent. Hi Dominum nostrum Jesum de utroque sexu genitum asserebant, sed talem animam accepisse quæ snperna cœlorum sciret. Resurrectionem corporis denegantes, prophetas Testamenti. veteris condemnabant. Habebant autem Mar. cellinam quamdam, quæ imagines Jesu et Pauli et Pythagorae philosophi ponebat in medio populi quem decipiebat, et iaciebat eos his imaginibus honorem Deitatis exhibere et incensum ponere. Hos damnavit apud Cyprum beatus Barnabas Christi discipulus, docens eos ministros esse Satanæ, et non debere constituit Christianum penitus cum bis habere sermonem.\n\nVIII.\n\nOctava hæresis Cerinthianorum, a Cerintho. Dicebant mundum ab angelis factum, carne circumcidi debere, veteris Testamenti secundum litteram debere præcepta servari. Jesum hominem tantummodo fuisse, non resurrexisse, sed adhuc resurrecturum esse memorabant. Hos in Galatia æterno anathemate beatus apostolus Paulus condemnavit. Hos denique tangit in sua Epistola quam ad Galatas misit.","english":"VII.\n\nThe seventh heresy is that of the Carpocratians, invented by Carpocrates, who taught that the powers of darkness cannot be passed through except by those alone who had mingled in every kind of shameful filth. These asserted that our Lord Jesus was born of both sexes, but received such a soul as knew the things above the heavens. Denying the resurrection of the body, they condemned the prophets of the Old Testament. They had moreover a certain Marcellina, who set up images of Jesus and Paul and of Pythagoras the philosopher in the midst of the people whom she deceived, and caused them to pay the honor of divinity to these images and to place incense before them. Blessed Barnabas, disciple of Christ, condemned these in Cyprus, teaching that they were ministers of Satan, and that a Christian ought not to have any conversation at all with them.\n\nVIII.\n\nThe eighth heresy is that of the Cerinthians, from Cerinthus. They said that the world was made by angels, that one ought to be circumcised in the flesh, and that the precepts of the Old Testament ought to be observed according to the letter. They declared that Jesus was only a man, that he had not risen, but would yet rise. These the blessed apostle Paul condemned in Galatia with an eternal anathema. These, finally, he touches in his Epistle which he sent to the Galatians.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":5,"ref":"p5","source":"e IX.\n\nNona haeresis Nazarenorum. Filium quidem Dei contitentur, omnem autem ritum veteris Testamenti Judaico more conservant. Hos docuit bealus apostolus Paulus debere spiritaliter Scripturas advertere; et hos in Ecclesiis Galalia deprehendit, atque non consentientes doctrinæ suæ anathemati esse constituit.\n\nDecima hæresis Ebionei. nominem solum fuisse Dominum Jesum Christum asserunt, et legis mandata more Judaico custodienda constituunt. Hos Lucas evangelista apud Antiochenam ecclesiam inveniens condemnavit, docens angelum dixisse ad Mariam: Spiritus sanctus superveniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit te. ldeo et id quod ex te nascetur sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei (Luc. i, 35).\n\nXI.\n\nUndecima hæresis Valentinianorum, a Valentino. Hi per Orientem dispersi graviter Dei Ecclesiam vulnerarunt, dicentes profundum et altum secum commixta. Ex quibus duobus, velut ex conjugio, mundum processisse: altum dicentes Patrem, profundum Filium, eumque nibil assumpsisse de Maria virgine; sed illum, tanquam aquam per rivum aut fistulam, sine ulla carnis assumptione transisse. Carnis autem resurrectionem omnimodis denegantes.","english":"IX.\n\nThe ninth heresy is that of the Nazarenes. They indeed confess the Son of God, but they observe every rite of the Old Testament in the Jewish manner. The blessed apostle Paul taught them that they ought to attend to the Scriptures spiritually; and he caught them in the churches of Galatia, and established that those who did not consent to his doctrine were anathema.\n\nThe tenth heresy is that of the Ebionites. They assert that the Lord Jesus Christ was a mere man only, and they establish that the commandments of the law are to be kept in the Jewish manner. Luke the evangelist, finding them at the church of Antioch, condemned them, teaching that the angel had said to Mary: The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee. Therefore also the holy thing that shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God (Luke 1:35).\n\nXI.\n\nThe eleventh heresy is that of the Valentinians, from Valentinus. These, scattered throughout the East, grievously wounded the Church of God, saying that the Depth and the Height were mingled together. From these two, as from a marriage, they say the world proceeded: calling the Height the Father, and the Depth the Son, and that he took nothing from the virgin Mary; but that he passed, like water through a channel or a pipe, without any assumption of flesh. But the resurrection of the flesh they deny in every way.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":6,"ref":"p6","source":"Hos anathematizavit healus Zacchæus Cæsariensis episcopus, docens Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, Deum verum verumque hominem, per virginea secreta transisse, ex semine David secundum carnem, sed hominem a vere natum, vere passum, vere mortuum, vere resurrexisse a mortuis, et vere ascendisse in cœlis.\n\nXII.\n\nDuodecima hæresis Secundianorum. Hoc solum a Valentinianis distant, quia addunt huic secte etiam turpitudinem corporis, quam quasi illi pseudocasti declinare se simulant. Hos damnavit Diodorus episcopus Cretensis.\n\nXIII.\n\nTertia decima haresis « Ptolemeitæ, a Ptolemæo Valentini discipulo, qui hanc eamdem hæresim acrius disputando dispersit; qui eodcm tempore a sancto Zacchaeo supra memorato episcopo Cæsariensi damnatus est. Hæresim tamen pessimam per multa spatia Orientis dispersit.\n\nXIV.\n\nQuarta decima hæresis a Marco quodam est adinventa: qui negans resurrectionem carnis, Christum non vere passum, sed putative conabatur astruere.","english":"The blessed Zacchaeus, bishop of Caesarea, anathematized them, teaching that our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and true man, passed through the virginal secret places, from the seed of David according to the flesh, but was truly born a man, truly suffered, truly died, truly rose again from the dead, and truly ascended into heaven.\n\nXII.\n\nThe twelfth heresy is that of the Secundians. They differ from the Valentinians only in this, that they add to this sect even bodily shamefulness, which those false-chaste ones pretend to avoid. Diodorus, bishop of Crete, condemned them.\n\nXIII.\n\nThe thirteenth heresy is that of the Ptolemaeans, from Ptolemaeus, a disciple of Valentinus, who scattered this same heresy by disputing more sharply; he was condemned at the same time by the holy Zacchaeus, bishop of Caesarea, mentioned above. Yet he scattered this most wicked heresy through many regions of the East.\n\nXIV.\n\nThe fourteenth heresy was devised by a certain Marcus, who, denying the resurrection of the flesh, tried to assert that Christ did not truly suffer, but only in appearance.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":7,"ref":"p7","source":"Hunc sanctus Clemens, episcopus Romanus et Christi dignissimus martyr, fixis et integris assertionibus confulans, et coram omni plebe in ecclesia detegens, æterna damnatione puniv.t: docens vere natum et passum Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, nihil ab eo in phantasia factum commemorans, et evidenter ostendens quod veritas inimica falsitatis falsum in se nihil habere potuerit: sicut nec lux in se tenebras habere potest, nec benedictio maledictionem, nec dulcedo amaritudinem; et si ista commisceri possent, Deum tamen docuit mendacio impossibile esse misceri.\n\nXV.\n\nQuinta decima hæresis Colorbasiana a e Colorbasio adinventa. Vitam omnem hominum in septem slellis esse positam, ct has septem Ecclesias, et seplem candelabra aurea conabatur astruere. Hunc sanctus Theodotus de Pergamo episcopus, habita synodo septem episcoporum, anathematizavit: docens septem Ecclesias in septiformi spiritu consecratas. Una forma est, inquit, cum in forma quam primus homo amiserat, revocatur. Secunda, cum immaculatus qui erat peccator efficitur. Tertia, cum ex terra corpus mortuum suscitabitur. Quarta, cum anima de inferni claustris eruitur. Quinta, quod anima paradisi habitatione lactalur, quousque corpus suum incorruptibile recipiat. Sexta quod lilios Deo facit qui cranl filii Adae. Septima, quod facit hominem regni coelorum esse participem.","english":"The holy Clement, bishop of Rome and most worthy martyr of Christ, confuting him with fixed and sound assertions and exposing him before all the people in the church, punished him with eternal damnation, teaching that our Lord Jesus Christ was truly born and truly suffered, recalling nothing that was done by him in mere appearance, and clearly showing that truth, the enemy of falsehood, could have nothing false in itself: just as neither can light have darkness in itself, nor blessing cursing, nor sweetness bitterness; and even if these things could be mingled, he taught that it is impossible for God to be mingled with a lie.\n\nXV.\n\nThe fifteenth heresy is the Colorbasian, invented by Colorbasius. He attempted to establish that the whole life of men is placed in the seven stars, and that these are the seven Churches, and the seven golden lampstands. The holy Theodotus, bishop of Pergamum, having held a synod of seven bishops, anathematized him, teaching that the seven Churches are consecrated in the sevenfold Spirit. One form, he says, is when man is recalled into the form that the first man had lost. The second, when the one who was a sinner is made immaculate. The third, when the dead body is raised from the earth. The fourth, when the soul is drawn out from the confines of hell. The fifth, that the soul is nourished by the dwelling of paradise, until it receives its incorruptible body. The sixth, that he makes sons of God of those who were sons of Adam. The seventh, that he makes man a partaker of the kingdom of heaven.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":8,"ref":"p8","source":"Has esse sancti Spiritus formas in septem ecclesiis, in septem oculis et in septem candelabris aureis collocatas.\n\nXVI.\n\nSexta decima haeresis Heracleonitarum ab Heradeone adinventa est; quae baptizatum hominem, sive justum, sive peccatorem, loco sancti computari docebat: nihilque obesse baptizatis peccata memorabat, dicens, sicut non in se recipit natura ignis gelu, ita baptizatus non in se recipit peccatum. Sicut enim ignis resolvit aspectu suo nives, quantæcunque juxta sint, sic semel baptizatus non recipit peccatorum reatum, etiam quantavis fuerint operibus ejus peccata permixta. Hic in partibus Siciliæ inchoavit docere. Contra hunc susceperunt episcopi Siculorum, « Eustacbius Lilybæorum et Panormeorum Theodorus. Quique omnium qui per Siciliam erant episcoporum synodum exorantes, gestis eum audire decreverunt, et universas assertiones ejus dirigentes ad sanctum Alexandrum Urbis episcopum, rogaverunt ut ad cum confutandum aliquid ordinaret. Tunc sanctus Alexander, ad singula quaeque capita hydri singulos gladios Dei Verbi de vagina divinæ legis ejiciens, librum contra Heracleonem ordinans, ferventissimum ingenio Sabinianum presbyterum destinavit; qui et scriptis i episcopi, et assertione sua ita eum confutaret, ut nocte media navis præsidio fugeret et ultra ubinam devenisset penitus nullus sciret.","english":"These are the forms of the Holy Spirit placed in the seven churches, in the seven eyes, and in the seven golden lampstands.\n\nXVI.\n\nThe sixteenth heresy, that of the Heracleonites, was devised by Heracleon; it taught that a baptized man, whether righteous or a sinner, is reckoned in the place of a saint, and it declared that sins do no harm to the baptized, saying: just as the nature of fire does not receive frost into itself, so the baptized person does not receive sin into himself. For just as fire by its look melts away the snows, however near they may be, so one who has been baptized once does not receive the guilt of sins, however many sins may be mingled with his works. This man began to teach in the regions of Sicily. Against him the bishops of the Sicilians took up the cause, Eustachius of Lilybaeum and Theodore of Panormus. And these, having entreated a synod of all the bishops who were throughout Sicily, decreed to hear him by official acts, and directing all his assertions to the holy Alexander, bishop of the City, they asked that he ordain something for confuting him. Then the holy Alexander, drawing forth against each several head of the hydra a single sword of the Word of God from the sheath of the divine law, arranged a book against Heracleon and sent the presbyter Sabinian, most fervent in intellect; and he, both by the writings of the bishop and by his own assertion, so confuted him that at midnight he fled under the protection of a ship, and no one at all knew whither he had gone.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":9,"ref":"p9","source":"XVII.\n\nSeptima decima hæresis Ophitarum. Hi a colubro nominati sunt. Coluber enim, Græce ophis dicitur. Habent ergo colubrum assuetum eorum panes lingua lambere, atque ita ex se velut Eucharistiam sanctificare. Quem colubrum suum Christum appellant. Contra hos susceperunt Bithyniæ provinciæ sacerdotes, id est civitatis Chalcedoniæ et Nicomediæ episcopi Theocritus et Evander, et confutantes eos publice superarunt, atque superventum facientes eis per collegia eorum, in Bithyniæ, ut dixi, partibus per possessiones clanculo ubi hæc ipsa perpetrabant, et sacerdotes eorum eliminarunt, et serpentes eorum occiderunt, ac rationem reddentes omni populo, maximam partem plebis ab hoc periculo liberarunt.\n\nXVIII.\n\nOctava decima haeresis, i Cainiani. Propterea sic appellati sunt, quoniam Cain honoranl, dicentes cum tortissimæ esse virtutis. Simul et Judam traditorem divinumaliquid putant esse, et scelus ejus beneficium deputant, asserentes eum præscisse quantum esset geueri humano Christi passio profutura, et occidendum Judæis propterea tradidisse. nos ortos esse a Mesopotamiani Ecclesiarum Syriae sacerdotes ad c;eteros suos coepiscopos conscripserunt.","english":"XVII.\n\nThe seventeenth heresy is that of the Ophites. They are named from the snake, for the snake is called ophis in Greek. They therefore keep a snake accustomed to lick their bread with its tongue, and so, as it were, to sanctify the Eucharist from itself. This snake of theirs they call Christ. Against them the priests of the province of Bithynia, that is, Theocritus and Evander, bishops of the cities of Chalcedon and Nicomedia, took up the cause, and confuting them publicly they overcame them, and making a surprise attack upon them through their assemblies, in the parts of Bithynia, as I said, secretly through their estates where they were perpetrating these very things, they both drove out their priests and killed their snakes, and giving an account to all the people, they freed the greatest part of the common folk from this danger.\n\nXVIII.\n\nThe eighteenth heresy is that of the Cainites. They are called this for the reason that they honor Cain, saying that he was of the most twisted virtue. At the same time they think that Judas the traitor was something divine, and they reckon his crime a benefit, asserting that he foreknew how much the passion of Christ would profit the human race, and that for this reason he handed him over to the Jews to be killed. That we have arisen from the priests of the Churches of Syria, the Mesopotamians wrote to the rest of their fellow bishops.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":10,"ref":"p10","source":"Quos triginta et duo episcopi apud Antiochiam residentes, cum ejusdem urbis episcopo Tbeodoro, in praesenti confutatos damnarunt, dicentes eis illud quod sanctus Spiritus locutus est per prophetam: Væ his qui dicunt de bono malum, et de malo bonum; qui ponunt tenebras lucem, et pro luce tenebras (Isa. v. 20). Constat ergo vos a vobis ipsis esse damnatos, qui eos vultis magnos et justos ascribi, quos pro facti sui qualitate Deus perpetuæ gehennæ incendio destinavit.\n\nXIX.\n\nNona decima hæresis Selhianorum. Hi nomen acceperunt a filio Adx qui vocatus est Seth; de superna matre eum natum esse jactantes, quam convenisse dicunt cum superno patre, unde divinum semen aliud nasceretur, ex quo semine sibi Deus justos cligeret, et suos filios appellaret. Hi orti sunt in partibus Achaiæ. Contra quos suscepit sanctus Perigenes Argus civitatis antistes, ostendens eis, de uno sancto vero et justo Isaac duos natos geminos, uno pariter utero editos: unum ad superiora divinæ gratiæ penetrasse, alium ad inferiora inferi devenisse. Unum itaque e duo-bus, inquit, aut naturæ malæ sunt filii, et ambo pro id quod sunt nati damnandi sunt; aut naturæ bonæ sunt, et pro facti sui qualitate, juste alium benediclio coronavit, alium maledictio condemnavit.","english":"These thirty-two bishops residing at Antioch, together with Theodore, bishop of that same city, refuted and condemned them in person, saying to them what the Holy Spirit spoke through the prophet: Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness (Isa. 5:20). It is evident, therefore, that you have been condemned by yourselves, you who wish those to be reckoned great and just whom God, according to the quality of their deed, has destined for the fire of eternal Gehenna.\n\nXIX.\n\nThe nineteenth heresy is that of the Sethians. These took their name from the son of Adam who was called Seth, boasting that he was born of a heavenly mother, whom they say came together with the heavenly father, so that another divine seed might be born, from which seed God would choose the just for himself and call them his sons. These arose in the regions of Achaia. Against them Saint Perigenes, bishop of the city of Argos, took up the case, showing them that from the one holy, true, and just Isaac two twin sons were born, brought forth from one womb together: one penetrated to the higher things of divine grace, the other descended to the lower things of the underworld. Therefore, he said, one of two things follows: either they are sons of an evil nature, and both must be condemned for what they were born as; or they are of a good nature, and, according to the quality of their deed, blessing justly crowned the one and cursing condemned the other.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":11,"ref":"p11","source":"Hæc et his similia asserente sancto Perigene, aliquanti credentes conversi suut ab errore hoc pessimo: non credentes autem, nec convertentes, gladio sunt anathematis amputati.\n\nXX.\n\nHxresis vicesima apud Cretam Archonticorum a principibus nomen accepit. Principes enim se colere jactant, quos dicunt condidisse hunc mundum. Hos sanctus Dioscorus Cretensis episcopus condemnavit, docens unum et verum Deum in partes substantiales penitus dividi omnino non posse: hunc esse Deum, qui se et prophetis ostendit, et in se credentes ab omnibus periculis liberavit, sicut Noe, sicut Abrabam, Isaac, Jacob, filiosque Israel, Jonam, Susannam, tres pueros; et innumerabilia erga credentes in se quæ ostendit Deus signa virtutum, quibus se solum Deum ostenderet. Acquiescentes veritati recepit, dissentientes vero æterna abominationc punivit.\n\nXXI.\n\nPrima et vicesima hæresis a Marcione orta est. Duo principia fuisse confirmat, boni et mali. Quem Eriphanius tria dicehat principia docuisse, boni, justi et pravi; sed Eusebius Syrinum quemdam, no!! Marcionem, trium principiorum atque naturarum scribit auctorem. e Marcionitæ, cum universalem OrienLis Ecclesiam macularent, ab Origene superati, confutati, et per singulas sunt civitates damnati.","english":"As holy Perigenes asserted these things and others like them, some who believed were converted from this most wicked error; those who did not believe, nor convert, were cut off by the sword of anathema.\n\nXX.\n\nThe twentieth heresy received its name from its leaders in Crete, the Archontics. For they boast that they worship the rulers, whom they say created this world. Holy Dioscorus, bishop of Crete, condemned them, teaching that the one and true God cannot at all be divided into substantial parts: that this is the God who showed himself both to the prophets and delivered those who believe in him from all dangers, as Noah, as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the sons of Israel, Jonah, Susanna, the three youths; and countless signs of powers which God showed toward those who believe in him, by which he showed himself to be the only God. Those who acquiesced to the truth he received, but those who dissented he punished with eternal abomination.\n\nXXI.\n\nThe twenty-first heresy arose from Marcion. He affirms that there were two principles, of good and of evil. Epiphanius said that he taught three principles: of good, of just, and of evil; but Eusebius writes that a certain Syrinus, not Marcion, was the author of three principles and natures. And the Marcionites, when they were staining the universal Church of the East, were overcome by Origen, refuted, and condemned throughout individual cities.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":12,"ref":"p12","source":"Item post aliquantos annos, jam devicti atque delecti, in Africanis partibus pullulabant, quos Tertullianus modis omnibus ita obtinuit, ut ipsos faceret contra sectam suam publice prædicare.\n\nXXII.\n\nVicesima secunda hæresis Apellitarum cst, quorum est princeps Apelles, qui duos quidem introducit deos, sed unum fatetur principium, hoc est, ab ipso uno principio allerum factum est. Quod cum malignum esset inventum, a bono ahjectum est; abjectum vero a bono principio hoc principium, quod malignabatur contra boni principii voluntatem, in sua malignitate mundum fecit. Inde est quod ad malum nos promptiores quam ad bonum natura consequitur, et plus in vitiis, inquit, quam in virtutibus delectatur. Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum asserunt carnem ex elementis suscepisse, quam aeri reddidit dum ascenderet, et sine ea intravit in cælum. Hos Origenes ita perfecte superavit, ut eorum causa periodeules fieret, et per singulas quasque urbes per Orientem eundo prædicaret. Et quia innumerabilia sunt tractatorum ejus volumina, hæretici superati libros ad suos libitus callidissima argumentatione mutarunt, ut quos vellent decipere, dicerent ita Origenem suis expositionibus definisse. Unde quicunque usque hodie Origenem legit, si prudenti eum novit recitatione distingucre, deprehendit loca ab hæreticis maculata; quod ita esse sanctus Pamphilus marty in suo Apologetico declaravit.","english":"Likewise after some years, already conquered and cast down, they were sprouting up in the regions of Africa, whom Tertullian so overcame by every means that he made them publicly preach against their own sect.\n\nXXII.\n\nThe twenty-second heresy is that of the Apellites, whose leader is Apelles, who indeed introduces two gods, but acknowledges one principle, that is, that the other was made by that one principle itself. Since this was found to be evil, it was cast away by the good; but cast away by the good principle, this principle, which was acting evilly against the will of the good principle, made the world in its own malice. Hence it follows by nature that we are more prone to evil than to good, and, he says, it delights more in vices than in virtues. They assert that our Lord Jesus Christ took flesh from the elements, which he returned to the air when he ascended, and without it entered into heaven. Origen so perfectly overcame these that for their sake he became a period-deacon, and going through the East preached in each and every city. And because the volumes of his treatises are innumerable, the heretics, having been overcome, changed his books according to their own whims by the most cunning argumentation, so that those whom they wished to deceive, they would say Origen had so defined in his expositions. Hence whoever reads Origen even to this day, if he knows how to distinguish him by prudent recitation, detects the places corrupted by the heretics; that this is so, the holy martyr Pamphilus declared in his Apologeticus.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":13,"ref":"p13","source":"XXIII.\n\nVicesima tertia haeresis Cerdonianorum a Cerdone cepit exordium, qui duo principia sibi adversantia dogmatizavit, Deumque legis ac prophetarum non esse patrem Christi, nec bonum esse Deum, sed justum, patrem vero Christi bonum; Christumque ipsum nec natum ex femina, neque habuisse carnem, nec vere mortuum vel quidquam passum, sed simulasse passionem. Contra hunc suscepit sanctus Apollonius episcopus Corinthiorum, eumque omni cum synodo Orientali damnavit, reddens rationem hunc esse Deum patrem Domini nostri Jesu Christi, de quo Moyses in capite libri sui dicit: In principio fecit Deus cœlum ac terram (Gen. I, 1). Omnes veteris Testamenti irreprehensibiles secundum Apostolum approbavit, dicens: Quis æcusabit adversus electos Dei? Deus qui justificat; quis est qui condemnet (Rom. VIII, 55)? Hæc autem et his similia hac de causa condemnatis hæreticis, rationabili sermone videbantur satisfacere sacerdotes, sive ut a I rrecipitio revocarent, sive ut se ostenderent sectas damnare, non homines; homines autem seipsos damnare, qui damnatas sectas amplectentes a veritate discedunt.","english":"XXIII.\n\nThe twenty-third heresy, that of the Cerdonians, took its beginning from Cerdo, who taught as dogma two principles opposed to each other, and that the God of the law and the prophets was not the father of Christ, and that God was not good but just, while the father of Christ was good; and that Christ himself was neither born of a woman, nor had flesh, nor truly died or suffered anything, but feigned his passion. Against him Saint Apollonius, bishop of the Corinthians, took up the cause, and condemned him together with the whole Eastern synod, giving the reason that this is the God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom Moses says at the beginning of his book: In the beginning God made heaven and earth (Gen. 1:1). He approved all the blameless men of the Old Testament according to the Apostle, saying: Who shall accuse against the elect of God? God who justifies; who is there who condemns (Rom. 8:33-34)? But when heretics had been condemned for this reason, these things and others like them seemed to satisfy the priests by reasonable discourse, whether to recall them from their error, or to show that they condemned the sects, not the men; but the men condemned themselves, who, embracing condemned sects, depart from the truth.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":14,"ref":"p14","source":"XXIV.\n\nVicesima et quarta est hæresis Severianorum, qui sunt a a Severo exorti. Yinum non bibunt, eo quod fabulosa vanitate de semine Satanae terram germinasse asserunt vitem. Carnis quoque resurrectionem cum veteri respuunt Testamento. Hos damnavit S. Euphranon episcopus Hhodius; apud Rhodum enim horum superstitio orta est. Quos convicit Scripturarum ratione sanctarum, in quibus legitur Deus educere de terra panem ad confirmandum cor hominis, et vinum ad lætificandum (Psal. CIII, 15, 16). Vini autem non usus necessarius, sed nimietas inimica saluti culpanda est. Carnis vero resurrectionem ab illo promissam esse qui in præsenti mortuos suscitabat; qui si mentitus fuisset, mortuos utique suscitare non potuisset. Sanclos esse apices Testamenli veteris, sicut fundamenta domus, præclare docuit dicens: Fundamenta domus circa jualida loca sunt posita, ut ea quæ sunt superius nullam contumeliam stercorum patiantur. Superiora ergo domus laquearibus auratis, parietibus pictis, et vario marmorum metallo sunt edita. Inferiora vero, humori terreno vicina, digesta etiam superiorum universa suscipiunt. Quid ergo nunc faciemus? si auferimus inferiora, superiora corruunt. Tamen si destruenda erant inferiora, non hoc alius poterat nisi Dei Filius facere. Videamus ergo utrumnam ipSe destruxerit hoc quod nos dicimus permanere: Putatis, inquit, quia veni legem destruere, aut prophetas?","english":"XXIV.\n\nThe twenty-fourth heresy is that of the Severians, who sprang from Severus. They do not drink wine, because they assert, with fabulous vanity, that the vine sprouted from the earth from the seed of Satan. They also reject the resurrection of the flesh, along with the Old Testament. Saint Euphranon, bishop of Rhodes, condemned them; for their superstition arose at Rhodes. He refuted them by the reasoning of the holy Scriptures, in which it is read that God brings bread out of the earth to strengthen the heart of man, and wine to make him glad (Ps. 103:15, 16). But the non-use of wine is not necessary; rather, the excess of it is to be blamed as hostile to salvation. But the resurrection of the flesh was promised by him who in the present raised the dead; for if he had lied, he could certainly not have raised the dead. That the letters of the Old Testament are holy, like the foundations of a house, he taught excellently, saying: The foundations of a house are placed around weak places, so that the parts which are above may suffer no insult from filth. Therefore the upper parts of the house are raised up with gilded panels, painted walls, and varied metal of marbles. But the lower parts, near the earthly moisture, having been arranged, also receive all the things of the upper parts. What then shall we do now? If we take away the lower parts, the upper parts collapse. Yet if the lower parts were to be destroyed, no one else could do this except the Son of God. Let us see, therefore, whether he himself destroyed this which we say remains: Do you think, he says, that I came to destroy the law or the prophets?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":15,"ref":"p15","source":"Non veni legem solvere, sed adimplere (Matth. v, 17). Hæc et his similia dicens sancLus Euphranon epispopus, multos convertit; in errore vero perseverantes perpetua sanctione a communione privavit.\n\nXXV.\n\nVicesima et quinta hxresis est Tatianorum, a Tatiano quodam instituta, qui et Encratitae appellati sunt. Hi nuptias damnant, atque omnino pares eas fornicationibus aliisque corruptionibus faciunt, nec recipiunt in suo numero conjugio utentem, marem vel fcminam. Non vescuntur carnibus, easque omnino abominantur. Contra hos suscepit sanctus EpiphaDius Ancyrae Galatiae episcopus, objiciens eis Pauli apostoli epistolam ad Timotheum primam, eo quod habeant cauteriatam conscientiam, prohibentes nubere, et abstinere docentes a cibis quos Deus creavit ad percipiendum cum gratiarum actione, fidelibus et his qui cognoverunt veritatem: quia omnis creatura Dei bona est, et nihil abjiciendum quod cum gratiarum actione percipitur; sanctificatur enim per verbum Dei et orationem (I Tim. IV, i - 5). Abstinentes autem nostros catholicos idcirco laudamus, quia quando non accipiunt cibos, quasi qui dicant malum esse accipere, sed bonum dicunt et optimum, quod se asserunt esse ad percipiendum indignos. Sic fit ut et illud statutum Apostoli conservetur, quod ait: Non manducans manducantem non judicet, et manducans non manducantem non spernat (Rom. XIV, 3).","english":"I have not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it (Matt. 5:17). Saying these things and others like them, the holy bishop Euphranon converted many; but those who persisted in error he deprived of communion by perpetual sanction.\n\nXXV.\n\nThe twenty-fifth heresy is that of the Tatians, instituted by a certain Tatian, who are also called Encratites. These condemn marriage, and altogether make it equal to fornications and other corruptions, nor do they receive into their number anyone who uses marriage, male or female. They do not eat meat, and altogether abominate it. Against these, the holy Epiphanius, bishop of Ancyra in Galatia, took up the cause, objecting to them the first epistle of the apostle Paul to Timothy, because they have a cauterized conscience, forbidding to marry, and teaching to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful and by those who have known the truth: because every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected which is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified through the word of God and prayer (1 Tim. 4:1-5). But we praise our catholic abstainers for this reason, that when they do not receive foods, it is not as if they were saying it is evil to receive them, but they call it good and most excellent, which they assert themselves to be unworthy to receive. Thus it comes about that that decree of the Apostle is also preserved, which says: Let not the one who does not eat judge the one who eats, and let not the one who eats despise the one who does not eat (Rom. 14:3).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":16,"ref":"p16","source":"Non enim creaturam accusat, sed se esse talem pronuntiat, e quo se dicat hujus epulis relici non mereri.\n\nXXVI.\n\nVicesima et sexta haeresis Cataphryges orti sunt, qui hoc nomen a provincia, non a dogmate assumpserunt; quorum auctores fuerunt Montanus, Prisca et Maximilla. Hi Utaque adventum Spiritus sancti a Domino promissum in se polius quam in apostolis fuisse asserunt redditum. Secundas nuptias pro fornicationibus habent, et ideo dicunt eas permisisse apostolum Paulum, quia ex parte sciebat, et ex parte prophetabat. Nondum enim venerat quod perfectum est. Hoc autem perfectum in Montanum et in ejus propbetissas quas supra diximus, venisse delirant. Hactenus dixerim de Cataphrygis. Cætera quæ dicuntur quasi incerta praetereo. De infantis sanguine eos accipere, quod ideo dicimus, ne videamur ignorare omnia quæ de eis dicuntur: hi enim qui contra eos scripserunt nibil hinc penitus memorarunt. Scripsit contra eos libruni sanctus Soter papa Urbis, et Apollonius Ephesiorum antistes. Contra quos scripsit Tertullianus presbyter Carthaginiensis. Qui cum omnia bene et prime et incomparabiliter scripserit, in hoc solum se reprebensibilem fecit, quod Monlanum defendit, agens contra Soterem supra dictum Urbis papam, asserens falsa esse de sanguine infantis, Trinitatem in unitate Deilatis, pœnitentiam lapsis, mysteriis eisdem unum pascha nobiscum.","english":"For he does not accuse the creature, but declares himself to be such a one, from whom he says he does not deserve to be excluded from its feasts.\n\nXXVI.\n\nThe twenty-sixth heresy is that of the Cataphrygians, who took this name from a province, not from a doctrine; their authors were Montanus, Prisca, and Maximilla. These assert that the coming of the Holy Spirit promised by the Lord was given in themselves rather than in the apostles. They regard second marriages as fornication, and therefore they say that the apostle Paul permitted them because he knew in part and prophesied in part. For that which is perfect had not yet come. But they rave that this perfect thing came in Montanus and in his prophetesses whom we mentioned above. Thus far I have spoken of the Cataphrygians. The other things that are said, as being uncertain, I pass over. That they receive [it] from the blood of an infant—which we say for this reason, lest we seem to be ignorant of all the things that are said about them; for those who wrote against them made no mention of this at all. Saint Soter, pope of the City, wrote a book against them, and Apollonius, bishop of the Ephesians. Tertullian, presbyter of Carthage, wrote against them. Although he wrote all things well and excellently and incomparably, in this one respect he made himself reprehensible, that he defended Montanus, acting against Soter, the aforementioned pope of the City, asserting that the things about the blood of an infant were false, [and maintaining] the Trinity in the unity of the Godhead, penance for the lapsed, and, in the same mysteries, one Pascha with us.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":17,"ref":"p17","source":"Hoc solum discrepamus, inquit, quod secundas nuptias non recipimus, et prophetiam Montani de futuro judicio non recusamus. Objiciunt quidam Tertulliano, quod animam ex traduce, id est animam dixerit ita gigni ex anima, sicut ex corporibus corpus; quod catholica tides vehementer exsecratur.\n\nXXVII.\n\nVicesima septima hæresis Pepuzianorum, qui a loco quodam nominati sunt. Quam desertam civitatem dicit Epiphanius: hanc autem isti divinum aliquid esse arbitrantes, Hierusalem vocant. Tantum dantes mulieribus principatum, ut sacerdotio quoque apud eos honorentur. Dicunt enim duas ecclesias, Quintillæ et Priscillæ, in eadem civitate Pepuza. Unum sunt cum Cataphrygis. Contemptui autem eos habent, quod se isti Pepuziani caeteris aestiment meliores. Dicunt enim hanc Pepuzam villam fuisse Montani, Priscæ et Maximillx, et quia ibi coeperunt prædicare et ibi vixerunt, ideo locum appellarunt Hierusalem. Et quia habitatores loci sunt, ideo cæteris se esse meliores ascribunt. Hos Apollonius superavit Ephesiorum episcopus.","english":"We differ in this alone,\" he says, \"that we do not accept second marriages, and we do not reject the prophecy of Montanus concerning the future judgment.\" Some object to Tertullian that he said the soul is from the tradux, that is, that the soul is begotten from the soul just as the body is from bodies; which the catholic faith vehemently abhors.\n\nXXVII.\n\nThe twenty-seventh heresy is that of the Pepuzians, who are named from a certain place. Epiphanius calls this a deserted city; but these, thinking it to be something divine, call it Jerusalem. They give such preeminence to women that they are even honored with the priesthood among them. For they say there are two churches, of Quintilla and Priscilla, in the same city of Pepuza. They are one with the Cataphrygians. But the latter hold them in contempt, because these Pepuzians consider themselves better than the rest. For they say that this Pepuza was the village of Montanus, Prisca, and Maximilla, and because they began to preach there and lived there, therefore they called the place Jerusalem. And because they are inhabitants of the place, therefore they claim to be better than the rest. Apollonius, bishop of the Ephesians, overcame these.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":18,"ref":"p18","source":"XXVIII.\n\nVicesima octava hæresis Artotyritas suos vocat, quibus hoc nomen oblatio dedit. Offerunt enim panem et caseum, dicentes a primis hominibus oblationes Deo de fructibus terrae et ovium fuisse celebratas. Hos Pepuzianis jungit Epiphanius, contra quos nullus dignatus est nec loqui.\n\nXXIX.\n\nVicesima nona haeresis Tessarescædecatitæ dicuntor, eo quod quarta decima luna Pascha celebrant, quilibet septimanae occurrerit dies; et si dies Dominicus incurrerit, ipso die jejunant et vigilant. Hoc tantum a nobis discrepant, nihil aliud. Hos sanctus Joannes Constantinopolites episcopus tali ratione in multis civitatibus obtinuit. Abiit cum clero suo, et cum eis Pascha celebravit dicens: Sicut nos vobiscum celebravimus Pascha, venite et vos nobiscum suscipite; a quibus cum hoc impetravit, cœperunt unum sapere et nobiscum celebrare diem. Probaverunt enim totam fidei regulam sic nos sicut se tenere, sic illos sicut nos credere.","english":"XXVIII.\n\nThe twenty-eighth heresy calls its followers Artotyrites, to whom the offering gave this name. For they offer bread and cheese, saying that by the first men offerings to God were celebrated from the fruits of the earth and of sheep. Epiphanius joins these to the Pepuzians, against whom no one deigned even to speak.\n\nXXIX.\n\nThe twenty-ninth heresy is called Tessarescadecatitae, because they celebrate Pascha on the fourteenth moon, on whatever day of the week it falls; and if the Lord's day falls on it, they fast and keep vigil on that very day. In this alone do they differ from us, in nothing else. The holy John, bishop of Constantinople, won these over in many cities by such reasoning. He went with his clergy, and celebrated Pascha with them, saying: \"Just as we have celebrated Pascha with you, come and you also receive with us.\" When he obtained this from them, they began to be of one mind and to celebrate the day with us. For they approved that we hold the whole rule of faith just as they do, and that they believe just as we do.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":19,"ref":"p19","source":"XXX.\n\nTricesima haeresis Alogiorum. Propterea sic vocantur, quia Verbum Dei esse Filium accipere nolunt; in tantum ut Evangelium sancti Joannis dicant ipsiusnon esse; nec Apocalypsiin accipiunt ejusdem Joannis. Quid multa? a Omnia nobiscum sapiunt, Dei Verbum Dei Filium penitus quasi blasphemiam exsecrantur. Hos Philo episcopus sæpe superavit.\n\nXXXI.\n\nTricesima prima hxresis Adamianorum, qui ex Adam nomen acceperunt, cujus imitantur in paradiso nuditatem, qualis fuit ante peccatum. Unde et nuptias aversantur, quia nec prius quam dimissus esset de paradiso cognovit uxorem. Credunt ergo quod nuptiæ futuræ non fuissent, si nemo peccasset. Nudi itaque mares feminxque conveniunt, nudi lectiones audiunt, nudi orant, nudi celebrant sacramenta. Et ex hoc paradisum suam arbitrantur ecclesiam. Hos sanctus presbyter Polycarpus detexit, obtinuit, eliminavit.","english":"XXX. The thirtieth heresy is that of the Alogians. They are so called because they refuse to accept that the Word of God is the Son; to such an extent that they say the Gospel of Saint John is not his, and they do not accept the Apocalypse of the same John. What more? In all things they think with us, but they utterly detest the Word of God, the Son of God, as if it were blasphemy. Philo the bishop often overcame them.\n\nXXXI. The thirty-first heresy is that of the Adamians, who took their name from Adam, whose nakedness in paradise they imitate, such as it was before sin. Hence they also abhor marriage, because he did not know his wife before he was sent out of paradise. They believe, therefore, that there would have been no marriages if no one had sinned. And so men and women come together naked, hear readings naked, pray naked, celebrate the sacraments naked. And from this they consider their church to be paradise. The holy presbyter Polycarp exposed them, overcame them, and drove them out.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":20,"ref":"p20","source":"XXXII.\n\nTricesima et secunda haeresis Helceseorum. Hos quidam Helchi nomine pseudopropheta decepit; ex cujus genere duas mulieres tanquam deas ab eis perhibetur adoratas. Caetera Hebioneis similia tenere ab Epiphanio asseruntur. Hos Papias presbyter Achaiæ obtinuit.\n\nXXXIII.\n\nTricesimum et tertium locum hæresis tenent Theodotiani, a quodam Theodoto instituti, hominem tantummodo Christum Dei Filium asserentes: quod dicitur idem Theodotus propterea docuisse, quia in persecutione lapsus isto modo se casus sui devitare putabat opprobrium, si non Deum negasse, sed hominem videretur. Hos oblinuit Craton episcopus Syrorum.\n\nXXXIV.\n\nTricesimam quartam haeresem Melchisedechiani invenerunt. Melchisedech, sacerdotem Dei excelsi, non hominem fuisse, sed virtutem Dei esse arbitrantur, illum locum sequentes Apostoli ad Hebræos quo ait, sine patre, sine matre, sine genealogia (Hebr. VII, 3). His occurrit Dionysius Hierosolymorum episcopus, dicens hunc et patrem habuisse et matrem; et hoc ideo dixisse Apostolum, quia et genealogia ipsius, et materna pateruave prosapia, non haberetur in eo ordine in quo lex Hebræorum ascripta est, cum Deo utique placuerit generatio Hebræorum.","english":"XXXII.\n\nThe thirty-second heresy is that of the Helceseans. A certain false prophet by the name of Helchi deceived them; from his line, two women are said by them to have been adored as goddesses. In other respects they are asserted by Epiphanius to hold views similar to those of the Ebionites. Papias, a presbyter of Achaia, won them over.\n\nXXXIII.\n\nThe thirty-third place among the heresies is held by the Theodotians, founded by a certain Theodotus, who asserted that Christ the Son of God was merely a man; and it is said that this same Theodotus taught this for the following reason: having fallen in persecution, he thought that in this way he could avoid the disgrace of his fall, if he should not seem to have denied God, but a man. Crato, bishop of the Syrians, won them over.\n\nXXXIV.\n\nThe Melchisedechians devised the thirty-fourth heresy. They hold that Melchisedech, priest of the most high God, was not a man, but a power of God, following that passage of the Apostle to the Hebrews where he says, without father, without mother, without genealogy (Heb. 7:3). Dionysius, bishop of Jerusalem, opposed them, saying that this man had both a father and a mother; and that the Apostle said this for the reason that neither his genealogy nor his mother's and father's lineage was recorded in that order in which the law of the Hebrews was written down, since the generation of the Hebrews was certainly pleasing to God.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":21,"ref":"p21","source":"XXXV.\n\nTricesima quinta hæresis sunt Bardesanitæ, a quodam Bardesane perversi. Quid Bardesan dicitur perfectus fuisse catholicus, sed postea in id per Valentiui discipulum incurrisse, ut malam diceret carnis humanae creaturam, animae bonam. Hunc in Cappadocia damnavit Theocritus episcopus, docens Deum bonum utraque fecisse, utraque copulasse, et carnis humanae non naturam, sed prævaricationem esse culpandam.\n\nXXXVI.\n\nHæresis tricesima et sexta e Noetianorum est, qui dicunt Christum eumdem ipsum esse Patrem et Spiritum sanctum: non per substantiam, sicut nos, sed per personam, ut putative dicatur Spiritus sanctus, non veraciter. Hic damnatus est a Tranquillo episcopo Chalcedoniorum Syriae. Ostendit enim Pairem verum, Filium verum, Spiritum sanctum verum: unum quidem Deum per unam substantiam, sed tres per distinctionem personas credi debere confirmans.","english":"XXXV.\n\nThe thirty-fifth heresy is that of the Bardesanites, corrupted by a certain Bardesanes. This Bardesanes is said to have been a perfect catholic, but afterward fell into this error through a disciple of Valentinus, so as to say that the creation of human flesh is evil, but that of the soul good. Theocritus, a bishop, condemned him in Cappadocia, teaching that the good God made both, joined both together, and that it is not the nature of human flesh but its transgression that is to be blamed.\n\nXXXVI.\n\nThe thirty-sixth heresy is that of the Noetians, who say that Christ is the same as the Father and the Holy Spirit: not in substance, as we say, but in person, so that the Holy Spirit is called so supposedly, not truly. This man was condemned by Tranquillus, bishop of the Chalcedonians of Syria. For he showed the Father to be true, the Son true, the Holy Spirit true: confirming that one God is to be believed in through one substance, but three through the distinction of persons.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":22,"ref":"p22","source":"XXXVII.\n\nIn tricesimam et septimam hæresim Valesii incurrunt, qui infelices et seipsos castrant et hospites suos. Hoc modo dicunt illud impleri: Qui se castraverunt propter regnum caelorum (Matth. XIX, 12). Alia quoque haeretica docere dicuntur et turpia, sed quae illa sint nec ipse Epiphanius commemorat, nec uspiam potui reperire. Hi a synodo sunt damnati Achaiæ.\n\nXXXVIII.\n\nTricesima octava hæresis est Catharorum, qui scipsos isto nomine quasi propter munditiam superbissime appellarunt. Secundas nuptias non admittunt. Pœnitentiam denegant, Novatum sectantes hæreticum: unde etiam Novatiani appellantur. Contra hunc beatus Xystus martyr rt episcopus, et venerabilis Cyprianus martyr Christi, tunc Carthaginiensis pontifex, scripsit contra Novalum librum deLapsis, quod possint per pœnitentiam recuperare gratiam quam labendo perdiderant, quod Novatus asserebat fleri omnino non posse.","english":"XXXVII.\n\nInto the thirty-seventh heresy fall the Valesians, wretches who castrate both themselves and their guests. In this way they say that the saying is fulfilled: \"Those who have castrated themselves for the kingdom of heaven\" (Matthew 19:12). They are also said to teach other heretical and shameful things, but what these are not even Epiphanius himself records, nor have I been able to find them anywhere. These were condemned by the synod of Achaia.\n\nXXXVIII.\n\nThe thirty-eighth heresy is that of the Cathars, who most arrogantly called themselves by this name, as if on account of purity. They do not admit second marriages. They deny repentance, following the heretic Novatus; hence they are also called Novatians. Against him the blessed Xystus, martyr and bishop, and the venerable Cyprian, martyr of Christ, then pontiff of Carthage, wrote; against Novatus he wrote the book On the Lapsed, [showing] that through repentance they can recover the grace which they had lost by falling, which Novatus asserted could by no means be done.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":23,"ref":"p23","source":"XXXIX.\n\nTricesima et nona hæresis Angelicorum est. Hi Angelicos se vocari voluerunt. Dicunt enim angelos debere adorari et excoli animo, et ipsis preces effundi, ut ipsi quem sciunt posse plus a se, ipsi faciant votis hominum et petitionibus subvenire. Hos Epiphanius jam omnino defecisse testatur victos a Theophilo Apameo episcopo.\n\nXL.\n\nQuadragesimo loco apparuerunt Apostolici; qui se hoc nomine arroganter appellari voluerunt, eo quod in suam communionem non recipiunt utentes conjugibus, et res proprias possidentes, quales habet catholica, et monachos et clericos plurimos. Ideo ergo isti hæretici sunt, quia se ab Ecclesia separantes, nulla spem eos putant habere qui utuntur his rebus, quibus ipsi carent. His in eo testimonio occurrit Ecclesia, in quo dicit Apostolus: Etiamsi corpus meum non solum abstinentiis macerem, sed etiam tradam cum igni ut ardeat, cbaritatem autem non habeam, nihil prodest ( I Cor. XIII, 3).","english":"XXXIX.\n\nThe thirty-ninth heresy is that of the Angelici. These wished to be called Angelici. For they say that angels ought to be adored and cultivated in the mind, and prayers poured out to them, so that they themselves, who they know can do more from themselves, may come to the aid of men's vows and petitions. Epiphanius testifies that these have now entirely failed, conquered by Theophilus, bishop of Apamea.\n\nXL.\n\nIn the fortieth place appeared the Apostolici, who wished to be called by this name arrogantly, because they do not receive into their communion those who use marriage, and those possessing their own property, such as the catholic Church has, and monks and very many clerics. Therefore these are heretics, because, separating themselves from the Church, they think that those who use these things which they themselves lack have no hope. Against them the Church meets them in that testimony in which the Apostle says: Even if I not only wear out my body with abstinences, but even hand it over with fire to be burned, yet have not charity, it profits nothing (1 Cor. 13:3).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":24,"ref":"p24","source":"XLI.\n\nIn quadragesimam et primam hæresim Sabelliani a Sabellio incurrerunt, ipsum sibi Patrem, ipsum sibi Filium, ipsum sibi sanctum Spiritum confitentes. Hi sunt qui et Praxeani dicuntur, qui habuerunt inter initia Praxeam quemdam doctorem. Dicuntur et Hermogeniani, quia Hermogenem habuerunt in Sabellii contubernio. His occurrit Dositheus episcopus Seleuciæ, docens eum totam Trinitatem negare, dum se æstimat unitatem defendere. Pater enim ingenitus, Filius genitus, Spiritus sanctus procedens ex Patre, coæqualis per omnia Patri et Filio. Deitas enim sic recipit unitatem substantie, ut distinctionem personae non perdat.\n\nXLII.\n\nQuadragesimam et secundam hæresim Origeniani inchoaverunt, a a quodam Origene, non illo qui fere omnibus notus est, sed alio Syro quodam sceleratissimo; de quo dicit Epiphanius quod tam turpia docuerit, ut ncc debeant per scripturam ad nostros posteros deslinari.","english":"XLI. The forty-first heresy is that of the Sabellians, who fell into it through Sabellius, confessing the Father himself to be the same as the Son himself and the same as the Holy Spirit himself. These are the ones also called Praxeanists, who had a certain Praxeas as their teacher in the early days. They are also called Hermogenians, because they had Hermogenes in the fellowship of Sabellius. Dositheus, bishop of Seleucia, opposed them, teaching that he denies the whole Trinity while he thinks he is defending the unity. For the Father is unbegotten, the Son begotten, the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father, coequal in all things with the Father and the Son. For the Godhead so receives the unity of substance that it does not lose the distinction of person.\n\nXLII. The forty-second heresy was begun by the Origenians, from a certain Origen, not that one who is known to almost everyone, but another, a most wicked Syrian; concerning whom Epiphanius says that he taught such shameful things that they ought not to be transmitted in writing to our descendants.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":25,"ref":"p25","source":"XLIII.\n\nQuadragesnnam et tertiam hæresim alii Origeniani continuo subsecuti sunt, ut dicit Epiphanius, qui et mortuorum resurrectionem negant: Chrisli autem creaturam esse sanctum Spiritum dicunt; paradisum autem et cælos allegorice dicta firmantes. Hi duo Origenes prava quæque scripserunt. Hæretici et perversi doctores nostro Origeni catholico tractatori miscuerunt; ut adimpleretur quod dicitur a Domino in Evangeliis: Nonne bonum semen seminasti in agro tuo unde ergo hæc zizania? Qui respondens ait: Inimicus homo hæc fecit (Matth. XIII, 28). Ideo enim Origenem legentes invenimus catholicum, et contra hæreses dimicantem et vincentem: identidem legentes Origenem invenimus hæreticum et adversa fidei astruentem. Litteræ verba tradunt et sensus: si possent et facies loquentium demonstrare, errorem nullus poterat de persona doctoris incurrere. Nam et illud cavendum est quod Ampullianus quidam hæresiarches Bithynius, qui docebat post Origenem Ecclesiam Dei. Hic incurrit talem hæresem, ut diceret omnes criminosos cum diabolo et dæmoniis eousque in gehenna decoqui, usquequo puri reddili possint inde mundi et immaculati egredi; ad hoc quod antea fuerant alieni a culpa, suo iterum creatori restitui. Hic dum argueretur ab universali Ecclesia, coepit proferre libros Origenis quos ipse vitiaverat, et dicere: Ecce quia Origenes ita sensit: et praecipue in quatuor Periarchon libris.","english":"XLIII.\n\nThe forty-third heresy is that of the Origenists, who followed immediately after, as Epiphanius says; they deny the resurrection of the dead. They say that the Holy Spirit is a creature of Christ, and they maintain that paradise and the heavens were spoken of allegorically. These two Origens wrote all manner of depraved things. Heretics and perverse teachers mixed their own errors with our catholic expositor Origen, so that what is said by the Lord in the Gospels might be fulfilled: \"Did you not sow good seed in your field? Where then do these weeds come from?\" And he answered and said: \"An enemy has done this\" (Matthew 13:28). For this reason, when we read Origen, we find him catholic, fighting against heresies and conquering; and again, when we read Origen, we find him heretical and asserting things contrary to the faith. The letters convey the words and the meaning; if they could also show the faces of those speaking, no one could fall into error concerning the person of the teacher. For this too must be guarded against: a certain Ampullianus, a Bithynian heresiarch, who taught the Church of God after Origen. He fell into such a heresy as to say that all the guilty, together with the devil and the demons, are boiled in hell until they can come out from there pure, clean, and undefiled, so that what they had previously been, free from guilt, might be restored again to their Creator. When he was being refuted by the universal Church, he began to bring forward the books of Origen, which he himself had corrupted, and to say: \"Behold, this is how Origen understood it,\" and especially in the four books of Peri Archon.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":26,"ref":"p26","source":"Sed qui sani sensus est, et habet splendidos oculos, sic videt addita in Origenis opusculis mala ista atque cognoscit, sicut si in stragulo coccineo pannos albos aut cujusque alterius coloris cernat assutos. Quod ita esse sanctus martyr Pamphilus docet, qui antequam ad martyrii coronam attingeret, irreprehensibiliter e cathedram episcopatus obtinuit, et sanam doctrinam Dei populis ministravit. Hic edidit Apologeticum, et omnia quæ de Origene catholici ignorantes mentiuntur exclusit: ostendens ea quae reprehensibilia inveniuntur in ejus opusculis, Origenis non esse, sed eorum quos ipse superaverat; alia vero quæ tota perversa sunt, aliorum duorum hæreticorum esse, qui Origenis nomen, non fidem nec conscientiam habuerunt.\n\nXLIV.\n\nQuadragesima et quarta haeresis, a Paulo Samosateo inventa, Paulianum sibi populum fecit. Christum non semper fuisse, sed a Maria coepisse, nec amplius eum aliud quam hominem dicunt. Hæc hæresis antea fuit Artemonis; quæ cum defecisset, ab isto Paulo Samosateo restaurata est. Item contra hunc suscipiens Ecclesia, licet post multos annos, dum defecisset cum assertoribus prava defensio, a Photino nostro episcopo renovata iterum, Photinianum populum pullulavit.","english":"But one who is of sound mind and has bright eyes sees and recognizes these evils added to the works of Origen in the same way as if he were to discern white patches or patches of some other color sewn onto a scarlet blanket. That this is so, the holy martyr Pamphilus teaches, who before he attained the crown of martyrdom irreproachably held the chair of the episcopate and ministered the sound doctrine of God to the peoples. He published an Apologeticum and excluded all the things that Catholics, in their ignorance, falsely claim about Origen, showing that the things found reprehensible in his works are not Origen's but those of the men whom he himself had overcome; while other things that are wholly perverse belong to two other heretics, who had Origen's name but not his faith or conscience.\n\nXLIV.\n\nThe forty-fourth heresy, invented by Paul of Samosata, made for itself a people called Paulianist. They say that Christ did not always exist but began from Mary, and that he is nothing more than a man. This heresy previously belonged to Artemon; when it had failed, it was restored by this Paul of Samosata. Likewise, the Church, taking up the case against him, though after many years, when the depraved defense had failed along with its assertors, renewed again by our bishop Photinus, sprouted a Photinian people.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":27,"ref":"p27","source":"Sive ergo Artemonianos audias, sive Paulianos, sive Photinianos, unum scias: sicut Donatistas, et a Montescs, et Parmenianos vocamus, Donatistas a Donato, Monteses a montis latebra, Parmenianos a Parmeniano; qui per totam Africam libros contra nos conficiens, et novos psalmos faciens circumibat, contra quem noster scripsit Optatus. Sed redeamus ad It Paulianos. Omnibus notum est nos hæreticos venientes non rebaptizare, sed manum reconciliationis accedere, et ita divino populo tradere sociandos. De Paulianis autem sancta synodus Nicæna hoc constituit, ut prorsus ba; tizentur, et ita demum catholico populo socientur. Unde ego credo regulam eos baptismatis integram non tenere, et ideo hoc decretum a Christi pontificibus constitutum.\n\nXLV.\n\nQuadragesima et quinta hæresis Photinianorum est a Pbotino, quem sic dixi nostrum episcopum fuisse, sicut fuit noster Judas Scarioles apostolus. Hic suum populum fecit. Hominem quidem purum fuisse Christum docebat, et a Maria coepisse cum Paulo Samosateo sentiebat, sed Spiritum sanctum semper fuisse memorabat: hoc solum quadragesimae quartae hæresi dissimilis, quod populum a se perversum suo nomine nuncupavit.","english":"Whether, then, you hear of the Artemonians, or the Paulians, or the Photinians, know this one thing: just as we call them Donatists, and Montenses, and Parmenians—Donatists from Donatus, Montenses from the hiding-place of the mountains, Parmenians from Parmenian, who went about through all Africa composing books against us and making new psalms, against whom our Optatus wrote. But let us return to the Paulians. It is known to all that we do not rebaptize heretics who come to us, but apply the hand of reconciliation and so hand them over to be joined to the divine people. Concerning the Paulians, however, the holy synod of Nicaea decreed this: that they should be baptized outright, and only then be joined to the catholic people. Hence I believe that they do not hold the rule of baptism intact, and that this decree was therefore established by the pontiffs of Christ.\n\nXLV.\n\nThe forty-fifth heresy is that of the Photinians, from Photinus, whom I said was our bishop, just as Judas of Iscariot was our apostle. He made a people of his own. He taught that Christ was a mere man, and held, with Paul of Samosata, that he began from Mary, but he declared that the Holy Spirit always existed: in this alone he differs from the forty-fourth heresy, that he called the people he perverted after his own name.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":28,"ref":"p28","source":"XLVI.\n\nQuadragesima et sexta hæresis a Mane inchoata Manichæorum contubernium fecit. Hic Manes, cum esset civis Persa, et in Perside docens se apostolum Dei diceret, etiam ad Græciam devolutus est. Quem Græci discipuli ejus, devitantes nomen insaniae, « Manichæum vocari decreverunt, id est quasi manna fundentem. Iste duo principia inter se diversa et adversa, eademque æterna et coaeterna, hoc est semper fuisse, composuit: duasque naturas atque substantias, boni scilicel et mali, sequens alios antiquos haereticos, opinatus est. Quorum inter se pugnam et commixtionem, et boni a malo purgationem, et boni quod purgari non potuit oum malo in aeternum damnationem, secundum sua dogmata asseverantes, multa fabulantur, que cuncta intexere nimis longum est. Dicunt animas bonas, eL ejusdem cujus est Deus esse naturae. Proinde mundum a natura boni, hoc est a natura Dei factum confitentur quidem, sed de commixlione boni et mali, quae facta est quando inter se utraque natura pugnavit. Ipsam vero boni a malo purgationem ac liberationem, non solum per totum mundum, et de omnibus ejus elementis, virtutern de! facere dicunt, verum etiam electos suos per alimenta quæ sumunt. Et eis quippe alimentis, sicut universo mundo, Dei substantiam perhibent esse commixtam: quam purgari putant in electis suis eo genere vitae quo vivunt electi Manichæorum, velut sanctius et excellentius auditoribus suis.","english":"XLVII.\n\nThe forty-sixth heresy, begun by Manes, formed the fellowship of the Manichaeans. This Manes, when he was a Persian citizen and, teaching in Persia, called himself an apostle of God, also spread down into Greece. His Greek disciples, avoiding the name of madness, decreed that he be called \"Manichaeus,\" that is, as it were, pouring forth manna. He composed two principles, different and opposed to each other, and the same eternal and co-eternal, that is, that they always existed; and he opined two natures and substances, namely of good and of evil, following other ancient heretics. Asserting according to his own dogmas their struggle with each other and commixture, and the purification of good from evil, and the damnation unto eternity of the good that could not be purified together with the evil, they fabricate many things, all of which it is too long to weave together. They say that good souls are of the same nature as that to which God belongs. Accordingly, they indeed confess that the world was made from the nature of good, that is, from the nature of God, but from the commixture of good and evil, which was made when both natures fought with each other. But the purification and liberation of good from evil they say the power of God brings about not only through the whole world and from all its elements, but also through the food which his elect consume. For they assert that the substance of God is commingled in these foods, as in the whole world; which they think is purified in their elect by that kind of life by which the elect of the Manichaeans live, as being holier and more excellent than their hearers.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":29,"ref":"p29","source":"Nam his duabus professionibus, hoc est electorum et auditorum, ecclesiam suam constare voluerunt. In caeteris autem hominibus, etiam in ipsis auditoribus suis, hanc partem bonæ divinaeque substantiæ, quae mixta et colligata in escis et potibus detinetur, maximeque in eis qui generant filios, arctius et inquinatius colligari putant. Quidquid vcro undique purgatur luminis, per quasdam naves, quas esse lunam et solem volunt, regno Dei tanquam propriis sedibus reddi. Quas naves de substantia Dei pura perhibent fabricatas: lucemque istam corpoream, animantium mortalium oculis adjacentem. Dei dicunt esse naturam. Quinque enim elementa quæ genuerunt principes proprios, genti tribuunt tenebrarum: eaque elementa his nominibus nuncupant, fumum, tenebras, ignem, aquam, ventum. In fumo nata animalia bipedia, unde homioes ducere originem censent; in tenebris repentia, in igni quadrupedia, in aquis natatilia, in vento volalilia. His quinque elementis malis debellandis alia quinque elementa de regno et substantia Dei missa esse dicunt; et in illa pugna fuisse permixta, fumo aerem, tenebris lucem; igni malo ignem bonum, aquae malæ aquam bonam, vento malo ventum bonum. Naves autem illas, id est duo coeli luminaria, ita distinguunt, ut lunam dicant factam ex bona aqua, solem vero ex bono igni.","english":"For they wished their church to consist of these two professions, that is, of the elect and the hearers. But in other men, even in their own hearers, they think that this portion of the good and divine substance, which is held mixed and bound up in foods and drinks, and most of all in those who beget children, is bound more tightly and more filthily. But whatever light is purged from every side, they hold to be returned through certain ships, which they wish to be the moon and the sun, to the kingdom of God as to its own proper seats. These ships they assert to be fashioned from the pure substance of God; and this corporeal light, which lies near to the eyes of mortal living creatures, they say is the nature of God. For the five elements which begot their own princes, they assign to the race of darkness; and these elements they call by these names: smoke, darkness, fire, water, wind. In smoke, two-footed animals were born, from which they reckon men to draw their origin; in darkness, creeping things; in fire, four-footed beasts; in the waters, swimming creatures; in the wind, flying creatures. To subdue these five evil elements, they say that another five elements were sent from the kingdom and substance of God; and in that battle they were mingled: air with smoke, light with darkness, good fire with evil fire, good water with evil water, good wind with evil wind. But those ships, that is, the two luminaries of heaven, they distinguish thus: they say the moon was made from good water, but the sun from good fire.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":30,"ref":"p30","source":"Esse autem in eis navibus sanctas virtutes, qux se in masculos transfigurant, ut illiciant feminas gentis adversæ: et per hanc illecehram commota eorum concupiscentia, fugiat de illis lumen quod membris suis permixtum tenebant, et purgandum suscipiatur ab angelis lucis, purgatumque in illis navibus imponatur ad regna propria reportandum. Qua occasiono coguntur electi eorum velut eucharistiam conspersam cum semine humano sumere, ut etiam inde, sicut de aliis cibis quos accipiunt, substantia illa divina purgetur. Sed hoc se dum facere negant, detecti sunt. Nam et apud ecclesiam Carthaginiensem ita sunt manifestati. Denique in conventu episcoporum coram omni populo confessa est puella nondum annorum duodecim istam nefariam turpitudinem; et multa prodidit, seipsam asserens ob hoc e scelestum sacramentum eorum vim eSse perpessam. Cui cum primo non crederetur uni puellae et soli, plurimas nominavit hujus facinoris conscias: quas solatio Ursi tribuni qui tunc domui regiæ praefuit, de diversis domibus ubi latebra fovebantur, ejectas a clericis ad ecclesiam Restitutam adductas, id ipsum propter hoc ipsum passas, vix et compulsas constat esse confessas.","english":"But that there are in those ships holy powers which transform themselves into males, so that they may entice the women of the hostile race; and that through this enticement their concupiscence being stirred, the light which they held mingled with its members may flee from them, and be received to be purged by the angels of light, and having been purged may be placed in those ships to be carried back to their own kingdoms. On which occasion their elect are compelled to take, as it were, a eucharist kneaded together with human seed, so that from there too, as from the other foods which they receive, that divine substance may be purged. But while they deny that they do this, they have been detected. For even at the church of Carthage they were thus made manifest. Finally, in a gathering of bishops before all the people, a girl not yet twelve years old confessed this nefarious turpitude; and she disclosed many things, asserting that she herself had for this reason endured the violence of their wicked sacrament. And when at first she, a single girl and alone, was not believed, she named very many women as conscious of this crime; and it is established that these, by the consolation of Ursus the tribune, who at that time presided over the royal household, having been cast out from the various houses where they were harbored in hiding, and brought by the clerics to the church called Restituta, and having suffered this very thing for this very reason, were scarcely even compelled to confess.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":31,"ref":"p31","source":"Tunc totum illud turpissimum scelus, ubi ad excipiendum et commiscendum concumbentium semen farina substernitur, profertur in medium, et quod cum infinito rubOre dicitur et auditur, recenti tempore nonnulli eorum ad ecclesiam adducti sunt, sicut gesta episcopalia ibidem confecta testantur. Tria ergo gencra eorum sunt. Catharistæ, a Macbarii et Manichæi, Omnes tamen has tres formas ab uno magistro, ipso scelerato Mane, constat esse conscriptas. Omnes denique Manichæum legunt, et omnes libri ejus sunt eis sine dubitatione communes. In quibus libris agitur ut per concupiscentiam dissolvatur utriusque sexus princeps jenebrarum, et fugiat ab eis liberata divina substantia, quam in hominis semine teneri existimant inquinatam, unde etiam Catharistæ appellantur, quasi purgatores. Qui cum carnes non comedant, tam polluti sunt, ut cum omnibus suis etiam humanum semen assumant, cum nec ova ipsa accipiant; aiunt enim, et ipsa dum franguntur exspirant. Sed nec alimonia lactis utuntur; non quia putent divinæ substantiae nihil ibi esse permixtum, sed quia sibi error ipse non constat. Nam et vinum non bibunt, dicentes fcl esse principis tenebrarum: et tamen uvas comedunt, cum de musto nec digitum intinctum assumant.","english":"Then that whole most shameful crime is brought out into the open, where flour is spread underneath to catch and mix together the semen of those lying together; and—a thing that is said and heard with boundless shame—in recent times some of them were brought to the church, as the episcopal records drawn up in that place testify. There are, then, three kinds of them: the Catharists, from Macbarius, and the Manichaeans. Yet it is established that all these three forms were written by one master, that criminal Manes himself. In short, all of them read the Manichaean, and all his books are without doubt common to them. In these books it is urged that through concupiscence the prince of darkness of either sex be dissolved, and that the divine substance, freed, flee from them—which substance they believe is held polluted in human seed; whence also they are called Catharists, as it were purifiers. And since they do not eat flesh, they are so polluted that along with all their other things they even take human seed, though they do not accept eggs themselves; for they say that these too breathe out when they are broken. But neither do they use milk as food; not because they think there is nothing of the divine substance mixed in it, but because their error itself is not consistent with itself. For they do not drink wine either, saying that it is the gall of the prince of darkness; and yet they eat grapes, though they would not dip a finger in must.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":32,"ref":"p32","source":"Animas auditorum suorum in electos revolvi arbitrantur; coeteras autem animas quae eorum non sunt auditorum, in pccora redire asserunt, et in omnia quae radicibus fixa sunt atque aluntur in terra. Herbas enim et arbores, ita in eis vitam esse putant, ut sentire ea cum læduntur aestiment et dolere. Unde et agriculturam, quæ omnium artium est innocentior, tanquam plurimorum homicidiorum ream, dementes accusant, et præcipue cum agrum a spinis viderint repurgari; suisque auditoribus ideo arbitrantur ignosci, quia praebent inde alimenta electis suis: ut divina illa substaotia, in eorum ventre purgata, impetret eis veniam, quorum traditur oblationepurganda. ltaque ipsi electi nihil in agris operantes, nec poma carpentes, nec folia ulla vellentes, exspectant hæc afferri usibus suis ab auditoribus suis, viventes tot et tantis secundum suam vanitatem homicidiis alienis. Monent etiam eosdem auditores suos, ut si vescunlur carnibus, animalia non occidant, ne offendant principes tenebrarum in coelestibus colligatos; a quibus omnem carnem dicunt originem ducere. Et sic utuntur conjugibus, ut conceptum generationemque devitent; ne divina substantia quæ in eos per alimenta ingreditur, vinculis carneis ligetur in prole. Sic quippe in omnem carnem, id est per escas et potus, venire animas credunt.","english":"They believe that the souls of their hearers are rolled back into the elect; but the other souls, which are not those of their hearers, they assert return into cattle and into all things that are fixed by roots and nourished in the earth. For they think that there is life in herbs and trees in such a way that they believe they feel and suffer pain when they are harmed. Hence, being mad, they accuse agriculture, which is the most innocent of all arts, as guilty of very many murders, and especially when they see a field cleared of thorns; and they believe that their hearers are therefore forgiven because they provide food from it for their elect, so that that divine substance, purified in their belly, may obtain pardon for those by whose offering it is said to need purification. And so the elect themselves, working nothing in the fields, nor plucking fruits, nor pulling any leaves, expect these things to be brought for their use by their hearers, living by so many and such great murders of others according to their own vanity. They also warn these same hearers of theirs that, if they eat flesh, they should not kill animals, lest they offend the princes of darkness bound together in the heavens, from whom they say all flesh takes its origin. And they use their wives in such a way as to avoid conception and generation, lest the divine substance which enters into them through food be bound in fleshly chains in offspring. For thus they believe that souls come into all flesh, that is, through foods and drinks.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":33,"ref":"p33","source":"Unde et nuptias sine dubitatione condemnant et quantum in ipsis est prohihent, quando generare prohibent, propter quod sunt copulanda conjugia. Adam et Evam ex principibus fumi asserunt natos, quorum pater, aiunt, nomine Saclas: quem sociorum suorum fetus omnium asserunt devorasse, et quidquid inde commixtum divinæ substantiæ ceperat, cum uxore concumbens in carne prolis, tanquam tenacissimo vinculo colligasse. Christum autem fuisse affirmant quem dicit nostra Scriptura serpentem: a quo illuminatos asserunt eorum aspectus, ut bonum malumque dignoscerent; eumque Christum novissimis temporibus advenisse, ad animas non ad corpora liberanda. Nec fuisse in carne vera sed simulatam spectem carnis ludificandis humanis sensibus praebuisse, ubi non solum mortem, verum etiam resurrectionem similiter mentiretur. Deum qui legem per Moysen dedit, et in Hebræis prophetis locutus est, non esse Deum verum, sed unum ex priucipibus tenebrarum affirmant. Ipsiusque Testameti novi Scripturas tanquam falsatas ita legunt, ut quod volunt inde accipiant, quod nolunt rejiciant: eisque tanquam totum verum habentes nonuullas apocryphas anteponunt. Promissionem Domini nostri Jesu Christi de Paracleto in suo hæresiarche Manichxo dicunt esse completam. Unde se ipse in suis litteris Jesu Christi apostolum dicit, eo quod Jesus Christus se eum missurum esse promiserit; et ideo ejus apo.","english":"Hence they also without doubt condemn marriage and, as far as in them lies, forbid it, since they forbid begetting, for which reason marriages are to be joined. They assert that Adam and Eve were born from the princes of smoke, whose father, they say, was named Saclas; they assert that he devoured the offspring of all his consorts, and whatever of the divine substance had been mingled from this, by sleeping with his wife he bound it in the flesh of offspring as if with a most tenacious bond. But they affirm that Christ was the one whom our Scripture calls the serpent: by whom they assert their eyes were enlightened, so that they might distinguish good and evil; and that this Christ came in the last times to free souls, not bodies. Nor was he truly in the flesh, but offered a simulated appearance of flesh to mock human senses, where he lied not only about death but likewise about resurrection. They affirm that the God who gave the law through Moses and spoke in the Hebrew prophets is not the true God, but one of the princes of darkness. And they read the Scriptures of the New Testament itself as if falsified, so that they take from it what they wish and reject what they do not wish; and as though having the whole truth, they prefer certain apocryphal writings to them. They say that the promise of our Lord Jesus Christ concerning the Paraclete was fulfilled in their heresiarch Manichaeus. Hence he himself in his writings calls himself an apostle of Jesus Christ, because Jesus Christ promised that he would send him; and therefore his apo.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":34,"ref":"p34","source":"stolus, quia in eo missus sit Spiritus sanctus. Propter quod etiam ipse Manichaeus duodecim discipulos habuit, instar apostolici numeri, quem numerum Manichaei hodieque custodiunt. Nam et ex electis suis habent duodecim quos appellant magistros, et tertium decimum principem ipsorum. Episcopos autem qui ordinantur a magistris, et presbyteros qui ordinantur ab episcopis, numeri indefiniti. Habent etiam episcopi diaconos. Jam caeteri tantummodo electi vocantur. Sed mittuntur etiam ipsi qui videntur idonei, ad hunc errorem, vel ubi est augmentandum, vel ubi non est seminandum. Baplismum in aqua nihil cuiquam perhibent salutis afferre, nec quemquam eorum quos decipiunt baptizandos putant. Orationes faciunt ad solem per diem, quaquaversum circuit: ad lunam per noctem si apparet; si autem non apparet, ad aquiloniam partem, qua sol cum occiderit ad Orientem revertitur. Stant orantes. Peccatorum autem originem non libero arbitrio voluntatis, sed substantiæ tribuunt gentis adversæ, quam dogmatizant esse hominibus mixtam. Omnem vero carnem non Divinitatis, sed malæ menlis asserunt esse opificium quae conlrario Deo coæterna est. Carnalem concupiscentiam qua caro concupiscit adversus spiriturn, substantiam volunt esse contrariam, sic nobis adhaerentem, ut quando liberamur atque purgamur, iterum reparelur, et in sua natura etiam ipsa immortaliter vivat.","english":"...apostle, because the Holy Spirit was sent in him. For this reason even Manichaeus himself had twelve disciples, in the likeness of the apostolic number, which number the Manichaeans keep even today. For from their elect they have twelve whom they call masters, and a thirteenth, their prince. But the bishops who are ordained by the masters, and the presbyters who are ordained by the bishops, are of an indefinite number. The bishops also have deacons. The rest are called only elect. But even those who seem suitable are sent to this error, either where it is to be increased or where it is not to be sown. They maintain that baptism in water brings salvation to no one, nor do they think that any of those whom they deceive are to be baptized. They pray to the sun by day, wherever it circles; to the moon by night if it appears; but if it does not appear, to the northern part, where the sun, when it has set, returns to the East. They stand while praying. But they attribute the origin of sins not to the free choice of the will, but to the substance of the hostile race, which they dogmatize to be mixed with men. Indeed they assert that all flesh is the workmanship not of the Divinity but of an evil mind, which is coeternal with the contrary god. They hold that the carnal concupiscence by which the flesh lusts against the spirit is a contrary substance, clinging to us in such a way that when we are freed and purified, it is again revealed, and in its own nature even itself lives immortally.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":35,"ref":"p35","source":"In uno homine duas dicunt animas esse et duas mentes, easque per naturam contrarias, bonas et malas; easque dicunt inter se habere conflictum. Finito autem isto sæculo, post conflagrationem mundi, istam substantiam mali in globo quodam dicunl tanquam in carcere esse victuram. Cui globo affirmant accessurum et semper adhæsurum, et quasi coopertorium atque tectorium, ex animabus natura quidem bonis, sed tamen qua non potuerint a naturae malae contagione mundari.\n\nXLVII.\n\nQuadragesimus septimus hæreticus Hieracha Hicracitas instituit. Hi resurrectionem carnis negant. * Monachos tantum et monachas, et eos qui conjugia non habent, in communionem recipiunt. Ad rcgnum coelorum non pertinere parvulos dicunt, quia non sunt eis merita ulla certaminis quo vitia superantur. Contra hunc suscepit sanctus Apbrodisius Hellesponti episcopus, asserens resurrectionem carnis et novo et veteri Testamento esse firmatam. Infames autem jam homines esse: et sicut si quis eos occidat, homicidæ suscipit crimen; sic qui eos baptismate consecraverit, mercedem sibi de hominis salute acquirit. Communionem nulli negandam, nisi his qui praetermissis conjugibus propriis alienas requirunt.","english":"They say that in one man there are two souls and two minds, and that these are by nature contrary, good and evil; and they say that these have a conflict with each other. But when this age is finished, after the conflagration of the world, they say that this substance of evil will live in a certain globe as if in a prison. They affirm that to this globe there will come and always cling, as a kind of covering and roof, those who are by nature indeed good souls, but who could not be cleansed from the contagion of the evil nature.\n\nXLVII.\n\nThe forty-seventh heresiarch, Hierax, instituted the Hieracites. These deny the resurrection of the flesh. They receive into communion only monks and nuns, and those who have no marriages. They say that little children do not belong to the kingdom of heaven, because they have no merits of the contest by which vices are overcome. Against this man Saint Aphrodisius, bishop of the Hellespont, took up the cause, asserting that the resurrection of the flesh is confirmed by both the New and the Old Testament. But that infamous men already exist: and just as if anyone kills them, he incurs the crime of a homicide; so whoever consecrates them by baptism acquires for himself a reward from the salvation of a man. Communion is to be denied to no one, except to those who, having set aside their own wives, seek others.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":36,"ref":"p36","source":". XLVIII.\n\nQuadragesima octava hæresis est Meletianorum, a Meletio quodam. Nolentes orare cum bis qui in persecutione ceciderant, schisma fecerunt. Quibus restitit sanctus Basilius episcopus Cappadociae, dicens majorem spei et fidei charitatem quae omnia tolerat, et manum lapsis magis porrigendam. Hortatur etiam desperantes recoperatione provocandos ut redeant: siquidem etiam angelis in cœlo gaudium majus faciat unus poenitens, quam nonagiuta novem qui non peccaverunt ( Luc. xv,.7).\n\nXLIX.\n\nQuadragesimus et nonus haeresiarches Arius ortus est. Hic populos Arianos instituit, qui Patrem et Filium et Spiritum sanctum nolunt esse unius ejusdem*que substantiae, sed esse Filium creaturam, Spiritum vero sanctum creaturam creaturae, hoc est ab ipso Filio creatum volunt. In eo autem quod Cbristum sine anima carnem suscepisse arbitratur, Epiphanius prodidit. Et ideo Patrem majorem Filio Sic dicit, qoasi creatorem: et Filium majorem Spiritu sancto, quasi creatorem ejus. Nostros, id est catbolicos, ad te venientes rebaptizant: utrum hoc etiam aliis, id est non catholicis, faciant, nusquam legitur. Primus contra hos suscepit sanctus Hesiodus episcopus Corinthiorum, vir qui etiam mortuos suscitasse asseritur. Unde factum est ut plus sanctitatem quam disputationem attendentes homines Arium exsecrarentur.","english":"XLVIII.\n\nThe forty-eighth heresy is that of the Meletians, from a certain Meletius. Refusing to pray with those who had fallen in persecution, they made a schism. Saint Basil, bishop of Cappadocia, opposed them, saying that the greater charity of hope and faith is that which bears all things, and that the hand should rather be extended to the fallen. He also urges that the despairing be roused by the offer of recovery to return: since indeed one penitent makes greater joy even among the angels in heaven than ninety-nine who have not sinned (Luke 15:7).\n\nXLIX.\n\nThe forty-ninth heresiarch, Arius, arose. He established the Arian peoples, who refuse to hold that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are of one and the same substance, but hold that the Son is a creature, and the Holy Spirit a creature of a creature, that is, they hold him to have been created by the Son himself. But in that he supposes that Christ took flesh without a soul, Epiphanius has set forth. And therefore he says the Father is greater than the Son, as a creator: and the Son greater than the Holy Spirit, as his creator. They rebaptize our people, that is, catholics, who come to them: whether they do this also to others, that is, non-catholics, is nowhere read. The first to take a stand against them was Saint Hesiod, bishop of the Corinthians, a man who is even asserted to have raised the dead. Whence it came about that men, attending more to his holiness than to disputation, execrated Arius.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":37,"ref":"p37","source":"Siquidem ejus orationibus asseritur ipse Arius in secessum sedens universa simul interanea cum stercoribus profudisse. Jam contra sectam ejus tam Orientales quam etiam Occidentales episcopi scripserunt. Quibus eum per singula capita dogmatum anorum asserunt blasphemantem.\n\nQuinquagesimos * Audianos memorat Epipbanius, non quidem haereticos, sed schismaticos: quos alii Anthropomorphitas vocant, quoniam Deum sibi fingunt cogitatione carnali, in similitudine imaginis corruptibilis hominis, dicentes: Oculi Domini super justo, (Ps. XXXIII, 16); Cœlos opera digilorum Dei (Ps. VIII, 4); et: Deus sedet super sedem sanctam suam (Ps. XLVI, 9); et: Deus stetit in synagoga deorum (Ps. LXXXI, 1), et cætera, quæ possunt de visibili cogitari. Quia ergo in nullo alio errant, mitius eos agens Epiphanius noluit haereticos nominare, dans veniam rusticitati. Quod autem nobis non communicant, divitias habere nostros episcopos clamant, quas Christus ctiam laicos contemnere juhet. Pascha cum Judæis celebrant. Egit contra hos Zenon Syrorum episcopus.","english":"For it is asserted that by his prayers Arius himself, sitting in a privy, poured forth all his inward parts together with his excrement. Already bishops of both the East and the West have written against his sect. In these writings they assert that he blasphemes, point by point, the dogmas of the ancients.\n\nEpiphanius records the fiftieth as the Audians, not indeed heretics but schismatics; others call them Anthropomorphites, because they fashion God for themselves by carnal thought, in the likeness of the image of corruptible man, saying: The eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous (Ps. 33:16); The heavens are the works of the fingers of God (Ps. 8:4); and: God sits upon his holy throne (Ps. 46:9); and: God stood in the synagogue of gods (Ps. 81:1), and other things which can be conceived in visible terms. Since, therefore, they err in nothing else, Epiphanius, dealing with them more gently, was unwilling to call them heretics, granting pardon to their rusticity. But because they do not hold communion with us, they cry out that our bishops possess riches, which Christ commands even the laity to despise. They celebrate the Passover with the Jews. Zeno, bishop of the Syrians, wrote against them.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":38,"ref":"p38","source":"LI.\n\nQuinquagesima prima hæresis Eunomianorum, ab Eunomio. Hi serpentis antiqui spiritu pleni, non solum minorem Filium, sed nec similis essentiæ esse Filium asseveranL. Egit contra hos Ammonius presbyter.\n\nLII.\n\nQuinquagesima secunda hæresis Macedonianorum, a Macedonio. Hos Pneumatomachos appellant per Orientem nostri, eo quod de Spiritu sancto litigent. Nam de Patre et Filio recte sentiunt, Spiritum vero sanctum nolunt credere Deum, creaturam eum dicentes. Philaster scribit Macedonium Spiritum santtum Deitatem Patris et Filii dicere: quo dicto videtur proprietatem suam sancto Spiritui denegare c.\n\nLIII.\n\nQuinquagesima tertia hæresis Aerianorum, ab Aerio quodam: qui cum esset presbyter, doluisse fertur quod non esset episcopus ordinatus. Coepit docere non debere pro dormientibus offerri, nec statuta celebranda esse jejunia; sed cum quisque voluerit, jejunandum, ne videatur esse sub lege. Presbyterum ab episcopo nulla differentia debere discerni; et non admitti ad communionem suam, nisi a conjugio abstinentes.","english":"LI.\n\nThe fifty-first heresy is that of the Eunomians, from Eunomius. These, filled with the spirit of the ancient serpent, assert that the Son is not only lesser, but not even of like essence. Ammonius the presbyter wrote against them.\n\nLII.\n\nThe fifty-second heresy is that of the Macedonians, from Macedonius. These our people in the East call Pneumatomachi, because they contend about the Holy Spirit. For they think rightly concerning the Father and the Son, but they refuse to believe that the Holy Spirit is God, calling him a creature. Philaster writes that Macedonius said the Holy Spirit is the Deity of the Father and of the Son; by which statement he seems to deny his own property to the Holy Spirit.\n\nLIII.\n\nThe fifty-third heresy is that of the Aerians, from a certain Aerius, who, when he was a presbyter, is said to have grieved that he had not been ordained bishop. He began to teach that offerings ought not to be made for the dead, nor the appointed fasts to be celebrated; but that each one should fast when he wished, lest he seem to be under the law. That a presbyter ought to be distinguished from a bishop by no difference; and that no one should be admitted to his communion unless abstaining from marriage.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":39,"ref":"p39","source":"LIV.\n\nQuinquagesima et quarta hæresis Aetiana, ab Ae • tio vocata. Hi cum Eunomio dissimilem per omnia Patri Filium confitentur; et dicunt: quicunque nostrae fidei consentiunt, sciant sibi e nulla obesse peccata quaecunque ab eis fuerint perpetrata. Contra hos synodus episcoporum egit in Achaia.\n\nLY.\n\nQuinquagesima et quinta haeresis Apollinaristarum est, ab Apollinare inchoata. Negant hominem perrectum in Christo, sed assumptionem carnis ita factam, ut intus in homine pro anima divinitas esset. Carnem autem et Verbum unius ejusdemque voluit docere substantiae. contentiosissime afferentes: Verbum caro factum est (Joan. I, 14), volunt docere aliquid de Verbo in carnem conversum. Insuper etiam de Mariæ carne nihil esse susceptum in incarnatione Domini nostri Jesu Christi con6rmanL. Egit contra hunc synodus in Antiochia.\n\nLVI.\n\nIn quinquagesima sexta hæresi Antidicomaritæ appellati sunt haeretici, qui Mariv virginitati usque adeo contradicunt, ut anirment eam post Chiistum natum viro fuisse commixtam. Egit contra hos Theo, dotus Cyprius episcopus.","english":"LIV.\n\nThe fifty-fourth heresy is that of the Aetians, named from Aetius. These, together with Eunomius, confess that the Son is unlike the Father in all things; and they say: whoever agrees with our faith should know that no sins whatsoever that they have committed are a hindrance to them. A synod of bishops acted against these in Achaia.\n\nLV.\n\nThe fifty-fifth heresy is that of the Apollinarists, begun by Apollinaris. They deny that a complete man was in Christ, but say that the assumption of flesh was so made that within the man, in place of a soul, there was the divinity. But he wished to teach that the flesh and the Word are of one and the same substance, most contentiously asserting: The Word was made flesh (John 1:14); they wish to teach that something of the Word was turned into flesh. Moreover, they also affirm that nothing was taken from the flesh of Mary in the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. A synod acted against this one in Antioch.\n\nLVI.\n\nIn the fifty-sixth heresy are named the Antidicomarians, heretics who so contradict the virginity of Mary that they assert that after Christ was born she had intercourse with a man. Theodotus, bishop of Cyprus, acted against these.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":40,"ref":"p40","source":"LVII.\n\nQuinquagesimam et septimam hæresim Messalianorum invenimus: quod nomen ex lingua Syra est; Græce autem dicuntur Euchitæ, ab orando sic appellati. Non psallunt, jugiter orant. Sed quia hoc solum faciunt, non habentes charitalem nec alloquii nec bumanitatis, inter hæreticos sunt a sancta synodo confutati. Condemnant etiam eos monachos qui aliud, præter legendi orandique opera aliquid fuerint operali, vel artis, vel agricullura. Usque ad istos Epiphanius pervenit, et siluit. Credo eum usque ad id temporis vixisse. Præterita enim et præsentia indicare humana curiositas potest, Deus autcm solus potest futura prædicere. Verum quia Philaster in suis et ipse libris quibus diversorum relexit historias, etiam hæreses quae ortæ fuerint caeteris quibusque temporibus, ex ejus nunc libris discerpendo solas hæreses in medium exhibemus. Egit contra hos Ephrem presbyter Syrorum.","english":"LVII.\n\nWe have found the fifty-seventh heresy to be that of the Messalians: this name is from the Syriac language; in Greek, however, they are called Euchites, so named from praying. They do not sing psalms, they pray continuously. But because they do this alone, having neither love nor of conversation nor of humanity, they have been refuted as heretics by the holy synod. They also condemn those monks who have done anything besides the works of reading and praying, whether of craft or of agriculture. Epiphanius reached as far as these and was silent. I believe he lived up to that time. For human curiosity can indicate things past and present, but God alone can foretell things to come. But because Philaster also in his own books, in which he reviewed the histories of various persons, [wrote of] the heresies that arose in all other times as well, we now present in their midst, culling from his books, only the heresies. Ephrem, a presbyter of the Syrians, wrote against these.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":41,"ref":"p41","source":"LVIII.\n\nQuinquagesimam et octavam hæresim Metangismonitæ inchoaverunt. ' Græco sermone vas dicitur, autem vas intra vas advertitur. Ex isto ergo articulo hoc sibi nomen assumunt, dicentes: Sic est Filius in Patre quomodo vas minus intra vas luajus. Quos ideo repudiat Ecclesia: quia de incorporto carnaliter sentiunt, et de incomprehensibili a linialis agunt, et de æqualitate Divinitatis gradus statuunt. Egit contra hos Diodorus episcopus Nicoinediæ.\n\nLIX.\n\nIn quinquagesima et nona hæresi Seleuciani sunt, orti a Seleuco: qui elementorum materiam de qua factus est mundus, non a Deo factam dicunt, sed Deo coæternam: nec animam Deo tribuunt creatori, sed creatorcs esse animarum angelos volunt de igni et de spiritu. Malum autem asserunt esse aliquando a Deo, aliquando a materia. Negant Salvatorem in carne sedere ad dexteram Patris, sed ea se exuisse perhibent, eamque in sole posuisse, accipientes occasionem de psalmo ubi legitur: In sole posuit tabernaculum suum, (Psal. XVIII, 6). Negant visibilem paradisum, baptismum in aqua non accipiunt, resurrectionem non credunt futuram, sed quotidie asserunt in generatione filiorum. Hos non admittit disciplina fidei nostræ nobiscum disceptationem assumere, sed pro definitionibus suis eos præcepit anathemati mancipari.","english":"LVIII.\n\nThe fifty-eighth heresy was begun by the Metangismonites. In the Greek language a vessel is called a vessel, but a vessel within a vessel is what is meant. From this article, then, they take their name, saying: The Son is in the Father as a smaller vessel within a larger vessel. The Church rejects them for this reason: because they think carnally about the incorporeal, and treat of the incomprehensible in a fleshly manner, and establish degrees in the equality of the Godhead. Diodorus, bishop of Nicomedia, contended against these.\n\nLIX.\n\nIn the fifty-ninth heresy are the Seleucians, sprung from Seleucus, who say that the matter of the elements from which the world was made was not made by God, but is coeternal with God; nor do they attribute the soul to God the creator, but would have the angels to be creators of souls from fire and spirit. But they assert that evil is sometimes from God, sometimes from matter. They deny that the Savior sits in the flesh at the right hand of the Father, but maintain that he put it off and placed it in the sun, taking occasion from the psalm where it is read: In the sun he has set his tabernacle (Ps. XVIII, 6). They deny a visible paradise, they do not accept baptism in water, they do not believe that there will be a resurrection, but daily assert it in the generation of children. The discipline of our faith does not permit them to enter into disputation with us, but has commanded that they be consigned to anathema in accordance with its definitions.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":42,"ref":"p42","source":"LX.\n\nSexagesimam haeresim Proclinianistæ a Proclino fecerunt. Dicunt isti Dei Filium sic paruisse in terris, sicut Raphaelem angelum, aut Gabrielem, non carne assumpta, sed visa. Sic se miscent populo Dei, ut non intelligantur. Denique quia nullum alium crrorem patiuntur, communicant nobiscum: et hoc cst quod pejus est, quia quoscunque simplices invenerint, ita eos faciunt sentire et credere. Hoc scelus valde inimicum salutis nostrae ita astruunt: Ergo Deus illas sordes habuit sustinere, quas naturalis conceptio partus et parientis infligit; habuitque Dei Filius habere alvum degesta sua abluentem, humorem de naribus, salivam ex ore, sordem in aure, in ventre stercora, putorem in exhalatione? et his similia, quæ insania mentis excogitat. His Tertullianus vehementer occurrit, ostendens Dei Filium impassibilem esse, et ista Divinitati non injuriam sed laudem afferre. Sicut rex, qui volens annulum aureum cum gemma de cloaca levare, induit se servilem tunicam, et sic descendit ad cloacam, ut stercoreas injurias tunica illa suscipiat, et mittens manum, et anuulum aureum cum gemma eripiens, aqua abluit, et digito suo regali induit, posteaquam inde ascenderit.","english":"LX.\n\nThe sixtieth heresy the Proclinianists made from Proclinus. These say that the Son of God so appeared on earth as Raphael the angel, or Gabriel, not by taking flesh, but by seeming to. Thus they mix themselves with the people of God, so that they are not understood. Finally, because they suffer no other error, they communicate with us: and this is what is worse, because whatever simple people they find, they make them feel and believe thus. This crime, greatly hostile to our salvation, they assert thus: Therefore did God have to endure those filths which the natural conception of the offspring and of the one giving birth inflicts; and did the Son of God have to have a belly washing away his digested food, moisture from the nostrils, saliva from the mouth, filth in the ear, excrement in the belly, stench in the exhalation? and things similar to these, which the madness of the mind devises. Against these Tertullian vehemently contends, showing that the Son of God is impassible, and that these things bring not injury but praise to the Divinity. Just as a king, who wishing to lift a golden ring with a gem from a sewer, puts on a servile tunic, and thus descends to the sewer, so that that tunic may receive the filthy insults, and putting in his hand, and snatching out the golden ring with the gem, washes it with water, and puts it on his royal finger, after he has ascended from there.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":43,"ref":"p43","source":"Ita procul dubio Dei Filius formam servi suscipiens, venit non solum ad inferos coelorum, ubi nos sumus qui videmur vivere in mundo, sed etiam ad inferos inferiores, qui tanto a nobis sunt profundius quanto nos sumus cœlo; et ut inde humanum genus eriperet, cunctarum sordium, non suarum, sed nostrarum, cst squalorem perpessus. Pro viventibus sic vixit sicut nos qui vivimus, nihil aliud distans, nisi hoc quod immaculatam vitam exercuit, habens intra se Deum; pro mortuis sic mortuus, nihil distans, nisi hoc quod tertia die resurrexit a mortuis; et qood propterea sic descendit, ut sanctos inde erueret et mortis princiDem religaret. Ouod autem annulum aureum cum gemma posuit, hoc in sequenti lectione edocuit, quod annulum corpus posuerit, gemmam vero inclusam esse animam declaravit. Hunc ergo annulum de btercoribus antiquis et de cloaca hujus mundi Christus elevans ac baptismatis unda perfundens, ab omni squalore abluens, in suis fecit sanctis manibus radiare. Siquidem ita legitur: Justorum autem anima in manu Dei sunt (Sap. III, 1). Et iterum: Pone me sicut annulum in manu tua (Cant. VIII, 6). Et: In manus tuas commendo spiritum meum (Psal. xxx, 6); et intinila sunt his similia in sacris apicibus, quae nos causa brevitatis omittentes, ad sexagesimam et primam hæresem accedamus.","english":"Thus without doubt the Son of God, taking the form of a servant, came not only to the lower parts of the heavens, where we are who seem to live in the world, but also to the lower parts below, which are as much deeper than we are as we are below heaven; and to snatch the human race from there, he endured the filth of all sordid things, not his own but ours. For the living he so lived as we who live, differing in nothing except that he led an immaculate life, having God within himself; for the dead he so died, differing in nothing except that on the third day he rose from the dead; and he descended for this reason, that he might snatch the saints from there and bind the prince of death. But what he meant by placing a golden ring with a gem, he taught in the following reading, declaring that the ring is the body and that the gem enclosed is the soul. Therefore Christ, lifting this ring from the ancient dung-heaps and from the sewer of this world, and pouring over it the water of baptism, washing it from all filth, made it shine in his holy hands. For thus it is read: But the souls of the just are in the hand of God (Wisdom 3:1). And again: Set me as a ring in your hand (Song of Songs 8:6). And: Into your hands I commend my spirit (Psalm 30:6); and countless similar things are found in the sacred writings, which we pass over for the sake of brevity, and let us come to the sixty-first heresy.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":44,"ref":"p44","source":"LXI.\n\nSexagesimam et primam hæresim Patriciani fecerunt, a Patricio sumentes exordium. Hi substautiam carnis humanae non a Deo, sed a diabolo conditam dicunt; eamque sic detestantur, ut hunc dicant esse perfectum qui se potueril constanter occidere. Ex his sunt aliquanti qui eliam rogant eos quos invenerint ignotos, ut ab eis occidantur. Hæc insania in partibus Numidue superioris et Mauritaniæ cœpit olim. Hos miseri Donatistæ postea seculi, coeperunt se montis praecipitio quasi futuri martyres tradere: ut qui vitam æternam catholicae fidei derelinquunt, viothanati æternam mortem inveniant. Contra hos Optatus legitur egissc.\n\nLXII.\n\nSexagesima secunda hæresis Ascitarum est. Ascitæ ergo ab utre appellantur. ' enim Graece uter dicitur. Isti cum in Trinitale nihil mali habeant, utrem tamen ingentem juxta altare ponunt, eumque vacuum inflant, et linteaminibus velant et adorant, quia confectum cruoris Domini ibi adjiciunt, illud dicentes evangelicum: Vinum novum in utres novos adjiciunt, et utraque conservantur (Matth. IX, 17).","english":"LXI.\n\nThe sixty-first heresy was that of the Patricians, taking their beginning from Patricius. These say that the substance of human flesh was created not by God but by the devil; and they detest it so much that they call him perfect who can steadfastly kill himself. There are some among them who even ask strangers whom they have met to be killed by them. This madness began long ago in the regions of Upper Numidia and Mauretania. Later the wretched Donatists of this world began to hand themselves over by throwing themselves from a mountain, as if they were to be future martyrs: so that those who abandon the eternal life of the catholic faith may find eternal death by a violent death. Against these, Optatus is read to have written.\n\nLXII.\n\nThe sixty-second heresy is that of the Ascitae. The Ascitae are so called from a wineskin. For in Greek a wineskin is called askos. These, although they hold nothing evil concerning the Trinity, nevertheless place a huge wineskin next to the altar, and inflate it when empty, and cover it with linen cloths and adore it, because they add there the consecrated blood of the Lord, saying that evangelical word: They put new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved (Matthew 9:17).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":45,"ref":"p45","source":"LXIII.\n\nSexagesima tertia hæresis est Passalorynchita;. Omnes quando ad Ecclesiam suam conveniunt, tanto silentio student, ut et naribus et labiis suis digitum apponant, ne vel ipsam taciturnilatem flatibus laedant. Cur autem per palum digitum significare maluerint, a quibus hoc nomen compositum est nescio, cum Graece palus dicatur, et digitus, et yjyy/j; nasus. Melius autem mihi videtur si Dactylorynchitæ vocilentur. Invenit sibi diabolus in lege Dei quos faceret Pythagoras, illud observantes Apostoli: Orabo spiritu, orabo et mente; psalmum dicam spiritu, psalmum dicam et mente ( I Cor. XIV, 15). Docent ergo homines foras ecclesiam quid dicant in cordibus suis intra ecclesiam positi. Quasi non idem Apostolus dixerit: Corde creditur ad juslitiam, ore autem confessio fit ad salutem (Rom. x, 10). Vanum dico ego eum laborem arripere, qui dignatur talibus respondendo tempus consumere, jusLumque judico at lacentes tacendo vincamus.","english":"LXIII.\n\nThe sixty-third heresy is that of the Passalorynchites. When they all assemble at their church, they devote themselves to such silence that they place a finger on their nostrils and lips, lest they injure even that very silence with their breath. But why they preferred to signify the finger by a stake, from which this name is compounded, I do not know, since in Greek a stake is called palus, and a finger is called digitus, and the nose is called rhinos. It seems better to me, however, that they be called Dactylorynchites. The devil has found for himself in the law of God those whom he might make Pythagoreans, observing that saying of the Apostle: I will pray with the spirit, I will pray also with the mind; I will sing a psalm with the spirit, I will sing a psalm also with the mind. They therefore teach people what they should say in their hearts when they are placed inside the church, as if the same Apostle had not said: With the heart one believes unto righteousness, but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. I say that he takes up a vain labor who deigns to consume time by responding to such people, and I judge it just that we conquer those who are silent by keeping silent.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":46,"ref":"p46","source":"LXIV.\n\nSexagesima quarta haeresis Aquariorum, qui ex hoc appellati sunt Aquarii, quod aquam offer unt in poculo sacramenti. Dicunt enim vinum ebrietatis esse rem, per quam homicidia et fornicationes et cætera scelera perpetrantur, cum constet omnia excedentia modum crimen facere, et vitium procreare. Non ergo vini haustu, sed nimietate, crimina committuntur. Quid est enim quod nimis sumptum non culpam incurrat? Bibatur nimis aqua, videamus si non lxdat; comedatnr nirnis panis, videamus si non crapulam faciat. Optimum ergo in rebus omnibus modum tenentes, etiam hos anathematizamus, cur cruorem Christi a fonte separantes, præjudicio fornicatorum et homicidarum, regulain a Christo fundatam audacter a infringant.\n\nLXV.\n\nSexagesima quinta hæresis Coluthianorum a quodam Colutho emersit. Hi dicunt Deum creasse mala et bona: secundum litteram sentientes quod dicitur: Ego Deus creans mala et faciens bona (lsa. XLV, 7). Cum Deus hoc per prophetam promiserit, quod faceret eos sine gladio hostium vivere, et faceret terram dare germen suum abundantiamque omnium frugum, si ejus n.andata servassent; si vero prævaricatores essent, gladium et famem paterentur. Et his dictis adjunxerit: Ego Deus creans mala et faciens bona. Illi hoc ad substantiam a specie transferentes, malorum Deum asserunt creatorem.","english":"LXIV.\n\nThe sixty-fourth heresy is that of the Aquarii, who are called Aquarii for this reason, that they offer water in the cup of the sacrament. For they say that wine is a thing of drunkenness, through which murders and fornications and the rest of crimes are perpetrated, although it is evident that all things exceeding measure commit crime and breed vice. Therefore it is not by the draught of wine, but by excess, that crimes are committed. For what is it that, taken too much, does not incur blame? Let water be drunk too much, and let us see whether it does not harm; let bread be eaten too much, and let us see whether it does not cause surfeit. Holding therefore the best measure in all things, we anathematize even these, because, separating the blood of Christ from the fountain, by the prejudice of fornicators and murderers they boldly break the rule founded by Christ.\n\nLXV.\n\nThe sixty-fifth heresy of the Coluthians arose from a certain Coluthus. These say that God created evils and goods, understanding according to the letter what is said: I am God, creating evils and making goods (Isa. 45:7). Although God promised this through the prophet, that he would make them live without the sword of enemies, and would make the earth give its sprout and abundance of all fruits, if they had kept his commands; but if they were transgressors, they would suffer the sword and famine. And to these words he added: I am God, creating evils and making goods. They, transferring this from the species to the substance, assert that God is the creator of evils.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":47,"ref":"p47","source":"Cum creatura nulla sit mala, possunt, ut video, Deum blasphemare perversum quia dicit ad populum: Si ambulaveritis recti, et ego vobiscum ambulabo rectus; si autem ambulaveritis perversi, et ego incedam vobiscum perversus (Levit.. XXVI, 23, 24).\n\nLXVI..\n\nSexagesima sexta haeresis Florianorum a Floriano, qui dicit malas animas et bonas a Deo creari. Ideo, inquit, qui malitiosi sunt, mali sunt, ct non mutantur; et boni simpliciter viventes non in audaciam iniquorum hominuin protrahuntur. Quod dictum a Theodoro breviter vincitur ita: Judas bonus fuit, et factus est traditor. Ipso tempore quo meretrix pessima lacrymis rigabat pedes ejus, misericordiam quærens, si animam malam habuit mulier, quare in meretricio crimine non co tempore perduravit? Constat ergo animas bonas a Deo conditas: quibus per naturam hoc inesse creator indulsit, ut cum sint bonae, non solum actu suo melirentur, sed etiam in ipsa possint malignitate converti, dum illud diligentia invenit, hoc incurrit negligentia.","english":"Since no creature is evil, they can, as I see it, blaspheme God—the perverse one—because he says to the people: If you walk uprightly, I also will walk with you uprightly; but if you walk perversely, I also will walk with you perversely (Leviticus 26:23-24).\n\nLXVI.\n\nThe sixty-sixth heresy is that of the Floriani, from Florianus, who says that both evil souls and good souls are created by God. For this reason, he says, those who are malicious are evil and are not changed; and the good, living simply, are not drawn into the audacity of iniquitous men. This statement is briefly refuted by Theodore as follows: Judas was good, and he became a traitor. At the very time when that worst of harlots was bathing his feet with tears, seeking mercy, if the woman had an evil soul, why did she not persist in the crime of harlotry at that time? It is established, therefore, that good souls are created by God; to these the Creator granted by nature that, since they are good, they should not only be made better by their own action, but could even be converted in the midst of wickedness itself, since diligence finds the one thing while negligence runs into the other.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":48,"ref":"p48","source":"LXVII.\n\nSexagesima et septima haeresis est Satannianorum, a Satannio. Hi dicunt, post resurrectionem mortuorum, in eodem slatu in quo nunc sumus non esse mansuros; neque ita esse mutandos, ut sit coelum novum et terra nova, sicut sancta Scriptura promittit (II Petre III, 13). Contra hos utriusque Testamenti scripta luctantur.\n\nLXVIII.\n\nSexagesima et octava hæresis est Gymnopodarum. Hi nudis pedibus semper ambulant, eo quod dixerit Dominus ad Moysen: Solve calceamentum de pedibus tuis (F.xod. III, 5); et quod sanctus Isaias legitur nudis pedibus ambulasse (lsa. xx, 2). Ideo hi schisma faciunt, quoniam calceatos condemnant.\n\nLXIX.\n\nIn sexagesimam et nonam hæresem Donatistæ a Donato exorti sunt: qui propter ordinatum contra suam voluntatem Caecilianum, Ecclesie Carthaginiensis episcopum, schisma fecerunt, objicientes ei crimina non probata, et maxime quod a traditoribus divinarum Scripturarum fuerit ordinatus. At ubi hinc mentiri convicli sunt, schisma in hæresim converterunt. Quasi etiam si vera fuissent crimina in Cæciliano, statum suum de toto orbe terrarum Ecclesia amittere potuisset propter unius hominis culpam, seu veram, seu, quod magis apparuit judicibus, falsam; et in parte Africana solus Donatus potuerit statum Ecclesiæ conservare, de toto autem orbe terrarum sit deletus sanctorum apostolorum labor et passio marlyrum.","english":"LXVII.\n\nThe sixty-seventh heresy is that of the Satannians, from Satannius. These say that after the resurrection of the dead, they will not remain in the same state in which we now are; nor are they to be so changed that there is a new heaven and a new earth, as holy Scripture promises (II Peter 3:13). Against these the writings of both Testaments contend.\n\nLXVIII.\n\nThe sixty-eighth heresy is that of the Gymnopodes. These always walk with bare feet, because the Lord said to Moses: Loose the sandal from your feet (Exodus 3:5); and because holy Isaiah is read to have walked with bare feet (Isaiah 20:2). Therefore these make a schism, since they condemn those who wear shoes.\n\nLXIX.\n\nIn the sixty-ninth heresy, the Donatists arose from Donatus: who, on account of Caecilian, bishop of the Church of Carthage, having been ordained against their will, made a schism, charging him with crimes not proven, and especially that he had been ordained by the traditors of the divine Scriptures. But when they were convicted of lying in this matter, they turned the schism into a heresy. As if, even if the crimes against Caecilian had been true, the Church throughout the whole world could have lost its standing because of the guilt of one man—whether true, or, as appeared more clearly to the judges, false; and Donatus alone in the African part could have preserved the standing of the Church, while from the whole world the labor of the holy apostles and the passion of the martyrs would have been erased.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":49,"ref":"p49","source":"Immo ipse Salvatoris nostri cruor ad conservandum cœlum catholicæ fidei defecit, quem solus Donatus cum aliquanlis asellionibus Byzacenis obtinuit. Et ideo ausi sunt rebaptizare catholicos. In quo opere et præsumptores se et damnabiles comprobarunt, cum Ecclesiæ universali sciant placuisse, nec in ipsis hæreticis baptismatis violare virtutem. Hujus hæresis principem legimus Donatum: qui de Numidia veniens Carlhaginem, et contra Cæcilianum Christi dividens plebem, adjungens sibi ejusdem factionis episcopos, a Majorinum nomine in sua parte apud Carthaginem ordinavit episcopum. Cui Majorino Donatus alius in eadem divisione successit: qui eloquentia sua sic confirmavit hanc hæresim, ul multi existiment de ipso polius Donatistas initium hæreseos assumpsisse. Exstant hodie scripta ejus, ubi probatur in Trinitate contra fidem catholicam suscepisse. Et quamvis unius substantie dicat in Trinitate Deum Patrem, tamen majorem Filio, Filium majorcm Spiritu sancto confirmare tentavit. Sed in hunc errorem ideo nullus de populo cjus attendit, quia alia erat intentio inter partes. Hi hæretici in partibus Italiæ Monteses appellantur, in interiore Africa Parmeniani, in Carthaginiensi Donatistae.","english":"Nay, the very blood of our Savior has failed to preserve the heaven of the catholic faith, which Donatus alone with some little asses of Byzacena obtained. And therefore they have dared to rebaptize catholics. In which work they have proved themselves both presumptuous and damnable, since they know that it has pleased the universal Church, and that not even in heretics themselves is the power of baptism to be violated. We read that the leader of this heresy was Donatus: who, coming from Numidia to Carthage, and dividing the people of Christ against Caecilian, joining to himself the bishops of the same faction, ordained as bishop on his own side at Carthage one Majorinus by name. To this Majorinus another Donatus succeeded in the same division: who by his eloquence so confirmed this heresy that many think the Donatists took the beginning of the heresy rather from him. His writings exist today, where it is proved that he received [a teaching] on the Trinity contrary to the catholic faith. And although he says that God the Father is of one substance in the Trinity, yet he attempted to confirm that the Father is greater than the Son, and the Son greater than the Holy Spirit. But no one of his people paid attention to this error, because their intent was otherwise among the parties. These heretics in the regions of Italy are called Montenses, in inner Africa Parmenians, in the Carthaginian territory Donatists.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":50,"ref":"p50","source":"In utriusque Numidiæ partibus habent veluti monachos, quos Circumcelliones vocamus, agrestes et audacissimos dæmonum famulos: qui non solum in alios acriter saeviunt, verum etiam sibi ipsis miseri omnino non parcunt. Nam per mortes varias, maximeque præcipitiorum, et aquarum, et ignium, sese interficere consuerunt, et ad bunc exitum ex utroque sexu quantos potuerint seducunt. Aliquando etiam quos invenerint rogant ut ab eis occidantur, mortem nisi fecerint comminantes. Quod verum est, multis Donatistarum displicent tales: sed hoc verbo, non opere. Nam si vere displicerent, utique talibus non communicarent, qui per totum orbem Ecclesiis unius Cæciliani crimen impingunt. Nam et inler se frequenter habuere dissidia. Denique apul Carthaginem, temporibus Heracliani comitis, cum Maximianus contra Primianum, ab ejusdem erroris centum ferme episcopis ordinatus, a reliquis trecentis decem episcopis qui ordinationi ejus crimina impingebant, fuisset damnatus, docuit populum qui eum sequebatur, etiam extra Ecclesiam dari posse baptismum Christi.","english":"In the regions of both Numidias they have, as it were, monks whom we call Circumcellions, rustic and most audacious servants of demons: who not only rage fiercely against others, but also, wretched as they are, do not spare even themselves. For by various deaths, especially by precipices, waters, and fires, they are accustomed to kill themselves, and to this end they seduce as many of either sex as they can. Sometimes, too, they beg those whom they meet to be killed by them, threatening death if they do not do it. It is true that such men displease many of the Donatists: but in word, not in deed. For if they truly displeased them, they would certainly not hold communion with such men, who throughout the whole world lay the crime of one Caecilian against the Churches. For they also frequently had dissensions among themselves. Finally, at Carthage, in the times of Count Heraclian, when Maximian, ordained against Primian by nearly a hundred bishops of the same error, had been condemned by the remaining three hundred and ten bishops who laid crimes against his ordination, he taught the people who followed him that the baptism of Christ could be given even outside the Church.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":51,"ref":"p51","source":"Denique, quicunque aut a Primiano ad Maximianum abiir, aut a Maximiano ad Primianum, non est iterum baptizatus ab eo qui contra voluntatem eorum ordinatus est, comprobantur ab eo quem ut:que damnaverunt: non abjiciunt, non renuunt, non mutant baptismatis sacramentum; et seu a Primiano, sive a Maximiano quis aut baptizetur, aut clericus ordinetur, quasi ab uno factum sit, non a duobus contrariis; in ea dignitate qua ab uno venerit quis ad alterum, perseverat: non mutatur baptisma, nec dignitas tollitur; quia non de baptismatis altercatione, sed de ordinationis contentione facta divisio comprobatur. De Cæciliani enim ordinatione dissenlire cceperunt, non de baplismatis aut Mel trans. gressione sese ab Ecclesia absciderunt.\n\nLXX.\n\nSeptuagesimam haeresim Priscillianorum apud Hispanos Priscillianus legitur inchoasse. Hi animas divinæ natune affirmant. Quas ad agonem quemdam spontaneum in terris exercendum, per septem cœlos et per quosdam gradatim dicunt descendere princi patus, et in malignum principem incurrere a quo istum mundum factum volunt, atque ab hoc principe per diversa carnis corpora seminari. Asserunt etiam fatalibus stellis homines colligatos, ipsumque corpus nostrum secundum duodecim signa cœli esse compositum.","english":"Finally, whoever either went over from Primianus to Maximianus, or from Maximianus to Primianus, is not baptized again by him who was ordained against their will; they are approved by him whom they both condemned; they do not cast him off, do not reject him, do not change the sacrament of baptism. And whether one is baptized or ordained a cleric by Primianus or by Maximianus, it is as though it were done by one, not by two who are opposed; in whatever dignity one has come from one to the other, he perseveres in it: the baptism is not changed, nor is the dignity taken away; because the division is shown to have arisen not from a dispute about baptism, but from a contention about ordination. For they began to disagree over the ordination of Caecilianus, not over baptism or the transgression of the law, and cut themselves off from the Church.\n\nLXX.\n\nThe seventieth heresy, that of the Priscillianists among the Spaniards, Priscillian is read to have begun. These affirm that souls are of a divine nature. They say that these descend through seven heavens and through certain principalities, step by step, to undergo a certain voluntary contest on earth, and fall in with an evil prince, by whom they hold this world was made, and by this prince are sown into various bodies of flesh. They assert also that men are bound by the fates of the stars, and that our very body is composed according to the twelve signs of heaven.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":52,"ref":"p52","source":"Prorsus sicut ii qui Mathemalici vulgo appellantur, constituunt in capite arietem, taurum in cervice, geminos in humeris, cancrum in pectore, et cætera nominatim signa percurrentes ad plantas, a signo Christi ad signa e astrologi migraverunt. Hæc eL alia fabulosa et vana multa confingunt. Uxores a viris quas potuerint separant. Carnes sicut Manichæi fugiunt. Apocryphas simul cum canonicis Scripturis accipiunt, et in sensus suos allegorizando convertunt. Trinitatem autem, sicut Sabelliani, ipsum sibi Patrem, ipsum sibi Filium, ipsum sibi sanctum Spiritum confitentur.\n\nLXXI.\n\nSeptuagesimam et primam hæresim Adelofagi inchoarunt, dicentes non debere ita cibum sumere Christianum, ut ab alio videatur dum comedit. Et haec sola causa eos ab Ecclesia separare dignoscitur. Trinitatem enim ejusdem substantiæ confitentur. Egerunt cum eis episcopi de Epheso.","english":"Just like those commonly called Mathematici, they set a ram in the head, a bull in the neck, twins in the shoulders, a crab in the breast, and running through the other signs by name down to the feet, they have migrated from the sign of Christ to the signs of the astrologer. These and many other fabulous and vain things they invent. They separate wives from husbands as many as they can. They avoid meats like the Manichaeans. They accept apocryphal writings together with the canonical Scriptures, and turn them into their own meanings by allegorizing. But the Trinity, like the Sabellians, they confess as the Father himself to himself, the Son himself to himself, the Holy Spirit himself to himself.\n\nLXXI.\n\nThe seventy-first heresy the Adelophagi began, saying that a Christian ought not to take food in such a way that he is seen by another while he eats. And this alone is known to separate them from the Church. For they confess the Trinity of the same substance. The bishops from Ephesus dealt with them.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":53,"ref":"p53","source":"LXXII.\n\nSeptuagesimam et secundam hæresim Rhetorianorum, a Rhetorio inchoatam Philistro scribente invenimus. Hi ad tantam vanilalem devoluti sunt, ut dicant omnes hæreticos recte apud Deum incedere, quia hoc in eorum mentibus datum est: sic colunt Deum sicut possunt. Error eorum nobis videtur reprehensibilis: apud Deum autem, nec erroi est, nec vituperatio. Hi hoc docentur a suis doctoribus, ut præter templa et synagogas, ubicunque invocatur Christus natus ex Virgine, introeanl, et participcs se faciant hæreticorum.\n\nLXXIII.\n\nSeptuagesima et tertia hæresis est Theoponitarum. Hi dicunt in Christo, dum patcrelur, Divinitatem sic doluissc, sicut potest dolere aninia dum Corpus suppliciis agitur. De quibus ait Gregorius episcopus: Infelices et miseri non vident, in arboribus, quando ferro cædeuntur, solem quidem esse in arboribus: » nunquid non dolet solis splendor, quem utique, antequam ad lignum perveniat, priorem ictus ferri contingit? Deus ergo lux est, et quomodo caedi potest lux? Nam quod anima sit quæ doleat in corpore, hinc Advertimus, quod recedente anima de corpore, nulla potest corpus sentire, nec adversa net prospera.","english":"LXXII.\n\nWe have found the seventy-second heresy, that of the Rhetorians, begun by Rhetorius, in the writings of Philistrus. These have fallen into such great vanity that they say all heretics walk rightly before God, because this has been granted in their minds: they worship God as they are able. Their error seems to us reprehensible; but before God there is neither error nor blame. These are taught by their teachers that, apart from temples and synagogues, wherever Christ born of the Virgin is invoked, they should enter and make themselves partakers with the heretics.\n\nLXXIII.\n\nThe seventy-third heresy is that of the Theoponitae. These say that in Christ, while he suffered, the Divinity grieved just as a soul can grieve while the body is subjected to torments. Concerning these Bishop Gregory says: The unhappy and wretched do not see that in trees, when they are cut down with iron, the sun is indeed in the trees; does the splendor of the sun not grieve, which, before it reaches the wood, is certainly struck first by the blow of the iron? God therefore is light, and how can light be cut? For that it is the soul which grieves in the body, we perceive from this, that when the soul departs from the body, the body can feel nothing, neither adversity nor prosperity.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":54,"ref":"p54","source":"In corpore ergo Domini nostri Jesu Christi, anima humanitUs sensit quam cum corpore assumpsit, non ipse qui assumpsit, sicut nec sol qui in arbore quam memoramus illuxit: etiam si solis lux in arbore possit a verberanle concidi, in Christo Divinitas non possit a cruciante contingi; quia solis lux creatura est, hic antem creator agnoscitur et probatur. Nam quod anima humanitatis senserit passionem, ipse Dominos ait ad discipulos suos, dicens: Tristis est anima mea usque ad mortem (Matt. XXVI, 58). Et hinc dixisse sufficiat: accedamus ad reliquos.\n\nLXXIV.\n\nSeptuagesimam et quartam haeresim Triscilidæ incurrerunt: qui triformem Deum ita asserunt, ut quædam pars ejus sit Pater, quaedam Filius, quædam Spiritus sanctas, et hinc sit Trinitas in unitate. De quibus ait Gregorius: Infelices et miseri non vident quia totam ipsam Trinitatem blasphemant. Non est enim Deus, nisi qui in seipso perfectus esi. Perfectos ergo Pater perfectum ex se genuit Filium, peirectus ex Patre procedit Spiritus sanctus. Ecce tria perfecta non faciunt tres deos, sed unum, quia una est Deitas. Non enim sicut tres personæ, sic tres deitates: sed sunt tres, Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus sanctus; sed una Deitas, una majestas, una virtus, una voluntas, et una substantia confitenda.","english":"In the body, therefore, of our Lord Jesus Christ, the human soul felt what it experienced together with the body it assumed, not He Himself who assumed it, just as the sun did not shine in the tree that we mentioned; even if the sun's light in the tree can be struck down by one who beats it, in Christ the Divinity cannot be touched by one who tortures Him; because the sun's light is a creature, but here the Creator is acknowledged and proved. For as to the fact that the soul of the humanity felt the passion, the Lord Himself said to His disciples, saying: My soul is sorrowful even unto death (Matt. 26:38). And concerning this, let it suffice to have said: let us proceed to the rest.\n\nLXXIV.\n\nThey have fallen into the seventy-fourth heresy, that of the Triscilidae, who assert God to be threefold in such a way that one part of Him is the Father, another part the Son, another part the Holy Spirit, and hence there is a Trinity in unity. Concerning these Gregory says: The unhappy and wretched do not see that they blaspheme the whole Trinity itself. For He is not God unless He is perfect in Himself. The perfect Father, therefore, begot from Himself a perfect Son; the perfect Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. Behold, three perfect beings do not make three gods, but one, because the Godhead is one. For it is not the case that as there are three persons, so there are three Godheads; but there are three, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit; yet one Godhead, one majesty, one power, one will, and one substance is to be confessed.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":55,"ref":"p55","source":"LXXV.\n\nSeptuagesimam et quintam haeresim Hydrotheitæ fecerunt, aquam Deum dicentes, non habentem nec initium nec finem, sordes luentem, peccata dimittentem, et habentem Spiritum sanctum. Quos juste damnat fides catbolica quasi cæcos, et non videntes aquam quibus spurcitiis servit, et potest Deus servire, quibus etiam squaloribus; aut cajus momenti est aqua sine consecratione. Illam sermo vivus vivificat, sermo sanctus sanctificat, ut sanctus Spiritus in ea dignetnr habitare, aut ut possit credentibus peccata mundare. Et sic, quomodo accipit vim hujus rei per benedictionem ut possit omnia mundare peccata, non potest mundare peccata ejus qui fidem suam non ex integro prius Deo crediderit offerendam. Non ergo per solum abluentem, sed magis per credentem Spiritus sanctus infunditur in homines, et peccatorum venia condonatur.\n\nLXXVI.","english":"LXXV.\n\nThe Hydrotheites made the seventy-fifth heresy, saying that water is God, having neither beginning nor end, washing away filth, forgiving sins, and having the Holy Spirit. The catholic faith rightly condemns them as blind, and as not seeing to what impurities water is subject, and to what impurities God can be subject; or of what importance water is without consecration. The living word gives it life, the holy word sanctifies it, so that the Holy Spirit may deign to dwell in it, or so that it may be able to cleanse the sins of believers. And thus, just as it receives the power of this thing through blessing so that it can cleanse all sins, it cannot cleanse the sins of one who has not first believed with his whole faith that it is to be offered to God. Therefore the Holy Spirit is poured into men not through the one washing alone, but rather through the one believing, and forgiveness of sins is granted.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":56,"ref":"p56","source":"Septuagesimam et sextam hæresim fecerunt a Homuncionitæ, qui dicunt in corpore hominis esse imaginem Dei, non in anima. Unde Gregorius: cum imago Det in rebus magnis et primis quæ sunt in homine debeat quæri, in memoria, in intellectu, in scientia, et in illis locis unde homo ad pietatem movetur; bec statuta in anima sunt, non in corporeis liniamentis instructa, et tanto plus similis Deo esl, quanto plus hæc quæ memoravimus purius potuerit obtinere.\n\nLXXVII.\n\nSeptuagesimam et septimam hxresim Ametritæ instituerunt, dicentes innumerabiles esse mundos. Hoc eos dicere novum putat, qui non legit pbilosopbos; hoc enim olim aliquanti philosopborum dixero gentiles. Nos autem Moysen a Deo missum suscipimus: et de mundo quid sentiamus et quid credamus, ab ipso didicimus.\n\nLXXVIII).\n\nSeptuagesimam et octavam hæresim Psychopneumones occuparunt, dicentes animas hominum bonas in spiritus angelorum converti: animas vero hominum malas in spiritus dapmonum mutari.","english":"The Homuncionites made the seventy-sixth heresy, saying that the image of God is in the body of man, not in the soul. Hence Gregory says: since the image of God ought to be sought in the great and primary things that are in man—in memory, in intellect, in knowledge, and in those places from which man is moved to piety—these things are established in the soul, not formed in bodily lineaments, and it is similar to God the more purely it has been able to obtain these things which we have mentioned.\n\nLXXVII.\n\nThe Ametrites established the seventy-seventh heresy, saying that there are innumerable worlds. He thinks this is new for them to say, who has not read the philosophers; for some of the gentile philosophers once said this. But we receive Moses as sent by God: and what we should think and what we should believe about the world, we have learned from him.\n\nLXXVIII.\n\nThe Psychopneumones occupied the seventy-eighth heresy, saying that the good souls of men are turned into the spirits of angels, but the evil souls of men are changed into the spirits of demons.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":57,"ref":"p57","source":"LXXIX.\n\nSeptuagesimam et nonam hæresem Adecerditæ tenent, dicentes: Christo descendenti ad inferos. omnis animarum multitudo occurrit, et credidit ei, et liberata est.\n\nLXXX.\n\nOctogesima hæresis dicit Filium Dei postea genitum, postea quam voluit Pater; si noluisset Pater, non genuisset: esto, confiteamur aequalem Filium Patri; ut aequalis sit, non est res naturæ, sed gratiæ. Pater hoc voluit, ac per hoc totum Patris est, non Filii. Nos e contrario dicimus: sicut fons ex eo genuit flumen ex quo est, ita Pater ex eo genuit Filium ex quo est: et sicut fons non volendo et nolendo genuit fluvium, sed gignendo; ita Pater non disputando, aut volendo, aut nolendo, sed sicut natura fontis hoc exstat, ut de plenitudine sua emanet, ita Pater de plenitudine sua effundens Filium genuit. Et sicut fluvius circuit totum mundum, et mare ingreditur, et tamen de sinu fontis non recedit,: ita et Filius de sinu Patris nunquam discessit, nec tunc quando se humiliavit factus obediens usque ad mortem. Sic ergo inter nos per assumptionem apparuit, sed per majestatem suam de sinu Patris nunquam discessit. Ut enim hoc fieret, nec possibilitas Deo defuit nec voluntas. Unum horum si Deo defuit, Deus non potest nuncupari. Qui enim bonum non vult, malus est; qui non potest quod vult facere, omnipotens non est. Hanc blasphemiam damnantes in hæretico quem diximus, ad cæteros accedamus.","english":"LXXIX.\n\nThe seventy-ninth heresy is held by the Adecerditae, who say: when Christ descended to the underworld, the whole multitude of souls ran to meet him, and believed in him, and was set free.\n\nLXXX.\n\nThe eightieth heresy says that the Son of God was begotten afterwards, after the Father willed it; if the Father had not willed it, he would not have begotten him: granted, let us confess the Son equal to the Father; but that he is equal is not a matter of nature, but of grace. The Father willed this, and by this very fact the whole belongs to the Father, not to the Son. We, on the contrary, say: just as a spring has begotten the river from the very moment it exists, so the Father has begotten the Son from the very moment he exists; and just as a spring has begotten the river not by willing and not willing, but by begetting; so the Father, not by debating, or willing, or not willing, but as it is the nature of a spring that it flows forth from its fullness, so the Father, pouring forth the Son from his fullness, begot him. And just as the river circles the whole world and enters the sea, and yet does not withdraw from the bosom of the spring, so too the Son never departed from the bosom of the Father, not even when he humbled himself and became obedient unto death. Thus, then, he appeared among us through his assumption of humanity, but through his majesty he never departed from the bosom of the Father. For that this might be done, neither ability nor will was lacking to God. If either of these was lacking to God, he cannot be called God. For he who does not will the good is evil; he who cannot do what he wills is not omnipotent. Condemning this blasphemy in the heretic we have mentioned, let us proceed to the rest.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":58,"ref":"p58","source":"LXXXI.\n\nOctogesimam et primam non haeresim accusamus e Luciferum, sed schisma arguimus. Catholicos quidem per omnia, sed Luciferianos faciendo populos, et dividendo se a! Ecclesia, a fide sua a charitas exclusit: dicenle Apostolo: Si fidem habeam ita ut montes transferam, charitatem autem non habeam, nihil mihi prodest (I Cor. XIII, 2). Gloriantur quidem a fide non deviasse: sed non parvum crimen arguimus eos incurrere, qui cum Dei Ecclesia noluerint habere charitatem.\n\nLXXXII.\n\nJovinianistæ a Joviniano quodam octogesimam et secundam hæresim arripuisse detecti sunt. Qui sicut Stoiri philosophi putant, paria dicunt esse universa peccata: nec posse peccare hominem lavacro regenerationis accepto, nec aliquid prodesse jejunia vel a cibis aliquibus ahstinentiam. Virginitalem sanctas Mariæ destruunt, dicentes eam pariendo fuisse violatam. Virginitati etiam sanctimonialium. continentiuin castitati. et viris eligentibus cœlibem vitam, conjugium castorum atque fidelium meritis adaequant; ita ut quædam virgines sacræ provectae jam ætatis, in urbe Romana ubi haec docebat, eo audito nupsisse. dicantur. Non sane ipse Jovinianus vel habebat vel habere volebat uxorem: quod factum non future vitæ profuturum dicebat, sed præsenti commodo applicabat. Conlra hunc suscepit sanctus Ambrosius Mediolanensis episcopus, quique edidit librum ad destruenda omnia commenta adinventionum ejus.","english":"LXXXI.\n\nWe do not accuse the eighty-first heresy of Lucifer, but we charge it as schism. They are indeed catholic in all things, but by making peoples Luciferians and dividing themselves from the Church, they have excluded themselves from their own faith and from charity, since the Apostle says: If I have faith so as to move mountains, but have not charity, it profits me nothing (1 Cor. 13:2). They boast indeed that they have not deviated from the faith, but we charge that they incur no small crime, who have been unwilling to have charity with the Church of God.\n\nLXXXII.\n\nThe Jovinianists are shown to have seized the eighty-second heresy from a certain Jovinian. They, as the Stoic philosophers think, say that all sins are equal; and that a man cannot sin after receiving the washing of regeneration, and that fasts or abstinence from certain foods profit nothing. They destroy the virginity of holy Mary, saying that she was violated by giving birth. They also equate the virginity of holy virgins, the chastity of the continent, and men choosing a celibate life with the merits of chaste and faithful marriage; so that certain sacred virgins already of advanced age, in the city of Rome where he was teaching this, are said to have married upon hearing it. Indeed Jovinian himself neither had nor wished to have a wife: a fact which he said would not profit the future life, but applied to present convenience. Against him Saint Ambrose, bishop of Milan, took up the pen, and he published a book to destroy all the contrivances of his inventions.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":59,"ref":"p59","source":"Quo lecto in media Romana, id est ecclesia Lv teranensi, una voce et populus Romanus et sacerdotes, in eisdem Jovinianislis et ipso Joviniano anathema clamaverunt, in ipso initio Quadragesimæ, sancto Anastasio episcopo antistite. Denique in ipsa authentica hebdomada Paschæ, inventi sunt epulantes et porcorum carnibus trahentes convivia: ita ut assum porcum quem in mensa eorum invenerant, populi collo ejus suspenderent, et ita eum per totam civitatem facerent circuire. Scripsit etiam contra hos Hieronymus presbyter certos libros; quos qui plenius legerit, et quanta bona virginitas et continentia et abslinentia habeat discit, et quanta mala edacitas et luxuria habeat perhorrescit.\n\nLXXXIII.\n\nOctogesimam et tertiam hæresim in sexto libro historiograpbus noster ponit Eusebius, quam nec Epiphanius alicubi memoravit, nec Polycrates, nec Africanus, nec Hesiodus, qui Graeco sermone universas hæreses describentes volumina multorum condidere librorum. In sexto itaque, ut dixi, libro narrat Eusebius esse in Arabia hæreticos, quorum quia auctorem non memorat, nos possumus eos nuncupare Arabicos. Hi, inquit, dicunt animas cum corporibus mori atque dissolvi, et in line sæculi utrumque reparari. Sed hos disputatione Origenis magna memorat ex parte revocatos.","english":"When this had been read in the middle of Rome, that is, in the Lateran church, both the Roman people and the priests with one voice cried anathema upon those same Jovinianists and upon Jovinian himself, at the very beginning of Lent, while the holy Anastasius was bishop and prelate. Finally, in that same authentic week of Easter, they were found feasting and drawing banquets from the flesh of pigs: so that a roasted pig which they had found on their table, the people hung upon its neck, and so made it go around through the whole city. The presbyter Jerome also wrote certain books against them; whoever reads these more fully both learns how many good things virginity and continence and abstinence possess, and shudders at how many evils gluttony and luxury possess.\n\nLXXXIII.\n\nOur historiographer Eusebius places the eighty-third heresy in the sixth book, which neither Epiphanius mentioned anywhere, nor Polycrates, nor Africanus, nor Hesiod, who, describing all the heresies in the Greek tongue, produced volumes of many books. In the sixth book, then, as I said, Eusebius narrates that there are heretics in Arabia, whose author, because he does not mention him, we can call Arabici. These, he says, claim that souls die with bodies and are dissolved, and that both are restored at the end of the age. But he records that these were for the most part recalled by the disputation of Origen.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":60,"ref":"p60","source":"LXXXIV.\n\nOctogesimam et quartam hæresem Helvidianos occupasse ab Helvidio memoramus. Qui ita virginitati sancte Mariæ contradicunt, ut. eam dicant de Joseph post nativitatem Christi alios filios peperisse. Isti quidem nuper. id est sub Siricio Romanorum antistite orti sunt, et per Italiam atque Gallias direxerunt suos discipulos. Contra hos scripsit Hieronymus doctor egregius duos libros, quos lectos in tempore digna eos exsecratione anathematizabant. Epiphanius autem noster, scrutator hærelicorum, scribens contra hos libellum, qui in illo tempore hanc blasphemiis plenam assertionem proferebant. Antidicomaritas eos censuit appeUari.\n\nLXXXV.\n\nOctogesimam et quintam haeresem Patemiani inchoasse leguntur. Hi inferiores humani corporis partes non a Deo, sed a diabolo factas opinantur: et omnium ex illis partibus flagitiorum licentiam tribuentes impurissime vivunt. Hos dum Damasus damnaret episcopus dctectos in scelere, hujusmodi de bis in relatione sua ad Valentinianum majorem scripsit, dicens: Scire volumus pietatem vestram, Venustianos in scelere turpissimo detectos ab apostolica sede esse damnatos. Quorum etiam nfessiones simul direxit. Contra hos postea lex specialis egressa est, ut ubicumque essent reperti, viudice gladio agerentur.","english":"LXXXIV.\n\nWe record that the eighty-fourth heresy, that of the Helvidians, was taken up by Helvidius. These so contradict the virginity of holy Mary as to say that she bore other sons by Joseph after the birth of Christ. These indeed arose recently, that is, under Siricius, bishop of the Romans, and they directed their disciples throughout Italy and the Gauls. Against them Jerome, that distinguished teacher, wrote two books, which, when read in due time, they anathematized with fitting execration. But our Epiphanius, the investigator of heretics, writing a little book against these men, who at that time were putting forth this assertion full of blasphemies, judged that they should be called Antidicomarians.\n\nLXXXV.\n\nWe read that the eighty-fifth heresy, that of the Patemians, began. These hold the opinion that the lower parts of the human body were made not by God but by the devil, and granting license to every shameful act from those parts, they live most impurely. When Damasus the bishop condemned these men, detected in wickedness, he wrote of them in his report to Valentinian the elder, saying: We wish your piety to know that the Venustians, detected in a most shameful crime, have been condemned by the apostolic see. He also sent their confessions together with this. Against these a special law later went forth, that wherever they were found, they should be put to death by the avenging sword.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":61,"ref":"p61","source":"LXXXVI.\n\nTerlullianislas olim a Sotere papa Romano damnatos legimus. Cur autem octogesimam et sextam eos hæresem dicamus arripuisse, hæc causa est, quod quædam Octaviana veniens ex Africa, cujus vir, IIosperius nomine, videbatur duci Arbogasti valde conjunctus, qui etiam apud Maximum tyrannum multum potuit, hæc e Octaviana adduxit secum quemdam tergiversatorem versutumque dæmonem, cui vii centum occurrent verbosanti atque in hominem confidenti. Hic cum se presbyterum diceret Tertullianistam, meruit per sacrum scriptum ut sibi collegium extra muros Urbis fabricaret. Quod dum impetrasset a tyranno Maximo, sanctorum nostrorum exclusit locum, id est duorum fratrum Processi et Martiniani, dicens eos Phryges fuisse, et ideo hanc legem tenuisse, quam Tertullianus: atque hoc ordine per occasionem martyrum Dei populum seducebat. Deo autem Theodosio religioso Augusto dante victoriam, punitoque satellite Maximi de cujus se Tertullianista potestate jactabat, statim fugit cum matrona quæ venerat, nec viventis nec mortui rumore rcnovato. Martyrum suorum Dens excubias catholicæ festivitati restituit. Tertullianus autem fuit civis et presbyter Carthaginiensis: opuscula eloquentissima et ferventia in defensione edidit veritatis. Hic apud Carthaginem basilicam habuit, ubi populi ad eum conveniebant. Quæ basilica usque ad Aurelium episcopum fuit.","english":"LXXXVI.\n\nWe read that the Tertullianists were once condemned by the Roman pope Soter. But the reason we say that they took up the eighty-sixth heresy is this: a certain Octaviana coming from Africa, whose husband, named Hosperius, seemed to be very closely connected with Arbogast, who also had much influence with the tyrant Maximus—this Octaviana brought with her a certain crafty and shifty demon, to whom seven hundred [spirits] ran to meet him as he spoke at length and put his confidence in man. When this man said that he was a Tertullianist presbyter, he obtained by a sacred writing that a congregation should be built for him outside the walls of the City. When he had obtained this from the tyrant Maximus, he shut out the place of our saints, that is, of the two brothers Processus and Martinianus, saying that they had been Phrygians and had therefore held this law which Tertullian held; and in this order, on the occasion of the martyrs, he was seducing the people of God. But when the religious Augustus Theodosius gave victory, and the satellite of Maximus, by whose power he boasted himself a Tertullianist, was punished, he immediately fled with the matron who had come, and no report of him, living or dead, was renewed. God restored the watches of his martyrs to catholic festivity. Now Tertullian was a citizen and presbyter of Carthage; he published most eloquent and fervent little works in defense of the truth. He had a basilica at Carthage, where the people came together to him. This basilica lasted until the bishop Aurelius.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":62,"ref":"p62","source":"Agente enim Augustino Hipponensi episcopo, et rationabiliter cum eis disputante, conversi sunt, Ecclefiamque suam sanctæ Ecclesiæ contulerunt. Tertullianum autem catholica hinc reprehendit auctoritas, quod animam ex anima nasci dicit, et defendit Monunum, et Priscam, et Maximillam contra fidem catholicam, et contra Apollonium episcopum Orientis, et contra Soterem papam urbis Romae, ut supra diximus, dum Cataphryges hæreticos detegeremus: a quibus postea divisus, ne plebs Montani nomen Tertulliani videretur excludere, fundit a se omnem Phrygiæ vanitatem et Tertullianislarum conventicula propagavit: nibil tamen in fide mutavit. Nam et secundas nuptias condemnat, ut diximus, animam ex traduce venire asserit, et nos catholicos Psychicos titulat. Ubicunque autem legeris Tertulliani adversum Psychicos, scias eum contra catholicos agere.","english":"For when Augustine, bishop of Hippo, was acting and reasoning with them in disputation, they were converted and brought their church over to the holy Church. But the catholic authority reproves Tertullian on this point: that he says the soul is born from the soul, and he defends Montanus, and Prisca, and Maximilla against the catholic faith, and against Apollonius, bishop of the East, and against Soter, pope of the city of Rome, as we said above when we were exposing the Cataphrygian heretics. Later, having been separated from them—lest the people seem to exclude the name of Tertullian on account of Montanus—he poured out from himself all the vanity of Phrygia and propagated conventicles of Tertullianists; yet he changed nothing in the faith. For he also condemns second marriages, as we said, he asserts that the soul comes by transmission, and he labels us catholics \"Psychics.\" But wherever you read Tertullian's work Against the Psychics, know that he is acting against the catholics.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":63,"ref":"p63","source":"LXXXVII.\n\nIn octogesima et septima haeresi Abeloitas nominamus: qui cum sint priores pene omnibus haereticis, nunc nostris temporibus finiti. Isti ex filio Adæ libi nominis derivationem assumpserant, id est, ab Abel Abeloi tas se nominari voluerunt. Hi non miscebantur uxoribus, et tamen non licebat lecte ipsi ut sine uxoribus viverent. Mas ergo et femina, sub continentiæ professione simul habitantes, puerum et puellam sibi adoptabant, in ejusdem conjunctionis pacto successores futuros. Morte præventis quibusque singulis alii subrogabantur, dum tamen duo duobus disparis sexus in illius domus societate succederent. Utrolibet quippe parente defuncto, uni remanenti osque ad ejus quoque obitum filii serviebant; post cujus mortem, etiam ipsi puerum et puellam similiter adoptabant. Nec unquam eis defuit unde adoptarent, generantibus circumquaque vicinis, et filios suos inopes ad spem haereditatis alienæ libenter dantibus. Hæc sola erat inter nos atque illos distantia: in quo nostros arguebant, ita non in lege nostra exerceri conjugia, ut et qui nubunl tanquam non nubentes sint.","english":"LXXXVII.\n\nIn the eighty-seventh heresy we name the Abelites: who, although they are almost earlier than all heretics, have now been ended in our times. These had taken the derivation of their name from the son of Adam, that is, from Abel they wished to be called Abelites. These did not have relations with wives, and yet it was not permitted to them to live without wives. Therefore a male and a female, living together under the profession of continence, adopted for themselves a boy and a girl, to be their successors in the pact of the same union. When any individuals were prevented by death, others were substituted, provided that two of the other sex succeeded two in the fellowship of that household. For when either parent had died, the children served the one remaining until his death as well; after his death, they too similarly adopted a boy and a girl. Nor did they ever lack a source from which to adopt, since the neighbors round about were begetting children and gladly gave their own needy sons to the hope of another's inheritance. This alone was the difference between us and them: in that they reproached ours, that marriages were not practiced in our law in such a way that even those who marry are as though not marrying.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":64,"ref":"p64","source":"LXXXVIII.\n\nOctogesimam et octavam hæresim in Pelagio se invenisse sedes apostolica sub papa sancto Innocentio docuit, dum Coclestius Pelagii discipulus apud Carthaginem doceret posse homines sine peccato esse, natura sibi sufficiente sola humana. Restitit ei quidam Paulinus diaconus, defensor et procurator ecclesiae Mediolanensis: cuique in conventu sacerdotum multa capitula objecit contra fidem catholicam, quæ Coelestius damnare neglexit, dicens: Non ad me pertinet de his quæ objecit, ubi meum nomen est, et crimen alienum. Tunc illi obtulerunt ei libros suos, ubi dicebat, ipsam sibi hominis naturam ad perfectionem posse sufficere: hoc est, tantam potest homo exercere justiliam, ut etiam sine peccato possit esse si velit. Adam mortalcm factum, qui sive peccaret, sive non peccaret, esset moriturus. Sic lex misit ad regnum, sicut Evangelia. Infantes in remissionem peccatorum baptizandos esse ideo confitemur, propter regulam universalis Ecclesiæ. Nihil obfuisse generi humano peccatum Adæ. Omnia hæc oppositionum genera ad damnandum objiciebantur Cœlestio. Sed ille dicebat multa esse in his quæ tenerct fides ejus, et propter ipsa caetera damnare non posse. Tunc ad relationem pene omnium Afrorum episcoporum, papa Innocentius damnationem et Pelagio et Cœlestio conscripsit.","english":"LXXXVIII.\n\nThe apostolic see under the holy pope Innocent showed that it had found the eighty-eighth heresy in Pelagius, when Coelestius, a disciple of Pelagius, taught at Carthage that men could be without sin, human nature alone being sufficient for itself. A certain Paulinus, deacon and defender and procurator of the church of Milan, resisted him, and in an assembly of priests brought many charges against him contrary to the catholic faith, which Coelestius neglected to condemn, saying: It does not pertain to me concerning the things he has charged, where my name is, and the crime is another's. Then they offered him his own books, where he said that the very nature of man could suffice for perfection by itself: that is, a man can practice such great justice that he can even be without sin if he wishes. That Adam was made mortal, who, whether he sinned or did not sin, was going to die. That the law sent to the kingdom just as the Gospels do. That infants are to be baptized for the remission of sins we confess for this reason, on account of the rule of the universal Church. That the sin of Adam harmed the human race in nothing. All these kinds of opposing propositions were brought forward to condemn Coelestius. But he said that many of these things were among those which his faith held, and on account of them he could not condemn the rest. Then, at the report of almost all the African bishops, pope Innocent wrote the condemnation of both Pelagius and Coelestius.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":65,"ref":"p65","source":"llli autem, sive antequam damnarentur ab universali Ecclesia, sive posteaquam damnati sunt, non cessaverunt scribere posse hominem sine peccato esse, et nihil obfuisse Adam generi humano, et legem sic misisse ad regnum sicut Evangelia, ct infantes non ideo baptizandos, quia habere possint originale peccatum; et naturam tam bene factam a Deo, ut sibi sola sufficiat ad hoc ut possit carere peccato. Contra hos suscepit sine scriptura quidam Constantius tractator. Post hunc autem, scripsit contra hos et Augustinus Hipponensis episcopus et Hieronymus presbyter a Bethleites. Pelagiani tamen seu Coelestiani, catholicæ plebi permixti sunt, quia eo clesiam aliam non habent: et ideo ubi eis evenerit, communionem non renuunt. Dicunt enim unius confessionis esse in hac parte, in qua cucharistia conficitur: de quaestione enim aiunt, non de communione discernimur. Pro hoc ausu, et a nostris, si deprebendantur, periculis subjacent, et a suis exsecrationi habentur. Habent enim et presbyleros et episcopos suos. Ipse autem Pelagius ita in commentario suo ad Romanos scribit; dum ageret illum locum quo ait Apostolus: Quoniam per unum hominem in hunc mundum peccatum intravit, et per peccatum mors; et ita in omnes homines pertransiit, in quo omnes peccaverunt (Rom.","english":"But they, whether before they were condemned by the universal Church or after they were condemned, did not cease to write that a man can be without sin, and that Adam did no harm to the human race, and that the law was sent for the kingdom just as the Gospels were, and that infants are not to be baptized for the reason that they can have original sin; and that nature was made so well by God that it alone suffices for it to be able to be without sin. Against these a certain Constantius, a tractator, took up the case without Scripture. After him, however, Augustine, bishop of Hippo, and Jerome, the presbyter of Bethlehem, also wrote against them. Yet the Pelagians, or Coelestians, are mixed in with the catholic people, because they have no other church: and therefore, wherever it has happened among them, they do not refuse communion. For they say that they are of one confession in this part, in which the eucharist is consecrated: for, they say, it is over a question, not over communion, that we are distinguished. For this boldness, both by our people, if they are detected, they are subject to dangers, and by their own they are held in execration. For they have both their own presbyters and bishops. But Pelagius himself writes thus in his commentary on Romans, when he was treating that passage where the Apostle says: For through one man sin entered into this world, and through sin death; and so it passed into all men, in whom all sinned (Rom.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":66,"ref":"p66","source":"v, 12); tangens Cœlestium, qui contra traducem peccati primus scripsit, his verbis ail: Hi, inquit, qui contra traducem veniunt, ita illam impugnare nituntur: Si Adæ peccatum etiam non peccantibus obfuit, ergo et Christi gratia etiam non credentibus prodest. Addunt etiam hoc: Si baptismus tollit originale illud peccatum, de duobus baptizatis nati debent hoc carere peccato: quomodo enim mittunt ad posteros quod ipsi in se minime habuerunt? Hæc, sicut ab ipso Pelagio sunt scripta posuimus. De hoc itaque quod dictum est, posse hominem sine peccato esse, objectum est illis ita: Aut potest, et adjutorium non quaerit.; aut non potest, et adjutorium quærit. A quocumque enim auxilium quaeritur, dicit se id quod vult facere implere non posse: alioquin irrisorie poscit qui potest hoc solus pro quo adjutorium postulat adimplere. Verbi gratia, decem pondo cujuscuuque rei si levare voluerim, et adjutorium quaeram, ridiculum vidcor exhibere dum posco. At vero si ducentas aut amplius velim levare libras, quia id implere non possum, auxilium flagito, cl immensis precibus adjutorium quæro: præcipue si status vita: noiii in hoc videtur pondere positus, ut si pondus quod memoravi non levavero, ad vitam pervenire non poss m. De duobus autem bapiizatis natum nihil habere de fide parentum, hæc nos ratio docet.","english":"And touching the Caelestians, who first wrote against the transmission of sin, he speaks in these words: These men, he says, who come against the transmission, strive thus to attack it: If Adam's sin harmed even those who did not sin, then Christ's grace also benefits even those who do not believe. They add this also: If baptism removes that original sin, then those born of two baptized persons ought to be free of this sin; for how do they transmit to their descendants what they themselves had in no way in themselves? These things, as written by Pelagius himself, we have set down. Concerning this, then, which was said—that a man can be without sin—the objection was put to them thus: Either he can, and does not seek help; or he cannot, and does seek help. For whoever seeks aid from anyone declares that he cannot accomplish what he wishes to do; otherwise he asks in mockery, who alone can fulfill that for which he requests aid. For example, if I wished to lift ten pounds of any thing, and sought help, I would seem ridiculous while I ask. But if I wished to lift two hundred pounds or more, because I cannot accomplish it, I demand aid, and with mighty prayers I seek help: especially if the state of life seems to be placed in this weight, so that if I have not lifted the weight I mentioned, I cannot attain to life. But that one born of two baptized persons has nothing from the faith of his parents, this reasoning teaches us.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":67,"ref":"p67","source":"Quoniam hi qui baptizati sunt, duas habent nativitates; unam qua eos generavit caro, aliam qua eos generavit Spiritus sanctus: ct ex his duabus generationibus nati, duas generationes ad posteros mittunt: unam de carne, conjugii ministerio; aliam de Spiritu, baptismate.consecrando. Hic ergo qui de baptizatis natus est, interrogo te qua re natus est? de carne, id est, de prima generatione, an de spiritu, id est, de secunda generatione? Si de spiritu natus est, baplizari non debet: quare? quia Spiritus sanctus eum fecil nasci, non libido conjugii. Sin autem de conjugio carnali, id est de masculo et femina, restat ut unde sunt regenerati de Christo et Ecclesia, suam iterum regenerent prolem. De primo enim est Adam quod nascimur: de secundo autem quod iterum recreamur, dicente sancto Apostolo: Factus est primus homo Adam ie animam viventem, novissimus Adam in spiritum vivificantem. Sed non prius quod spiritale est, sed quod animale; deinde quod spiritale. Primus homo de terra terrenus, secundus homo de cœlo coelestis. Ergo sicut portavimus imaginem terreni, id est sicut creavimus filios carnaliter, portemus et imaginem cœlestis (I Cor. xv, 45); id est, quos creavimus carnaliter, spiritaliter recreemus: aut ipsi qui carnaliter creati sumus nutu Creatoris, iterum ejus gratia spiritaliter recreemur.","english":"Since those who have been baptized have two births—one by which the flesh begot them, the other by which the Holy Spirit begot them—and being born from these two generations, they send forth two generations to their descendants: one from the flesh, through the ministry of marriage; the other from the Spirit, by the consecration of baptism. Therefore, I ask you: this one who has been born from baptized parents, for what reason has he been born? From the flesh, that is, from the first generation, or from the spirit, that is, from the second generation? If he has been born from the spirit, he ought not to be baptized. Why? Because the Holy Spirit caused him to be born, not the lust of marriage. But if he is from carnal marriage, that is, from male and female, it remains that those who have been regenerated from Christ and the Church should in turn regenerate their own offspring from the same source. For it is from the first Adam that we are born; but from the second that we are recreated, as the holy Apostle says: The first man Adam was made a living soul, the last Adam a quickening spirit. But that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven, heavenly. Therefore, just as we have borne the image of the earthy, that is, just as we have created children carnally, let us also bear the image of the heavenly (I Cor. 15:45); that is, those whom we have created carnally, let us recreate spiritually: or let us who have been created carnally by the will of the Creator be again spiritually recreated by His grace.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":68,"ref":"p68","source":"JIoc autem dice, dixit Aposlolus, quia caro et sanguis, id est, prima tantum generatione homines nati, nisi gratiam divinam meruerint adipisci, regnum Dei invenire non possunt. Neque corruptio incorruptionem possidebit (Ibid., 50).\n\nLXXXIX.\n\nOctogesimam et nonam hæresim Nestorius Constantinopolites episcopus legitur incurrisse. Consuetudo est namque ut unum tractatum suum episcopus Alexandrinus mittat ad Constantinopolim, qui recitetur in pascha; et tractatum suum Constantinopolites, qui Alexandriæ recitetur. In tractatu suo Constantinopolites Nestorius scripsit Mariain non esse Theotocon, sed Christotocon: id est, non Deum peperisse, sed hominem. Cyrillus Alexandrinus hoc dictum ita reprehendit, quo diceret per epislolam, ut s: eum forte fefellisset, emendaret dictum. Ex hoc ipso quo reprehensus est Nestorius a Cyrillo, coepit Cyrillum hæreticum inclamare. Data est synodus apud \" Ephesum; et nec sic emendare voluit Nenorius, ut diceret Mariam Deum et hominem genuisse, sed solum, inquit, hominem. Si enim dixcrimus quia Deum genuit, fecimus matrem Deum, sicut gentiles. Maria ergo, iuquit, templum Deo genuit, non ipsum qui in templo habitat. Accepit induci L ut aut damnaret dictum, et rediret ad sedem suan episcopus; aut si damnare noluisset, postea redir non posset. N duit, et in eadem confessione permansit.","english":"But this, the Apostle said, because flesh and blood—that is, men born only by the first generation—unless they have merited to obtain divine grace, cannot enter the kingdom of God. Neither will corruption possess incorruption (Ibid., 50).\n\nLXXXIX.\n\nNestorius, bishop of Constantinople, is read to have incurred the eighty-ninth heresy. For it is the custom that the bishop of Alexandria send one of his treatises to Constantinople, to be read aloud at Easter; and the bishop of Constantinople send his treatise to Alexandria, to be read aloud there. In his treatise Nestorius of Constantinople wrote that Mary is not Theotokos, but Christotokos: that is, that she did not give birth to God, but to a man. Cyril of Alexandria censured this statement so as to say by letter that, if perhaps he had been mistaken, he should correct what he had said. From this very fact that Nestorius was censured by Cyril, he began to cry out that Cyril was a heretic. A synod was held at Ephesus; and not even so did Nestorius wish to correct himself, so as to say that Mary gave birth to God and man, but only, he said, to a man. For if we say that she gave birth to God, we have made her the mother of God, like the gentiles. Mary, therefore, he said, gave birth to a temple for God, not to him who dwells in the temple. He was permitted to be brought in, either to condemn his statement and return to his see as bishop, or, if he refused to condemn it, he could not return afterwards. He did not, and he remained in the same confession.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":69,"ref":"p69","source":"Hunc synodus apud Ephesum damnavit: in qua damnatione Romanus papa Cœlestinus scripsit, et omnes cum eo pariter Orientales atque Occidentales episcopi subscripserunt.\n\nXC.\n\nNonagesima hxresis, quam in præfatione nostra diximus de nomine Augustini episcopi esse mentitam, Prædestinatorum nomen accepit. Hi electionem bonorum, et recusationem malorum, Deo decernente deliniunt, non homine vel studente vel negligente. Nolunt Dei jura, vel a studentibus custodiri, vel a negligentibus violari. Dicunt, etiam si voluerit bonum faccre qui ad malum prædestinatus est, ad bonum pervenire non potcrit: nam qui ad bonum prædestinatus est, etiam si negligat, ad bonum perducelur invitus. Dicunt baptismatis undam non universa peccata mundare. Dicunt, ita antecedit gratia liberum arbitrium, ut ante accipiat homo quam petat, ante inveniat quam quærat, ante ei aperiatur quam pulset. Dicunt nullum ad Christi iidem accedere, nisi fuerit a Patre tractus invitus: illud attendentes: Nemo venit ad me, nisi quem Pater attraxerit (Joan. VI, 41). Dicunt omnia non in re, sed ita in spe fieri, ut quod dicit Apostolus: Spes quæ videtur, non est spes (Rom. VIII, 24), etiam hoc mysteriis applicent dictum, etdicant: Ea quæ percipiuntur, videntur quidcm esse, sed non sunt. Dicunt: Plus obfuit ad nocendum Adam generi humano, quam Cbristus iri subveniendo.","english":"The synod at Ephesus condemned him; in that condemnation the Roman pope Celestine wrote, and all the Eastern and Western bishops subscribed together with him.\n\nXC.\n\nThe ninetieth heresy, which we said in our preface falsely claimed the name of Augustine the bishop, received the name of the Predestinarians. These define election of the good and rejection of the evil as God decreeing it, not man striving or neglecting. They will not have God's rights either guarded by those who strive or violated by those who neglect. They say that even if one predestined to evil wishes to do good, he cannot arrive at good; for one predestined to good, even if he neglects, will be brought to good unwilling. They say that the water of baptism does not cleanse all the sins of the world. They say that grace so precedes free will that a man receives before he asks, finds before he seeks, has it opened to him before he knocks. They say that no one comes to Christ unless he has been drawn by the Father unwilling; attending to that saying: No one comes to me unless the Father who sent me draws him (John 6:44). They say that all things happen not in reality but in hope, so that what the Apostle says—Hope that is seen is not hope (Rom 8:24)—they also apply to the mysteries, and say: The things that are perceived seem indeed to be, but are not. They say: Adam was more harmful to the human race in doing harm than Christ was helpful in giving aid.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":70,"ref":"p70","source":"Nam A'Iam, aiunl, quod nocuit ita manet ut hoc nec passio Christi, nec baptismatis sanctificalio possit auferre.\n\nVerum quid moras tibi, o lector sancte et studiose, incutimus? Librum eorum tibi integrum, sicut est editus, in isto corpore praesentamus: cujus lectione cognosces definitiones ejus a melatoribus Antichristi adinventas. Quotiescunque autem contra eos suscepimus, dixerunt nos ex hæreticorum argutiis contra se agere. Videntes enim se ita superari, ut suspirare non possent, hanc calumniam semper catholicis nisibus irrogarunt, ut dum liment se hæreticos infamari, in silentio vcritatis loquelam arctarent. Eorum ergo ob causam omnes hæreses a Simone memorantes huc usque deteximus, ut probemus nos soli fidei catholicæ esse concordes. Rogamus te, Domine, Pater cœli et terræ, qui cum Filio tuo, ct Spiritu sancto, unius veritatis obtines majestatem, unius majestatis obtines Deitatem, unius Dcitatis obtines trinitatem, ut nos adjuves contra hostes tuos tela tractantes. Habeant illi castra Goliæ in Allophylorum acic constituta. Nos Hebræi, pueri tui David pastoforium assumentes, de lapide tuo angulari pugnemus; ut fidentes cum Apostolo tuo dicere valeamus: Deo nostro gratias, qui dedit nobis victoriam per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum (I Cor. xv, 57).","english":"For, they say, what has harmed remains so, such that neither the passion of Christ nor the sanctification of baptism can take it away.\n\nBut why, O holy and zealous reader, do we strike delays into you? We present to you their entire book, just as it was published, in this body of ours; by reading it you will recognize its definitions, invented by the imitators of Antichrist. But whenever we have taken up arms against them, they have said that we act against them out of the quibblings of heretics. For seeing themselves so overcome that they could not even sigh, they have always inflicted this calumny upon catholic efforts, so that while they pretend that heretics are being defamed, they might restrict the speech of truth in silence. For their sake, therefore, we have uncovered all the heresies from Simon up to this point, so that we may prove that we alone are in concord with the catholic faith. We ask you, Lord, Father of heaven and earth, who with your Son and the Holy Spirit hold the majesty of one truth, hold the Deity of one majesty, hold the trinity of one Deity, that you help us as we wield weapons against your enemies. Let them have the camp of Goliath set in the battle line of the Allophyloi. Let us Hebrews, assuming the pastoral staff of your boy David, fight from your cornerstone; so that, trusting, we may be able to say with your Apostle: Thanks be to our God, who has given us victory through our Lord Jesus Christ (I Cor. 15:57).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":71,"ref":"p71","source":"Sit pax omnibus catholicis, et cum angelis una nobiscum voce exclament, decantantes, Gloria in excelsis Deo, et in terra pax hominibus bonæ voluntatis.\n\nLIBER SECUNDUS, * SUB NOMINE AUGUSTINI CONFICTUS,\n\nNonagesimam hæresim continens, qua asserit Dei prædestinatione peccata committi.\n\nParticipem me intentionis vestræ, qui defenditis veritatem ( fieri, fratrum spiritalium suggestio invitavit. Unde breviler nisibus vestris me interserens, sermonis latitudinem fugi, sensosque qui latum quærunt certaminis campum in angustum constitui, ut fastidium vobis lectionis auferrem, et occasionem defendendæ veritatis afferrem, atque dimicantes servos contra volunlatem sui Domini confutarem: eorum scilicet, qui dicuut, Deo invito et nolente hominum moveri arbitria, ac de potestate mortalium Dei immortalis potestatem infringi. Huc adjiciunt, homines per volunlatem suam sanctos fieri, et suo arbitratu ad Dei amicitias pervenire. Levi hos impulsione videbitis corruentes, a quibus sollicitudo humana et meliores et primas accepit partes, quibus excluso Deo dicitur homo, non ordinatione Dei, sed sua se posse voluntate salvare. Vos autem, o filii charitatis, zelum fidei signatum in vestris sensibus retinentes, estote securi de ordinatione Dei, quam prædestinando constituit: certaque sit nostris sensibus apostolico ore dicta sententia: Quoniam cui vult Deus miseretur, et quem vult indurat.","english":"Let there be peace to all catholics, and let them cry out together with the angels in one voice with us, singing, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men of good will.\n\nBOOK TWO, FALSELY COMPOSED UNDER THE NAME OF AUGUSTINE,\n\nContaining the ninetieth heresy, in which he asserts that sins are committed by the predestination of God.\n\nThe suggestion of spiritual brethren has invited me to become a partaker of your intention, you who defend the truth. Hence, briefly inserting myself into your efforts, I have avoided a broad discourse, and I have confined to a narrow compass the thoughts of those who seek a wide field of combat, so that I might remove from you the distaste for reading, and bring the occasion of defending the truth, and confute servants fighting against the will of their own Lord: namely, those who say that the wills of men are moved against God's will and unwillingness, and that the power of the immortal God is infringed by the power of mortals. To this they add, that men are made holy by their own will, and by their own judgment come to the friendships of God. You will see these men rushing headlong with a light impulse, by whom human solicitude has received both the better and the first parts, by whom, with God excluded, it is said that man can save himself, not by the ordination of God, but by his own will. But you, O sons of charity, keeping the zeal of faith sealed in your minds, be secure concerning the ordination of God, which he established by predestining: and let the sentence spoken by the apostolic mouth be certain to our minds: For whom he wills, God has mercy on, and whom he wills, he hardens.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"scripture","severity":"info","ref":"Luke 2:14","text":"The English carries the scriptural phrase “glory to god in the highest”, which matches Luke 2:14. The match is on the English draft; check the Coptic before quoting the verse."}]},{"i":72,"ref":"p72","source":"Non est enim volentis neque currentis, sed miserentis est Dei (Rom. IX. 18, ); quia habet potestatem figulus luti ex eadem massa facere unum vas ad honorem, alium ad contumeliam (lbid., 21); et inde est quod caro adversatur spiritui, spiritus carni. Hæc, inquit Apostolus, invicem adversantur, ut non quæ vultis, illa faciatis (Gal. v, 17). In opere enim suo Deus omnes homines e ante prævidit, et quid unicuique competeret prævidendo constituit. Hoc majestatis cjus singulare indicium, in quo parem non habet. ' Deus solus est enim, qui cogitanda, loquenda, operanda præsciit: et quia præsciit cunctorum generaliter gesta ante quam fierent, merita i disponendo quasi facta con- I spexit. Et idcirco res, quasi oculatas et sibi in manifesto positas, tunc quando prasciit prædestinavit, et constituit cui conformes fierent imaginis Filii ejus, ut esset et Filius Dei primogcnitus in multis fratribus: quos autem prædestinavit i hos vocavit, quos vocavit i hos justificavit, et quos justificavit ipsos et magnificavit (Rom. VIII, 29, 50). Unde et prophem dicit: Non est in homine via ejus (Jerem. x, 23). Quid putatis vos, o fragiles, o caduci, niiseri et mortales nomines, si quid bene agitis esse laudandos, aut furto delinquentes prorsus esse damnandos? cum ideo lex loquatur, ut timorem incutiat: celerum nihil sit nisi quod voluerit Deus.","english":"For it is not of him who wills nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy (Rom. 9:18); because the potter has power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel unto honor and another unto dishonor (ibid., 21); and hence it is that the flesh is contrary to the spirit, and the spirit to the flesh. These, says the Apostle, are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you will (Gal. 5:17). For in His work God foresaw all men beforehand, and by foreseeing He determined what would befit each one. This is a singular proof of His majesty, in which He has no equal. For God alone is He who foreknew things to be thought, spoken, and done; and because He foreknew the deeds of all in general before they were done, by disposing their merits He beheld them as though already done. And therefore the things, as though seen and set plainly before Him, He predestined at the time when He foreknew them, and determined to whom they should be conformed to the image of His Son, so that His Son might be the firstborn among many brothers; and those whom He predestined, these He also called; and those whom He called, these He also justified; and those whom He justified, these He also glorified (Rom. 8:29-30). Hence also the prophet says: The way of man is not in himself (Jer. 10:23). What do you think, you fragile, you fallen, wretched and mortal men—that if you do anything well you are to be praised, or that if you sin by theft you are altogether to be condemned? Since the law speaks for this reason, that it may strike fear; otherwise there is nothing except what God has willed.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":73,"ref":"p73","source":"Quem voluerit Deus sanctum esse, sanctus est; aliud non crit: quem præscierit esse iniquum, iniquus erit; aliud non crit. Prædestinatio enim Dei jam et numerum justorum, et numecum constituit peccatorum, et necesse erit constitutum terminum prateriri non posse. Hoc autem non quasi personarum acceptor constituit, sed quasi præscius omnium futurorum. Non enim per acceptionem personæ, sed per præscientiam Deus prædestinationem suam fixit atque constiluit. Jam quos præsciit nullo modo converti, hos predestinavit ad mortem: quos præsciit i omni modo converti, hos prædestinavit ad vitam. Miror autem quod testimonia veteris Testamenti contra auctoritatem novi prorcrantur. Solent enim sancti Ezechielis prophetæ testimonia usurpare dicentis: Hæc dicit Dominus: Cum dixero impio: Morte morieris; et conversus fuerit ab impietate sua, vivo ego, dicit Dominus. vita vivet (Ezech. XVIII, 21). Hoc, ut dixi, in veteri lege scriptum est pro tempore captivitatis, pro causa qua ipsa captivitas facta est, pro persona populi cui irro. gata est, ut disceret in captivitate positus pro peccatis suis se jugo Assyrii regis esse subjectum. Certe pro peccato captivitas facta est: et ut quid simul captivitatem justi cum peccatoribus incurrerunt, nisi quia mysteria Dei a nostra fragilitate penitus sciri non possunt? Hoc. ergo mysterium in veteri lege scriptum est.","english":"Whom God wills to be holy, is holy; he cannot be otherwise. Whom he has foreknown to be wicked, will be wicked; he cannot be otherwise. For the predestination of God has already fixed both the number of the righteous and the number of sinners, and it must be that the appointed limit cannot be passed over. But he established this not as one who shows partiality to persons, but as one who foreknows all future things. For God fixed and established his predestination not by acceptance of persons, but by foreknowledge. Those whom he foreknew would in no way be converted, he predestined to death; those whom he foreknew would be converted in every way, he predestined to life. But I am amazed that testimonies of the Old Testament are brought forward against the authority of the New. For they are accustomed to seize upon the testimonies of the holy prophet Ezekiel, who says: Thus says the Lord: When I have said to the wicked man, You shall die the death; and he has turned from his wickedness, as I live, says the Lord, he shall live the life (Ezek. 18:21). This, as I have said, was written in the old law for the time of the captivity, for the cause by which that captivity came about, for the person of the people upon whom it was imposed, so that, placed in captivity, it might learn that for its own sins it had been subjected to the yoke of the king of Assyria. Certainly the captivity came about because of sin; and why did the righteous incur captivity together with the sinners, if not because the mysteries of God cannot be thoroughly known by our frailty? This mystery, therefore, was written in the old law.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":74,"ref":"p74","source":"In novo autem Apostolus clamat: Vasa iræ apta in interitum (Rom. IX, 22). Et ideo scriptum memorat Denm dixisse per præscientiam suam: Jacob dilexi, Esau autem odio habui (Rom. ix, 13). Cum enim nondum nati fuissent, nec aliquid egissent huni vel mali (Ibid., 11), ex præscientia dictum est, quod unus haberetur odio, alius amaretur. Hæc a nobis adinventa non sunt: nec dicimus aliquid præter quam evangelizavit Apostolus. Per præscientiam Dei prædestinationem ipse factam commemorat. De:Deo ipse dicit: Quos vocavit, hos prædestinavit (Rom. VIII, 30). Si præscientem, et prædestinantem et vocantem, in Apostolo lcgilis, nobis ut quid impingitis crimen ob hoc quod dicimus prædestinasse Deum homines, sive ad justitiam, sive ad peccatum, ne videretur ipse sibi quasi non provide faccre homines, qui facerent quod nolebat? Invictus enim in sua voluntate permanet Deus, cum homo assidue superetur. Si ergo invictum confitemini Deum, confitemini et hoc, quia quod eos voluit ille qui condidit, aliud esse non possunt. Unde colligimus apud animum quos Deus semel prædestinavit a i vitam, etiam si negligant, etiam si peccent, etiam si nolint, ad vitam.perducentur invili: quos autem prædestinavit ad mortem, etiam si currant, etiam si festinent, sine causa laborant. Nec hoc sine magisterio admittas evidentis exempli.","english":"But in the New Testament the Apostle cries out: Vessels of wrath fitted for destruction (Rom. 9:22). And therefore he recalls that it is written that God said through his foreknowledge: Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated (Rom. 9:13). For when they had not yet been born, nor had done anything good or evil (ibid., 11), it was said from foreknowledge that one was held in hatred and the other loved. These things have not been invented by us, nor do we say anything beyond what the Apostle proclaimed. He himself recalls that predestination was made by God's foreknowledge. Of God he himself says: Those whom he called, he predestined (Rom. 8:30). If you read in the Apostle one who foreknows, predestines, and calls, why do you lay a charge against us for saying that God predestined men, whether to righteousness or to sin, lest he should seem to himself to have made men as it were without providence—men who would do what he did not wish? For God remains invincible in his own will, while man is continually overcome. If, therefore, you confess that God is invincible, confess this also: that what he who created them willed them to be, they cannot be otherwise. From this we conclude in our mind that those whom God has once predestined to life, even if they are negligent, even if they sin, even if they are unwilling, will be brought to life against their will; but those whom he has predestined to death, even if they run, even if they hasten, labor in vain. Nor should you admit this without the teaching of a clear example.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":75,"ref":"p75","source":"Judas quotidie verbum vitæ audivit, quotidie adhæsit Domino, quotidie virtutibus occupatus, quotidie ipsum Dei Filium monitorem audivit: et quia prædestinatus cst ad mortem, uno ictu subito iuteriit. Saulus quotidie persecutor, quotidie lapidator Cbristianorum, quotidie vastator Ecclesiariun: et quia pracdestinatus est ad vitam, uno ictu subito vas electionis est factus. Quid ergo tu qui in peccatis permanes expavescis? si te Deus dignatus est, sanctus eris: aut quid tu qui in sanctitate Vivis,. sollicitus redderis quasi tua te sollicitudo conservet? si Deus noluerit, nunquam corrues. Uterque de Deo securi estote. Nunquid tu qui sanctus es, et sollicitus es ne corruas, et die noctuque orationibus ades, occuparis jejuniis, et divinis lectionibus diligenter insistis, exbortationibus vacas, atque omnibus sanctis studiis quotidie immines, nunquiduam tuo hoc stadio salvus eris? Nunqnid sanctior eris Juda, qui accepit potestatem infirmos curandi, dæmonia fugandi, mortuos suscitandi, calcandi super serpentes et scorpiones, collega apostolorum, Christi discipulus; et tamen quia prædestinatus est ad inortem, mortem æternam invenit? Cessa de te, o homo, cessa, inquam, de virtute tua esse sollicitus, et de Dei tantum confide voluntate securus. Nihil enim boni tu Deo oblincbis invito; sed si te dignabitur Deus ut in bono permaneas, salvus eris.","english":"Judas heard the word of life every day, every day he clung to the Lord, every day he was occupied with virtues, every day he heard the very Son of God as his monitor; and because he was predestined to death, in a single sudden stroke he perished. Saul was every day a persecutor, every day a stoner of Christians, every day a ravager of the Church; and because he was predestined to life, in a single sudden stroke he was made a vessel of election. Why then do you, who remain in sins, tremble? If God has deigned to regard you, you will be holy; or why are you, who live in holiness, made anxious, as if your own anxiety preserved you? If God has not willed it, you will never fall. Let both of you be secure concerning God. Are you, who are holy and anxious lest you fall, and who attend prayers day and night, are occupied with fastings, and diligently apply yourself to divine readings, devote yourself to exhortations, and every day press on in all holy pursuits—are you ever to be saved by this your own striving? Will you be holier than Judas, who received power to heal the sick, to drive out demons, to raise the dead, to tread upon serpents and scorpions, a colleague of the apostles, a disciple of Christ; and yet, because he was predestined to death, he found eternal death? Cease concerning yourself, O man, cease, I say, to be anxious about your own virtue, and be secure, trusting only in the will of God. For you will obtain nothing good from God against his will; but if God deigns that you remain in good, you will be saved.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":76,"ref":"p76","source":"Tu quoque qui in peccato desperationc vana concuteris, disce a Paulo apostolo, quis unquam par ejus potuit sceleribus inveniri? Nunquid tu aliquando pejora potuisti quam ille commsit perpetrare peccata? Et tamen, quia prædestinatus ad apostolatum, evasit subito universa crimina, et ab inferioribus inferis ad superiora superiorum ascendit. Omnes itaque, quos scit dignos salute redemptionis suæ Deus, hos ad salutem prædestinavit: et hos tantum salvat, quos se ad salutem prædestinasse cognoscit. Salus enim Dei non.volUi. tali hominis servit; ipse enim scit cuiquid faciat. Nec enim antecedit humani arbitrii libertas gratiam Dei, sed antecedit gratia Dei humani voluntatem arbitrii. Yana est enim et infructuosa voluntas homiuis, et vanum est humanæ voluntatis arbitrium. Errat qui se putat per id quod vult bonum pervenire ad Christum, cum ipse ChrisLus dicat: Nemo venit ad me, nisi quem Pater attraxerit (Joan. vi, 44). Qui melin, sapitis a Christo. dicite si mentilus est Christus: et ita demum asserite nos contra Christi regulam istam fixisse sententiam. Si enim verum dixit Christus, non mentimur quod dicimus prædestinatos trahi ad vitam, quia vita ipse est.","english":"You too, who are shaken in the sin of despair by empty things, learn from the apostle Paul: who was ever found to be his equal in crimes? Could you at any time have committed worse sins than he did? And yet, because he was predestined to the apostleship, he suddenly escaped all his crimes and ascended from the lower depths to the higher realms of the highest. Therefore all whom God knows to be worthy of the salvation of his redemption, these he has predestined to salvation; and he saves only those whom he knows he has predestined to salvation. For the salvation of God does not serve the will of such a man; for he himself knows to whom he does it. Nor does the freedom of human will precede the grace of God, but the grace of God precedes the will of human choice. For the will of man is vain and unfruitful, and the choice of human will is vain. He errs who thinks that through what he wills he comes to Christ as a good, since Christ himself says: No one comes to me unless the Father has drawn him (John 6:44). You who think better things, say from Christ—tell us if Christ is a liar—and only then assert that we have fixed this opinion against the rule of Christ. For if Christ spoke the truth, we do not lie in what we say: that the predestined are drawn to life, because he himself is life.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":77,"ref":"p77","source":"Quod si aggravat vos vis testimonii evangelici, qui contra nostram venitis sententiam, et non potestis aggravati pondere sententiæ nobis dare responsum, saltem Apostoli nobis definitionem exponite, qui dicit: Non est volentis, neque currentis, sed miserentis est Dei (Rom. IX, 16). Quantumcunque igitur studii sui vires ad:edificandum moveat humana voluntas, casso certamine nititur. Aut quid vigilantiam suam putat hominis fragilitasxternis desideriis profuturam, cum propheta evidentibus exclamet documentis, dicens: Nisi Dominus ædificaverit domn, in vanum laboraverunt qui ædificant eam. Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem, in vanum vigilaverunt qui custodiunt eam (Ps. CXXVI, t). Quid est quod contra divinos apices, et contra conscientiam suam, sperat se quispiam ædificationi studere, cum his sacris apicibus doceatur ædificatio hominis non esse certa, sed vana Sed si contra nos venitis, non contra nos venitis, sed contra eum qui dixit: Nisi Dominus ædificaverit domum, in vanum laboraverunt qui ædificant eam. Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem, in vanum vigilaverunt qui custodiunt eam. Ergo nesciit quia non erat utile populo Dei qui hæc fecit scribi, et per posteros usque ad finem sæculorum dirigi? Vos itaque qui ista reprehendiLis, auferte hæc de libro Psalmorum, quia legentes et psallentes hos versiculos, ut dicitis, ædificari non possunt.","english":"But if the force of the gospel's testimony weighs on you, you who come against our opinion, and, weighed down by the burden of that opinion, you cannot give us an answer, at least expound to us the apostle's definition, who says: It is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy (Rom. 9:16). Therefore, however much the human will may stir up the strength of its zeal to build, it struggles in vain combat. Or why does man's frailty think that its vigilance will profit external desires, when the prophet cries out with evident proofs, saying: Unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it have labored in vain. Unless the Lord guards the city, those who guard it have watched in vain (Ps. 126:1). What is it that, against the divine letters and against his own conscience, anyone hopes that he is devoted to building, when by these sacred letters he is taught that man's building is not certain but vain? But if you come against us, you do not come against us, but against him who said: Unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it have labored in vain. Unless the Lord guards the city, those who guard it have watched in vain. Did he therefore not know that it was not useful for the people of God that these things be written and directed through posterity even to the end of the ages? You, therefore, who find fault with these things, take them away from the book of Psalms, because those who read and sing these verses, as you say, cannot be built up.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":78,"ref":"p78","source":"Sed quid putant isti se voluntate sua ad fructum posse ædificationis attingere, cum nec ipse vas electionis suam se asserat potuisse voluntatem implere? Dicit enim de se ipso Apostolus: Non quod volo bonum hoc ago, sed quod nolo malum illud facio (Rom. VII, 19). Si ergo Apostolus quod vult bonam implere non prævalet, quomodo isti dicunt per voluntateln suam ad fructum se e gratiæ pervenire? Apostoli verba sunt, nostrum nihil adjungimus. Ipse de se dicit: Non quod volo bonum hoc ago, sed quod nolo malum illud facio. Et nos culpatis, quia dicimus, Non vocantar nisi prædestinati? a Antecedit enim gratia Dei voluntatem hominis. Prior est enim Deus in bono hominis; homo autem, etiam si optimus sit, in omni bono vix novissimus invenitur. Date primas partes Deo, ut superbiam evacuetis humanam. Quod si volueritis superbiam nutrire hominibus, apparet vos ruinam generis humani perquirere, quia docetis in bono opere non Deum antecedere, sed hominum voluntalem; ut ipsi videantur magis Deum, ut bonum faciat, suis suggestionibus admonere, quasi qui non faceret bonum nisi ipsi dixissent, cum constet Deum nullo suggerente, nullo rogante.bona omnibus condonare. Non enim dicit Apostolus, cum rogaremus, etc.; sed cum inimici, inquit, essemus, reconciliati sumus Deo, non per volunlatem nostram, sed per mortem filii ejus (Rom. v, 10). Ubi est ergo voluntas hominis? exclusa est. Quare?","english":"But what do these men think—that by their own will they can attain the fruit of edification, when not even the vessel of election himself claims that he could fulfill his own will? For the Apostle says of himself: For the good that I will, that I do not; but the evil that I will not, that I do. If, then, the Apostle cannot prevail to fulfill the good that he wills, how do these men say that by their own will they come to the fruit of grace? These are the Apostle's words; we add nothing of our own. He says of himself: For the good that I will, that I do not; but the evil that I will not, that I do. And you find fault with us because we say, None are called except the predestined? For the grace of God precedes the will of man. For God is first in what is good for man; but man, even if he be the best, is scarcely found last in every good. Give the first place to God, that you may empty out human pride. But if you wish to nourish pride in men, it is evident that you are seeking the ruin of the human race, because you teach that in a good work it is not God who comes first, but the will of men—so that they themselves seem rather to admonish God by their suggestions to do good, as though he would not do good unless they had told him, when it is certain that God bestows good things on all with no one suggesting, no one asking. For the Apostle does not say, When we asked, etc.; but, he says, When we were enemies, we were reconciled to God, not through our will, but through the death of his Son. Where, then, is the will of man? It is excluded. Why?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":79,"ref":"p79","source":"quia non omnis qui vult ipse salvatur; quia si omnis qui vellet salvaretur, nullus a salute poterat effici alienus. Omnis etenim homo salvari vult, sed non omnis salvatur homo: salvatur autem is quem voluerit Deus; utique, inquam, is quem voluerit Deus, ut exclusa hominis voluntate, suam plenam ex integro gratiam manifestet. Quod si aliquem vult Deus bonum esse, et bonus non est, ergo homo vincil Deum. Vincit enim Deum, si Deus eum vult esse bonum et bonus non est. Dei ergo voluntas et effectus est in bono hominis. Non enim cum rogaremus, neque cum peteremus, sed Cum inimici, inquit, essemus, reconciliati sumus Deo per mortem flii ejus. Cum autem pro omnibus mortem filii cjus legitis, miror quomodo omnes intelligatis, cum paucos vix ad salutem cernatis attingere. Ubicunque autem omnes legitis, generaliler omnes vultis intelligi, cum omnes sæpe pro parte doceantur. Narn cum dicitur: Omnes declinaverunt (Ps. XIII, 2), non tamen omnes declinaverunt, et Omnis homo mendax (Ps. cxv, 11), non tamen omnis homo mendax, quia de quodam legimus: Erat nomo verax. Et illud: Viri mendaces non erunt illius memores; viri autem veraces inveniuntur in ea (Eccli. xv, 8). Pars ergo maxima omnes videtur significare, cum utique constet non debere omnes intelligi.","english":"For not everyone who wills is himself saved; for if everyone who willed were saved, no one could be made a stranger to salvation. For every man wills to be saved, but not every man is saved; but he is saved whom God has willed—yes, I say, he whom God has willed, so that, with man's will excluded, He may manifest His own grace fully and entirely. But if God wills someone to be good, and he is not good, then man overcomes God. For he overcomes God if God wills him to be good and he is not good. Therefore God's will is also the effect in a man's goodness. For it was not when we were asking, nor when we were petitioning, but, as it says, While we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son. But when you read that the death of His Son was for all, I wonder how you understand all, when you see that few scarcely attain to salvation. But wherever you read all, you wish all to be understood generally, although all is often taught in reference to a part. For when it is said: All have turned aside (Ps. 13:2), yet not all have turned aside; and Every man is a liar (Ps. 116:11), yet not every man is a liar, because we read of a certain one: He was a true man. And that passage: Lying men shall not be mindful of him; but true men are found in her (Sir. 15:8). Therefore the greatest part seems to signify all, although it is certainly agreed that all ought not to be understood.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":80,"ref":"p80","source":"Et hoc miror, quod clausis oculis transitis hostis insidias, vos qui dicitis voluntatem hominis aliquid acquirere posse virtutis: non attendentes quantæ ruinæ castitatis per diabolum fiant: quantaque crimina concupiscentiæ, avaritirc, livoris ac perfidiæ, quotidie perpetrentur. Quæ utique si videretis, non laboraremus vobis ostendere damna virtutum, et victorias vitiorum. Si integra enim esset libertas arbitrii, ista non fierent. Per prævaricationem itaque primi hominis periit ab hominibus libertas arbitrii. Sed vos hæresem Pelagianam iterum renovatis, cum dicitis per libertatem arbitrii homines finem ponere posse peccatis. Excluditis enim gratiam per libertatem arbitrii. Aut enim libero arbitrio liberamur, aut gratia Dei eripimur. Eligite quid dicatis. Si gratiæ totum dederitis, unum sapimus; si libero arbitrio, sciatis nos vobis consentire non posse. Unde autem illi major libertas arbitrii in bono, unde isti minor est, nisi quia Dei dispensatione e censentur? In alio enim tenuem se exhibet gratia, in alio.abundantem et largam, prout ipsa vult gratia, non prout nos volumus, qui a factune nostrae ordine recessimus. In tantum denique vitiatam per prævaricationem Adae hominis naturam agnovimus, ut instaurationem suam per Christum non in rc, sed in spe fuerit consecuta, dicente Apostolo: Spe salvi facti sumus; spes autem quæ videtur, non est aes (Rom. VIII, 24).","english":"And this I marvel at, that with closed eyes you pass by the snares of the enemy, you who say that the will of man can acquire something of virtue: not attending to how great ruins of chastity are wrought by the devil, and how great crimes of concupiscence, avarice, envy, and treachery are perpetrated daily. Which if you truly saw, we would not labor to show you the losses of virtues and the victories of vices. For if the freedom of the will were whole, these things would not happen. Therefore by the transgression of the first man, the freedom of the will perished from men. But you renew the Pelagian heresy again, when you say that through the freedom of the will men can put an end to sins. For you exclude grace through the freedom of the will. For either we are freed by free will, or we are rescued by the grace of God. Choose what you say. If you give everything to grace, we are of one mind; if to free will, know that we cannot agree with you. But whence is there in that one a greater freedom of the will for good, and in this one a lesser, unless because by God's dispensation they are reckoned so? For in one grace shows itself slender, in another abundant and lavish, according as grace itself wills, not according as we will, who have departed from the order of our making. To such an extent, finally, have we known the nature of man to be vitiated by the transgression of Adam, that it has obtained its restoration through Christ not in reality but in hope, as the Apostle says: We are saved by hope; but hope that is seen is not hope (Rom. 8:24).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":81,"ref":"p81","source":"Si ergo spe salvati sumns, adhuc rem in præsenti sæculo non accepimus. Ideo denique baptizati iterum carnaliter concupiscunt, et illos motus corporis patiuntur; quia spe, non re consecuti sunt instaurationis auxilium. Si enim re consecuti fuissent, post baplismatis gratiam non esset peccati possibilitas nec voluntas. Verum quia virtus baptismatis tanta est, ut universa peccata delcat, pullulatio tamen peccatorum baptismatis unda non abluitur; inesse enim per Adam naturaliter perdocetur. Nam illa membra quæ in baptismatis hora confusione carent, postea confusionem recipiunt, qua evitant ubique conspectum, et quærunt pudendo secretum. Quæ enim Deus membra fccerat, prævaricatio in pudenda convertit, et non dicuntur membra, sed pudenda. Quæ Dudenda in puncto illo baptismatis membra fiunt, sed mox iterum pudenda efficiuntur ex membris; non enim re, sed spe instaurati sunt. Concupiscentia enim carnis, quæ per prævaricationem Adæ regnat in corpore tanquam lex peccati, iterum sibi vindicat baptizatum, totumque animum ej::s conatur evertere. Hæc enim radix illius plagæ est, quam Christus salvavit. Salvavit autem sic, sicut Apostolus dicit: Spe salvi facti sumus. Et jubet nos animum ad invisibilia contemplanda transferre, nec de his quæ videntur præsumendo corruere: et ideo dicit: Spes autem quæ videtur, spes non est.","english":"If therefore we have been saved in hope, we have not yet received the thing itself in the present age. For this reason, indeed, even after baptism they desire again in a carnal manner and suffer those motions of the body, because it is in hope, not in reality, that they have obtained the help of restoration. For if they had obtained it in reality, after the grace of baptism there would be no possibility of sin, nor the will to sin. But because the power of baptism is so great that it wipes away all sins, yet the sprouting of sins is not washed away by the wave of baptism; for it is clearly taught that it is present naturally through Adam. For those members which at the hour of baptism are free from shame afterward receive shame, whereby they avoid being seen everywhere and seek privacy by means of what is shameful. For the members which God had made, transgression turned into shameful parts, and they are not called members but shameful parts. Those shameful parts at that moment of baptism become members, but soon again they are made shameful parts from members; for they have been restored not in reality but in hope. For the concupiscence of the flesh, which through the transgression of Adam reigns in the body like the law of sin, again claims the baptized person for itself and strives to overthrow his whole mind. For this is the root of that wound which Christ healed. But he healed it in such a way as the Apostle says: We have been saved in hope. And he commands us to transfer the mind to the contemplation of invisible things, and not to fall by presuming upon the things that are seen; and therefore he says: But hope that is seen is not hope.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":82,"ref":"p82","source":"Ne forte æstimarentur per baptismum ita tolli peccata, ut etiam radices ipsæ peccatorum pariter evellantur. Motus enim ille pollutionis, qui per prævaricationem naturam invasif, ita remanet in baptizato, sicut radix capilli, cum fuefit novacula in superficie emundatus et rasus. Rasus enim est, ut emundaretur locus: non est eradicatus, ne ulterius nasceretur. Si cnim ex integro per baptismum omnis pravaricationis Adæ fragilitas tolleretur, baptizati omnes nullo caloris motu traherentur ad crimina, nullus sordibus inquinaretur humanis, nullus concupiscentiæ stimulo pungeretur. Sed quia spc salvi facti sumus, quod adhuc non videmus, per patienliam exspectamus. a Venit tempus in quo neque nubant, neque uxores ducant, sed sint sicut angeli in cœlis (Matth. XXII, 30). Cum enim corruptibile hoc induerit incorruptionem, et mortale hoc induerit immortalitatem, tunc fiet sermo qui scriptus est: Absorpta est mors in victoriam. Ubi est, mors, contentio tua? ubi eat, mora, stimulus tuus? Stimulus autem mortis precatum; virtus vero peccati lex (I Cor. xv. 54-56). Tunc dicemus: Deo gratias qui dedit nobis victoriam per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum (Ibid., 57).","english":"Lest perhaps they should think that sins are so taken away through baptism that the very roots of sins are likewise torn out. For that motion of pollution which invaded nature through transgression remains in the baptized person like the root of a hair when it has been cleansed and shaved on the surface with a razor. For it has been shaved so that the place might be cleansed; it has not been uprooted, lest it grow again thereafter. For if the whole frailty of Adam's transgression were removed entirely through baptism, all the baptized would be drawn to crimes by no motion of heat, no one would be stained by human filth, no one would be pricked by the sting of concupiscence. But because we have been saved in hope, what we do not yet see we await through patience. The time has come in which they neither marry nor take wives, but are as the angels in the heavens (Matthew 22:30). For when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: Death is swallowed up in victory. Where is, O death, your contention? Where is, O death, your sting? But the sting of death is sin; yet the power of sin is the law (1 Corinthians 15:54-56). Then we shall say: Thanks be to God, who has given us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ (ibid., 57).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":83,"ref":"p83","source":"' PROLOGUS LIBRI SEQUENTIS.\n\nFinitus est libcr inimicus hominum, contra fidem catholicam confictus; liber dolosus, circumdatus fallaciis, adulter integræ definitionis; quique, ut sanctus Cyprianus ait, falsa ostentat ut vera subripiat. Qui sub specie pietatis editus, agit contra omnium instituta sanctorum. Hujus libri causa, ut memoravimus in præfatiuncula, omnium hæreticorum in unum librum collegimus sectas, ut sciant defensores ejus cunctis nos hæresibus adversari; et nullius contra cos uti consensu. Itaque, o sancta mater Ecclesia, puræ fidei genitrix, contra occultos hostes tuos, contra novos barbaros pacificum habitum mentientes, contra eos qui per te contra te arma corripiunt, nostras vires exalta, et volentes inire certamcn adjuva: contra hos praecipue contra quos adhuc nullus scribendo pugnavit, cum illi scriptis suis, sub sacerdotis Augustini nomine, totum pene jam vulneraverint mundum, vitiatos libros proferendo, et varias epistolas dando quas memorati Hipponensis episcopi esse confingunt. Et vos, omnes catholicæ fidei defensores, precibus exoramus, ut exclusa omni occupatione, I intentius nostrum prælium attendatis: et futurum judicem judicii vestri ante oculos habentes, ex integro dcfendenda defendite, ex integro damnanda damnate.","english":"PROLOGUE OF THE FOLLOWING BOOK.\n\nThe book of the enemies of men has been finished, fabricated against the catholic faith; a deceitful book, surrounded by fallacies, a corrupter of the sound definition; and one which, as Saint Cyprian says, displays false things so as to steal in true ones. Published under the appearance of piety, it acts against the institutions of all the saints. For the sake of this book, as we have mentioned in the little preface, we have gathered the sects of all the heretics into one book, so that its defenders may know that we oppose all heresies; and that we use the agreement of none against them. Therefore, O holy mother Church, begetter of the pure faith, against your hidden enemies, against the new barbarians who feign a peaceful demeanor, against those who through you take up arms against you, exalt our strength, and aid those willing to enter the contest: especially against these, against whom as yet no one has fought by writing, since they have already wounded almost the whole world by their writings, under the name of the priest Augustine, by bringing forth corrupted books, and by giving various letters which they pretend to be those of the aforementioned bishop of Hippo. And you, all defenders of the catholic faith, we entreat with prayers, that, with every occupation shut out, you attend more intently to our battle: and having the future judge of your judgment before your eyes, defend thoroughly what must be defended, condemn thoroughly what must be condemned.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":84,"ref":"p84","source":"Cur autem, intermissis aliis pravitatibus, hunc librum in medium attulimus solum, hæc ratio est, quia in modum symboli eis quos deceperint tradunt. Hunc ergo totum per ordinem credidimus scribendum, ne videantur ea quae facile vinci poterant, ex eorum libro fuisse discerpta, et illa callide prætermissa, quae ipsum librum poterant ab accusationis nostræ injuria vindicare. Nihil ergo prætermisimus: sed omne corpus ejus his detegentes scriptis, gladium contra eum verbi Dei proferimus, atque in partes eum concidentes, singula quaeque membra ejus catholicorum oculis denudamus: ostendentes quas venena in capite habeat, quæ in ore contorqueat, quas ex pectore sagiltas emittat; ac per singula membrorum officia adversarietatis cjus arguentes astutias, et captivum eum Ecclesiæ catholicæ pedibus prosternen. tes, omnibus eum facimus manifestum: ut ex hoc ipse sui damnator existat, qui catholicam doctrinam deserens, consensum suum hujus libri voluerit con. tagione violare c.","english":"But the reason why, setting aside other corruptions, we have brought this book alone into the open is this: that they hand it down in the manner of a creed to those whom they have deceived. We therefore believed that it should be written out entirely, in order, lest those things which could easily be refuted seem to have been plucked out of their book, and those things craftily passed over which could have vindicated that same book from the injury of our accusation. We have therefore passed over nothing, but exposing its whole body in these writings, we bring forth against it the sword of the word of God, and cutting it into parts, we lay bare each and every one of its members to the eyes of catholics: showing what poisons it has in its head, what it twists in its mouth, what arrows it shoots from its breast; and through the individual functions of its members, proving the cunning of its hostility, and laying it captive at the feet of the catholic Church, we make it manifest to all: so that from this it may itself be its own condemner, since, deserting catholic doctrine, it has wished to violate its consent with the contagion of this book.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":85,"ref":"p85","source":"a LIBER TERTIUS,\n\nRefutationem continens libri superioris sub S. Augustini nomine conficti.\n\nHactenus hæreticorum omnium incensas sunt silvæ, in quibus latrocinante perfidia divitiæ fidei pervasæ sunt, prædam passa Ecclesia, animarum sanguis effusus. Verum quia solitum est spinis post incendium iterum pullularc, falcem divini judicii teneamus, ut rediviva ct contra cœlum euntia spinarum capita amputemus. Non deerunt, procurante Deo, buic agro cultores, ut possint beati immaculati in via, immaculati in fide, qui ambulant in lege Domini (Psal. CXVIII, 1), absque impedimento sentium pervenire quo pergunt. Nonagesimam hæresim Prædestinati fecerunt, ostendentes libros falsos quos Angustini confingunt, cujus dicta in multis locis leguntur islis libris valde contraria: Datur ergo catholicis vera suspicio quod t.:m scelcrata a dicta viri orthodoxi esse uno possint, quæ dantes n:anus Mathematicis, dicunt humanum genus ita divinis prædestinationibus subjacere, ut mala omnia quæ geruntur in saeculo, Dei dicantur voluntate committi. Ne ergo participes nos eorum timor humanus aut verecundia faceret, omnium hxreticorum egimus curas, et invenimus neminem pejus potuisse errare, quam hos qui dicunt mala omnia et crimina Dci prædestinatione committi.","english":"BOOK THREE,\n\ncontaining the refutation of the preceding book, forged under the name of St. Augustine.\n\nUp to this point the forests of all the heretics have been set ablaze, forests in which faith's riches were laid waste by brigand treachery, the Church suffered plunder, and the blood of souls was poured out. But since it is customary for thorns to sprout again after the burning, let us hold the sickle of divine judgment, so that we may cut off the thorns that grow back and rise against heaven. God providing, there will not be lacking laborers for this field, so that the blessed who are undefiled in the way, undefiled in faith, who walk in the law of the Lord (Ps. 118:1), may reach their destination without being hindered by brambles. The Predestinarians have made the ninetieth heresy, displaying false books which they fabricate as Augustine's, whose sayings are read in many places to be greatly contrary to these books. Therefore a true suspicion is given to Catholics that such wicked words cannot be those of an orthodox man, who, handing them over to the Mathematicians, say that the human race is so subject to divine predestinations that all the evils which are done in the world are said to be committed by the will of God. Therefore, lest human fear or shame make us partakers of them, we have examined the concerns of all the heretics, and we have found that no one could have erred worse than these who say that all evils and crimes are committed by the predestination of God.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":86,"ref":"p86","source":"Habcant ergo omnes hæretici unum librum, in quo eos non dc potestate, sed de ratione vera damnavimus, ut sciant Prædestinati nulli nos consentire haeretico. Habeant et Prædestinati unum librum, in quo cos Deus ipse convincit, qui scit se nullum prædestinasse ad malum, omnes autem prædestinasse ad bonum:. ut quod bonum est, ipsius comprobemus. Omnia enim bona quæ faciunt nunc homines, aut qua? ab initio fecerunt, vel facturi sunt, Dei gratia, Dei de.. mentia, Dei dicimus auxilio, Dei etiam prædestinatione completa. Prædestinatione autem, non qua vim faciat Deus bonum nolentibus, sed qua ipse nunquam mutet sententiam bonitatis, et incessanter sit bonum volentibus promptus, malum autem volentibus hnparatus. Siquidem venientibus ad bonum, fidei eorum statim remunerationem exhibeat, conrerendo indulgentiam peccatorum, et Dci filios facindo; euntibus autem ad malum non statim pœnam inferat quam merentur, sed exspectationis sum pias largiatur inducias. Hoc propositum Dei prædestinatum confitemur et fixum. Ergo dum mala fiunt, non Deus suum propositum subduxit, sed homo suum contemptum induxit; nec Dco volente factum est aliquando peccatum, sed bonine est negligente commissum. In tantum Deo nolente humanum deliquit genus, ut semper peccata exercentibus irasceretur, et justitiam agentibus subveniret.","english":"Let all the heretics therefore have one book, in which we have condemned them not by power but by true reasoning, so that the Predestinati may know that we agree with no heretic. Let the Predestinati also have one book, in which God himself convicts them, who knows that he has predestined no one to evil, but has predestined all to good, so that we may approve as his own whatever is good. For all the good things that men do now, or have done from the beginning, or will do, we say are of God's grace, of God's mercy, of God's help, and are completed even by God's predestination. By that predestination, however, not by which God does violence to those unwilling to do good, but by which he himself never changes his purpose of goodness and is unceasingly ready for those willing good, but unprepared for those willing evil. Since indeed for those coming to good he at once bestows the reward of their faith, granting pardon of sins by conversion and making them sons of God; but for those going to evil he does not at once bring in the punishment they deserve, but grants them the pious truces of his waiting. This purpose of God we confess to be predestined and fixed. Therefore while evils are done, God has not withdrawn his purpose, but man has brought in his own contempt; nor was sin ever committed with God willing it, but it was committed with man neglecting the good. To such an extent did the human race sin with God unwilling, that he was always angry with those practicing sins and came to the aid of those doing justice.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":87,"ref":"p87","source":"Denique dum totus mundus a justitia declinasset, ct dignus esset diluvii perire naufragio, docetur Deus voluisse eum per suam correptionem salvari. Nam quid est quod apostolus Petrus dicit? Exspeciavit Dei patientia eos qui increduli fuerunt in diebus Noe,, cum fabricaretur area (I l'et. III, 20). Dicite nobis, quid exspectabat Dei patientia? Nunquid prædestiantam perditionem, an provocatam conversionem? Fabricatio itaque arcae diluvii exstitit prædicatrix. Clamabat ascia, sonabat malleus, contestabatur serra, ipsa infidelibus prædicabant ferramenta diluvium. Datis itaque centum annorum induciis, præcessit lex, quæ perituros diceret posse pœnitendo evadere: quam non prædestinatio impediit, quae negaret posse corrigendo salvari. Si enim prædestinatio finibus suis terminum fixit, injusta est lex, quæ fines cupit invadere alienos. Ergo ut prædestinationem constituas, præcepta convince: da legi repudium, ut regnum prædestinationi inducas; lex enim imperare omnibus semper voluit, et nunquam a ulli servire. Si ergo prædestinatio imperium legis cracuat, et lex prædestinationis jura conturbat, una e duabus tyrannidem gestat. Eligite nunc, catholici, cui colla subdamus. Si legi, negemus pnedestinationem ab imperio suo legem excludere, quia lex dici.: Custodi precepta mea, et vives; praedestinatio autem dicit: Vasa iræ jam aptata ad interitum, et vasa misericordiæ quæ vocantur ad vitam.","english":"Finally, when the whole world had turned aside from righteousness and deserved to perish in the shipwreck of the flood, God is shown to have willed that it be saved through his own rebuke. For what is it that the apostle Peter says? The patience of God waited for those who were unbelieving in the days of Noah, while the ark was being built (1 Pet. 3:20). Tell us, what was the patience of God waiting for? Was it a predestined perdition, or a provoked conversion? And so the building of the ark became the herald of the flood. The axe cried out, the hammer resounded, the saw testified; the very tools preached the flood to the unbelieving. And so, with a hundred years' reprieve granted, the law came first, which declared that those who were to perish could escape by repenting—a law that predestination did not hinder, which would deny that they could be saved by correcting themselves. For if predestination has fixed its own boundary limits, the law that wishes to invade another's boundaries is unjust. Therefore, in order to establish predestination, refute the commandments; grant the law a bill of divorce, so that you may bring in the kingdom of predestination; for the law always willed to command all and never to serve anyone. If, then, predestination breaks the empire of the law, and the law disturbs the rights of predestination, one of the two wields tyranny. Choose now, catholics, to whose neck we should submit. If to the law, let us deny that predestination excludes the law from its empire, because the law says: Keep my commandments, and you shall live; but predestination says: Vessels of wrath already fitted for destruction, and vessels of mercy which are called to life.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":88,"ref":"p88","source":"Utrumque scriptum est: qui1 nunc faciamus, eligite. Si jam sunt vasa iræ aptata a Dco ut pcccent, et sunt vasa misericordiæ aptata ad vitam ut vivant, fundamus nos omnes prædestinationis imperio, et legem cum suis prædicatoribus expellamus. Et ne forte hoc ausu facinoris novum putetis esse peccatum, fecit hoc ab initio omnis turba peccantium. Nam ut quid interfecta est prophetarum et apostolorum, et omnium turba sanctorum, nisi hac de causa, quia legem Dei humanis sensibus ingerentes, arguebant in peccatoribus vitia? Qui si voluissent adulationis voce regnum prædestinationis inducere, exclusa lege justitiæ, nullus fuisset occisus. Dicebant enim illis, sicut scriptum t: Nolite prædicare nobis dura (Isa. XXX, 10). Quid est, nolite prædicare nobis dura? Hoc est sine dubio, nolito nobis per legem comminantem prædicare supplicia. Illi ad IKCC: Si vos nostri temporis monitores audissent, habuerant illis in his verbis adulando servire, et, sicut vos facitis, per legis eos testimonia male interpretata decipere d.","english":"Both things are written: \"Choose now what we should do.\" If there are already vessels of wrath fitted by God so that they sin, and vessels of mercy fitted for life so that they live, let us all abandon ourselves to the command of predestination and drive out the law together with its preachers. And lest perhaps you think this is a new sin, committed by some novel outrage, the whole crowd of sinners has done this from the beginning. For why was the crowd of prophets and apostles and all the saints killed, except for this reason: that by pressing the law of God upon human minds, they reproved vices in sinners? If they had wished to bring in the kingdom of predestination by the voice of flattery, with the law of justice shut out, no one would have been killed. For they used to say to them, as it is written: \"Do not preach to us hard things\" (Isa. 30:10). What is \"Do not preach to us hard things\"? This is undoubtedly: do not preach to us punishments through the threatening law. They say in reply: If the monitors of our time had heard them, they would have had to serve them in these words by flattering, and, as you do, to deceive them by the badly interpreted testimonies of the law.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":89,"ref":"p89","source":"eI. Estote securi de ordinatione Dei, quam prædestinando constituit. Cui vult Deus miseretur, et quem vult indurat. Non est enim volentis, neque currentia, sed miserentis est Dei. Potestatem habet figulus luli ex eadem massa facere unum vas ad honorem, alium ad contumeliam. Caro adversatur spiritui, spiritus carni. Hæc invicem sibi adversantur, ut non quæ vultis ipsa faciatis. Jam prædestinavit Deus quos præsciit; et quos prædestinavit, hos vocavit; quos vocavit, hos justificavit; quos autem justificavit, hos magnif. cavit. Non est in homine via ejus. Quid putatis tot in eo quod bene agitis esse laudandos, cum ideo lex loquatur, ut timorem incutiat? Cæterum nihil sit, nisi quod voluerit Deus: quem voluerit esse sanctum, sanctus est; aliud non erit: quem præscierit esse iniquum, in quus est; non erit aliud. Prædestinatio enim Dei jam et numerum justorum, et numerum constituit peccalorum: et necesse erit constitutum terminum præteriri non posse. Hæc quæ dicitis si dixissent, u hominum quidem temporales evaserant iras, sed invenerant Dei æterna supplicia. Non ergo hoc dixerunt, sed dixerunt: Hæc dicit Dominus: Si volueritis et audieritis me, quæ bona sunt terræ edetis; si autem nolueritis, neque audieritis me, gladius vos comedet. Os enim Domini locutum est Hæc (laa. I, 19-21).","english":"Be secure concerning God's ordination, which he established by predestining. God has mercy on whom he wills, and whom he wills he hardens. For it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. The potter has power from the same lump of clay to make one vessel for honor, another for dishonor. The flesh is opposed to the spirit, and the spirit to the flesh. These are opposed to one another, so that you do not do the very things you will. God has already predestined those whom he foreknew; and those whom he predestined, he called; those whom he called, he justified; and those whom he justified, he magnified. His way is not in man. What do you think—that so many of you are to be praised for the good you do, when the law speaks for this very purpose, to strike fear? Otherwise there would be nothing except what God has willed: whom he has willed to be holy, is holy; there will be nothing else; whom he has foreknown to be unjust, is unjust; there will be nothing else. For the predestination of God has already fixed both the number of the just and the number of sinners; and it must be that the appointed limit cannot be passed by. If those whom you address had said these things, they would indeed have escaped the temporal wrath of men, but they would have found the eternal punishments of God. Therefore they did not say these things, but they said: Thus says the Lord: If you are willing and hear me, you shall eat the good things of the land; but if you are unwilling and do not hear me, the sword shall devour you. For the mouth of the Lord has spoken these things (Isa. 1:19–21).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":90,"ref":"p90","source":"Et iterum: Hac dicit Dominus: Quia vos recessistis a me, et ego recedam a vobis, et tradam vos Assyriis in deprædatione: filio. vestros in conspectu vestro occident gladio, et uxores vestras abducent, quoniam contempsistis legem meam, et quæ ego nolui elegistis. Et iterum: Hæc dicit Dominus: Nunquid opprobrium factus sum domui Israel, quoniam me dereliquerunt. et præcepta mea et legitima mea computaverunt pro nihilo? Et iterum: Quoniam vocavi et contempsistis, ego quoque in vestra perditione ridebo, et gratulabor dum venerit super vos repentina calamitas (Proverb. 1,21-27),Hæc et his similia dicentes, diversis sunt interfecti soppliciis. Unde et Dominus ad populum civitatis in qua prophetæ fucrant interfecti, clamat tam in prophetis quam in Evangeliis suis dicens: Jerusalem, Jerusalem, quæ occidis prephetas, et lapidas eos qui ad te missi sunt, quotie, volui congregare filios tuos, sicut gullina congregat pullos suos sub alia suis, et noluisti (Matth. XXIII, 37)? Noluisti, inquit, quod volui; voluisti quod nolui. Si ergo noluit Deus quod illi voluerunt, aut coactus a potentiore alio prædestinationem constituit; aut si ipse constituit, calumniam fecit. Ut quid enim dicit homini: Hoc volui quod noluisti, si scit se eum prædestinasse ne vellet?","english":"And again: Thus says the Lord: Because you have withdrawn from me, I also will withdraw from you, and I will deliver you to the Assyrians for plunder; they will kill your sons before your eyes, and they will carry off your wives, because you have despised my law, and you have chosen the things that I did not will. And again: Thus says the Lord: Have I become a reproach to the house of Israel, because they have forsaken me and have counted my precepts and my statutes as nothing? And again: Because I called and you despised me, I also will laugh at your destruction, and I will rejoice when sudden calamity comes upon you (Proverbs 1:21-27). Saying these things and things like them, they were killed with various punishments. Hence the Lord also cries out to the people of the city in which the prophets had been killed, both in the prophets and in his Gospels, saying: Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those who are sent to you, how often I willed to gather your children, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you would not (Matthew 23:37). You would not, he says, what I willed; you willed what I did not will. If, therefore, God did not will what they willed, either he established predestination under compulsion from some more powerful being; or if he himself established it, he has done them a wrong. For why does he say to a man: I willed this, which you did not will, if he knows that he predestined him not to will it?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":91,"ref":"p91","source":"Secundum vestram blasphemiam excluditur reatus hominis, et apparet calumnia Dei: et probatur innocens qui delinquit, et injustus qui punit. Dolendum enim est peccanti potius quam irascendum, quia vim passus est a prædestinatione divina, cum rueret ad praecipitia criminum. Hoc enim voluit qui creavit; qui enim creavit, ipse prædestinavit. Quod si ita est, constat non suum esse vitium omnino qui peccat. Si ergo non suum habet Vitium omnino qui peecat, et constat a juslo Deo extranea esse universa quæ damnat, cujus invenitur factum, hujus invenietur esse peccatum. Nulla enim ratio patitur ut ubi alter prædestinator est, ibi alter prævaricator esse dicatur; nec recipit boc boni et justi æquitas,ut prædestinationem suam crimen faciat alienum. Ergo ut peccantem punias ostende prædestinantern; da auctorem prædestinationis, ut possis judicem monstrare peccati, quia unum eumdemque ostendere non potes prædestinantem a atque damnantem. Si enim Deus auctor est prædestinationis, et operum nostrorum ipse est constitutor, ostendite alium qui puniat prædestinata peccata; aut si quasi justus injusta humani operis facta condemnat, hujus injustitiæ alium prædestinatorem ostendite. Cui enim displicet factum, nunquam potuit ab eo ut fieret constitutum. Perquam enim stultum est, si ipsum praedestinatorem eumdem damnatorem operum confiteris.","english":"According to your blasphemy, the guilt of man is excluded, and the calumny against God appears; and he who does wrong is proved innocent, and he who punishes is proved unjust. For one ought to grieve over the sinner rather than be angry with him, because he suffered violence from divine predestination when he rushed headlong into the precipices of crimes. For this is what the one who created willed; for the one who created, he himself predestined. But if this is so, it is evident that the fault belongs not at all to the one who sins. If, therefore, the one who sins has no fault at all of his own, and it is evident that all the things which he condemns are foreign to a just God, then whose act it is found to be, his sin will be found to be. For no reason allows that where one is the predestinator, the other should be said to be the transgressor; nor does the equity of the good and just accept this, that predestination should make its own crime another's. Therefore, in order that you may punish the sinner, show the one who predestines; give the author of predestination, so that you may be able to point out the judge of sin, because you cannot show the same one as both predestining and condemning. For if God is the author of predestination, and he himself is the establisher of our works, show another who punishes the predestined sins; or if, as if just, he condemns the unjust deeds of human work, show another predestinator of this injustice. For he whom a deed displeases could never have established that it be done. For it is exceedingly foolish if you confess that the same one is both the predestinator and the condemner of works.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":92,"ref":"p92","source":"Nullus enim tam impius quam is qui rem a se præordinatam exhorreat, et id puniat factum, quod ipse praeordinavit ut fieret. Nisi si forte, animo ad meliora converso, mutabililate consilii, quod prius fecit judicat esse damnandum, quod qui agit doctrina melioris impellilur. Qui vero in omnipotentiæ virtute consistit, et nec parem novit, nec superiorem meluit, dicite nobis praedestinationem suam quo compellente damnavit? quia si prædestinati opera rca est, multo magis prædestinantis ordinatio criminosa. Si enim is qui prædestinatus est, per prædestinationem ipsam reus est; quanto magis ille cujus prædestinatio facta est, vacatur in culpam? Cavete, obseero, ne hæc adulterini seminis zizania casto Ecclesiæ dogmati aspergantur: quia peccatum non a prædestinante dirigitur, sed a delinquente committitur. Recedant ergo vana argumenta verborum. Nihil habent omnino commune praevaricatio delinquentis et prædestinatio vindicantis: quia peccatum in voluntate transgressoris est, prædestinatio autem in redemptoris est ordinata virtute. Non enim aliud prædestinavit iste qui condidit, nisi ut secundum ejus homo possit vivere voluntatem. Nefas est enim, ei nimis est criminosum, ut præsumptio hominis ex Dei credatur prædestinatione descendere, et delinquentis vitium præordinatio futuri judicis aestimetur. Occurrunt hoc loco, et dicunt: Per præscientiam Deus praedestinationem suam constituit.","english":"For no one is so impious as he who shrinks from a thing preordained by himself, and punishes as done what he himself preordained to be done. Unless perhaps, with his mind turned to better things, by a change of counsel, he judges that what he did before ought to be condemned, and he who does this is driven by the teaching of something better. But he who stands in the virtue of omnipotence, and knows no equal, nor fears a superior—tell us, by what compulsion did he condemn his own predestination? For if the work of the predestined is guilty, much more is the ordination of the one predestining criminal. For if he who is predestined is guilty through that very predestination, how much more is he by whom the predestination was made called into fault? Beware, I beseech you, lest these tares of adulterous seed be sprinkled upon the chaste dogma of the Church: because sin is not directed by the one predestining, but is committed by the one sinning. Let the vain arguments of words therefore depart. The transgression of the sinner and the predestination of the avenger have nothing at all in common: because sin is in the will of the transgressor, but predestination is ordered in the virtue of the redeemer. For he who created did not predestine anything else, except that man might be able to live according to his will. For it is impious, it is excessively criminal, that the presumption of man should be believed to descend from the predestination of God, and the vice of the sinner should be reckoned the preordination of the future judge. At this point they meet us and say: By foreknowledge God established his predestination.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":93,"ref":"p93","source":"Narn quos præsciit nullo modo converli, hos prædestinavit ad mor. tem; et quos praesciit omnimodo converti, hos prædestinavit ad vitam. a Videamus nunc si non iniquis ambagibus judicium Dei ad præjudicium justitiæ trahitis. Ergo adhuc non sunt creati homines, et jam a justo Deo praejudicium patiuntur? Videtur mihi quod alterum vobis e invenissetis Deum, qui tam impius sit, ut a praejudicio circumveniat humani generis massam, et nondum nati hominis merita dispungendo constituat, ac praedestinationis suæ vinculo ad peccandum astringat; et cui adhuc conceptio non est, jam illi praeparet æterna supplicia; et cui adhuc non dedit lucis hujus labentis transitoria munera, iam illi perpetuas tenebrarum præparet pœnas. Quaerite vobis, ut dixi, alterum Deum de quo ista dicatis. Nam hunc pium et dementem i nostrum nunquam ad hoc provocabitis, ut saltim blasphemiis vestris commotus, etiam vobis hoc faciat. Nam qui vos patienter tolerat, nescio jam cui peccanti non parcat. Quotidie nobis injuste agentibus subvenit, et recentioribus delictis subinde recentiora indulgentiæ suae dona largitur; et vos dicitis: Jam ante mundi constitutionem indignatus nobis pro futuris peccatis praedestinavit sententiam. In praesenti se blasphemantibus veniam tribuit; et vos dicitis: Jam tunc indignatus est contra peccaturos, et praedestinavit eos ad mortem, quando prima liniamenta generationis humanæ formavit.","english":"For those whom he foreknew would in no way be converted, he predestined to death; and those whom he foreknew would be converted in every way, he predestined to life. Let us now see whether you do not drag the judgment of God to a prejudice against justice by your iniquitous circumlocutions. So then, men are not yet created, and already they suffer prejudice from a just God? It seems to me that you have invented for yourselves another God, one so impious that he deceives the mass of the human race by a prejudice, and by reckoning the merits of a man not yet born establishes them, and binds him by the chain of his own predestination to sin; and for whom conception has not yet taken place, for him he already prepares eternal punishments; and to whom he has not yet given the fleeting gifts of this passing light, to him he already prepares the perpetual penalties of darkness. Seek for yourselves, as I said, another God of whom you may say these things. For you will never provoke this pious and merciful God of ours to such a point that, moved even by your blasphemies, he should do this to you as well. For he who patiently tolerates you, I do not know whom, when he sins, he will not spare. Daily he comes to our aid when we act unjustly, and to more recent sins he repeatedly grants ever more recent gifts of his indulgence; and you say: Already before the foundation of the world, being angry with us for future sins, he predestined the sentence. In the present he grants pardon to those who blaspheme him; and you say: Already then he was angry against those who would sin, and he predestined them to death, when he formed the first outlines of the human race.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":94,"ref":"p94","source":"Jam ergo tunc egit judicium mundi, antequam ipsum mundum statueret, ut jam post finem sæculi non inveniat i quem punire. Laborem sibi forte voluit tollere, et ne non occurret post facta sua homines judicare, ante eos prædestinavit ad mortem, quam crearentur ad vitam. Et tamen, si ipse creavit quos prædestinavit ad pcenas, præveniL meritum occidendi; et qui adhuc nonccepitvivere sententiam jam æternæ mortis accepit. Hoc Deus no. ster nunquam fecit: si vester est aliquis alius, ipsi istas irrogatc blasphemias. De Deo autem nostro dicit propheta: Viro ego, dicit Dominus; quin cum dixero peccatori: Morte morieris, et peccator se abstulerit a via sua mala, et a studiis suis pessimis, vivo ego, dicit Dominus, vita vivet, et non morietur in delicto suo quod fecit. Et si dixero justo: Vita vives, et recesaerit post hæc a justitia sua, vivo ego, dicit Dominus, quia morte morietur: a justitiæ ejus non liberabunt eumin die qua recesserit a justitia et jecerit iniquitatem; in iniquitate sua morietur (Ezech. XXXIII, seq.). Vides nostrum Deum ex ulroque latere et justum monere, ne per securitatem corruat, et peccatorem alloqui, ne pro desperatione non surgat. Si alicubi vos legistis de Deo: Vivo ego, dicit Dominus, quia quem prædestinavi ad vitam aliud non erit, et quem prædestinavi ad mortem, sine dubio morietur; quis vos ferret ista docentes?","english":"So then he already carried out the judgment of the world at that time, before he established the world itself, so that now after the end of the age he may find no one left to punish. Perhaps he wished to spare himself the labor, and lest he fail to come to judge men after their deeds, he predestined them to death before they were created to life. And yet, if he himself created those whom he predestined to punishment, he has anticipated the merit of killing them; and the one who has not yet begun to live has already received the sentence of eternal death. Our God never did this; if your god is some other, he is the one to whom you direct these blasphemies. But of our God the prophet says: As I live, says the Lord, when I say to the sinner, You shall surely die, and the sinner turns away from his evil way and from his worst pursuits, as I live, says the Lord, he shall surely live, and he shall not die in the sin that he committed. And if I say to the righteous man, You shall surely live, and he turns back after this from his righteousness, as I live, says the Lord, he shall surely die: his righteous deeds shall not deliver him on the day when he turns away from righteousness and casts iniquity upon himself; in his iniquity he shall die. You see that our God warns the righteous man on both sides, lest through security he fall, and speaks to the sinner, lest through despair he fail to rise. If you have read anywhere concerning God: As I live, says the Lord, because the one whom I have predestined to life shall be no other, and the one whom I have predestined to death shall without doubt die—who could endure you teaching such things?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":95,"ref":"p95","source":"Ecce contra sententiam vestram Deus loquitur, et ipsi Deo de se testimonium danti non creditis. Nec justus securus sit, inquit, si dixero ei: Vita vives, quia si recesserit a justitia, in iniquitate morietur; et cum dixerim peccatori: Morte morieris, et conversus fuerit, vivo ego, dicit Dominus, iniquitatum ejus non recordabor, vita vivet. Nolo enim mortem morientis, tantum ut convertatur et vivat. Occurrunt nobis iterum clamantes: Hoc in veteri lege scriptum est, in novo autem Apostolus clamat: Vasa iræ aptata in interitum (Rom. IX, 22). Ergo si ante adventum pietatis pietas jam exuberabat; quanto magis nunc, ubi pietas ipsa pro impiis sententiam impietatis accepit, ut impios a reatu suo absolveret, et eos ad indulgentiae gratiam revocaret? Videamus ergo vasa iræ quo ordine aptentur in interitum. Audi Apostolum, non Dei præordinationi hoc, sed hominis negligentiae vel diligentiæ applicantero. In magna, inquit, domo non sunt tantum vasa aurea et argentea, sed et lignea et fictilia; et quædam quidem sunt in honorem, quædam autem in contumeliam. Si quis ergo mundaverit semetipsum ab his, erit vas e in honore sanctificatum, utile Deo ad omne opus bonum paratum ( U Tim. II, 20-22).","english":"Behold, God speaks against your judgment, and you do not believe God himself when he gives testimony about himself. \"Nor let the righteous be secure,\" he says, \"if I say to him: You shall live the life, because if he departs from righteousness, he shall die in iniquity; and when I have said to the sinner: You shall die the death, and he has turned, I live, says the Lord, I will not remember his iniquities, he shall live the life. For I do not will the death of the dying man, only that he be converted and live.\" They meet us again, crying out: \"This is written in the old law, but in the new the Apostle cries out: Vessels of wrath fitted for destruction\" (Rom. 9:22). Therefore if before the coming of piety piety was already overflowing, how much more now, when piety itself has received the sentence of impiety on behalf of the impious, so as to absolve the impious from their guilt and recall them to the grace of pardon? Let us see, then, in what order the vessels of wrath are fitted for destruction. Hear the Apostle, applying this not to God's preordination but to man's negligence or diligence. \"In a great house,\" he says, \"there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay; and some indeed are for honor, some however for dishonor. If anyone therefore has cleansed himself from these, he shall be a vessel sanctified for honor, useful to God, prepared for every good work\" (2 Tim. 2:20-22).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":96,"ref":"p96","source":"Ergo vasa aptata iræ in interitum, si se emundaverint ab his pro quibus aptata sunt in interitum, erunt vasa in honore sanctilicata, et Deo utilia ad omne opus bonum parata; secundum quod supra dixit ad prophetam: Cum dixerim peccatori: Morte morieris (Ezech. XXXIII, 14), hoc est, cum dixerim: Eris vas aptatum ad interitura, et bic peccator converterit se ab iniquitate sua, hoc est, cum sit vas aptatum ad interitum, mundaverit semetipsum ab his, erit vas in honore sanctificatum. Postea quam hinc eos superaveris, ad obscuriora loca Scripturarum confugiunt, ut sagittent in obscuro rectos corde.\n\nII. Nescitis, inquiunt, quia scriptum est: Jacob dilexi, Esau autem odio habui? Cum enim nondum noti fuissent, nec aliquid egissent boni vel mali, ex praescientia dictum eat, ut unus haberetur odio, alius amaretur. I Necesse nobis erit in hoc loco, de lumine sacrae legis interpretatiunculæ hujus lumen incendere, ut detegamini non aliud in obscuris locis vos figere, nisi ut simpliciter ambulantes exspolietis catholicos vestitu deauralo, et induatis eos pannis hæreticorum sordibus plenis. In Geneseos libro de Rebecca dictum est: Duæ gentes et duo populi de luo utero prodient, et populus populum superabit, et major servict minori (Gen. xxv, 23).","english":"Therefore the vessels fitted for wrath unto destruction, if they have cleansed themselves from those things for which they were fitted unto destruction, will be vessels sanctified unto honor, and useful to God, prepared for every good work; according to what he said above to the prophet: When I shall have said to the sinner, You shall die the death (Ezek. 33:14), that is, when I shall have said: You shall be a vessel fitted for things that perish—and if this sinner has turned himself from his iniquity, that is, when he who was a vessel fitted unto destruction has cleansed himself from those things, he shall be a vessel sanctified unto honor. After you have overcome them on this point, they flee to the more obscure places of the Scriptures, so as to shoot in the dark at the upright in heart.\n\nII. Do you not know, they say, that it is written: Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated? For when they had not yet been known, nor had done anything good or evil, it was said from foreknowledge, so that the one might be held in hatred and the other loved. In this place it will be necessary for us to kindle the light of this little interpretation from the light of the sacred law, so that you may be exposed as fixing nothing else in the obscure places except that, walking simply, you may despoil the catholics of their garment of gold and clothe them in the rags of the heretics, full of filth. In the book of Genesis it was said concerning Rebecca: Two nations and two peoples shall come forth from your womb, and the people shall overcome the people, and the greater shall serve the lesser (Gen. 25:23).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":97,"ref":"p97","source":"Prophetia ergo non de his est qui secundum carnem nascebantur, sed de duobus populis Judxorum et gentium: in quo major populus Judæorum serviet minori, id est, gentium. Sic enim et sequitur Apostolus: A præsciente, inquit, dictum est, quia major serviet minori (Rom. IX, 12). Ut quid hoc dixisti, o beate Paule apostole? peto ut respondeas. Nunquidnam propterea hoc dixisti, ut prædestinatio præjudicium nascituris afferret? Respondet ita Apostolus: Ego propter hoc dixi, Major serviet minori, ut electio ex gentibus fierct. Ergo si prophetiæ hujus mysterium nobis interpretatur Apostolus, tu quis es qui aliter quam explanavit nobis magister verus istum sensum exponas, cum dictum ab eo quod si angelus de cœlo evangelizaverit vobis præter quam evangelizavimus vobis, anathema sit (Gal. i, 8)?\n\nIII. Occurrunt hoc loco renovato certamine dicentes: Nos non dicimus præter quam evangelizavit Apostolus. Per præscientiam Dei prædestinationem factum ipse commemorat; de Deo ipse dicit: Quos vocavit, hos prædestinavit (Rom. VIII, 30). Si præscientem et prædestianantem, et vocantem in Apostolo legitis, nobis ut quid impingitis crimen? i Nos vobis crimen non impiogimus, sed probamus.","english":"The prophecy, therefore, is not about those who were born according to the flesh, but about the two peoples, of the Jews and of the Gentiles: in which the greater people of the Jews will serve the lesser, that is, of the Gentiles. For so also the Apostle continues: It was said, he says, by the Foreknowing One, that the greater will serve the lesser (Rom. 9:12). Why did you say this, O blessed Paul the apostle? I ask that you answer. Was it for this reason that you said it, that predestination might bring prejudice to those who are to be born? The Apostle answers thus: I said for this reason, The greater will serve the lesser, that the election from the Gentiles might be made. Therefore, if the Apostle interprets for us the mystery of this prophecy, who are you who expound this meaning otherwise than the true Master explained it to us, since it was said by him that if an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel other than what we preached to you, let him be anathema (Gal. 1:8)?\n\nIII. At this point, with the contest renewed, they object, saying: We do not say anything other than what the Apostle preached. He himself mentions that predestination was made through the foreknowledge of God; he himself says of God: Those whom he called, he predestined (Rom. 8:30). If you read in the Apostle one who foreknows and predestines and calls, why do you charge us with a crime? We do not charge you with a crime, but we prove it.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":98,"ref":"p98","source":"Sive enim vos peritos dicatis, arguimus non sic sensus apostolicos vos debere concidere; sive vos probetis imperitos, increpamus non scientes praesumere non debere, et ejus rei magisterium polliceri, cujus nunquam voluistis esse discipuli. Vos enim, si voluissetis discere prius, et sic docere, ab istis interpretationibus fugientes, a Dei æquitate nunquam recesseratis, nec diceretis quia non omnes homines vult salvos fieri. Apostolus -autem legis peritus-noster, omnibus se omnia factum dicit, ut omnes lucrifaceret peccalores (I Cor. IX, 22). Jam enim didiccrat, quia conclusit Deus omnia in incredulitate, et vult ut omnibus misereatur (Rom. XI, 32). Didiccrat quod omne os deberet obstrui, et subdilus deberet fieri omnis mundus Deo (Rom. III, 19), et et ideo dicebat: Dico autem per gratiam quæ data est mihi, omnibus qui in vobis sunt (Rom. XII, 3). Et iterum: Corripientes omnem hominem, et docentes (Coloss. I, 28). Et iterum: Idem Deus dives in omnibus vobis (Rom. X. 12). Et iterum: Apparuit gratia Dei omnibus hominibus, erudiens nos et docens (Tit. II, ), ut sit omnis homo perfectus in Christo (II Tim. m, 17). Et quia sciebat Filium Dei pro omnibus natum, pro omnibus passum, ideo clamat, dicens: Hoc placitum est coram Salvatore nostro Deo, qui vult omnes homines salvos fieri. et in agnitionem veritatis venire ( I Tim. II. 3).","english":"For if you call yourselves learned, we argue that you ought not thus to cut up the apostolic meanings; or if you prove yourselves unlearned, we rebuke you that, not knowing, you ought not to presume, and to promise the teaching of a matter of which you have never wished to be disciples. For you, if you had wished first to learn and so to teach, fleeing from these interpretations, you would never have departed from God's equity, nor would you say that he does not will all men to be saved. But the Apostle—our teacher of the law—says that he became all things to all men, that he might gain all sinners (I Cor. 9:22). For he had already learned that God has shut up all things in unbelief, and wills to have mercy on all (Rom. 11:32). He had learned that every mouth ought to be stopped, and that all the world ought to become subject to God (Rom. 3:19), and therefore he said: But I say, through the grace that has been given to me, to all who are among you (Rom. 12:3). And again: Reproving every man, and teaching (Col. 1:28). And again: The same God is rich in all of you (Rom. 10:12). And again: The grace of God has appeared to all men, instructing and teaching us (Tit. 2), that every man may be perfect in Christ (II Tim. 3:17). And because he knew that the Son of God was born for all, suffered for all, he therefore cries out, saying: This is pleasing before God our Savior, who wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth (I Tim. 2:3).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":99,"ref":"p99","source":"Unde etiam quotidie nobis in Evangeliis suis ipse Dominus clamat, dicens: Venite ad me, omnes qui laboratis et onerati estis, et ego vos requiescere faciam (Matth. XI, 28). Unde ut doceret se nullum hominem a sua largitate repellere, promptus, liberalis, abundans, nunquam niinus faciens, loquitur in Evangeliis suis dicens: Omnis qui petit accipit, et qui quærit invenit, et pulsanti aperietur (Matth. VII, 8). Nam et Scriptura veteris Testamenti omnes ad audiendum gentes invitans, dicebat: Audite hæc, omnesqui habitatis orbem, quique terrigenæ et filii hominum, simul in unum dives et pauper (Ps. XLVIII. 2,3). Et ideo idem Apostolus, videns quia omnes homines vult Deus, non tamen omnes homines Deum volunt, futurum judicium memorans clamat, dicens: Omnes nos oportet mani[estari ante tribunal Christi, ut recipiat unusquisque propria corporis, prout gessit, sive bona site mala (II Cor. v, 10). Unde et apostolus Petrus: Gratia, inquit, Dei super omnes, et in omnibus vobis. Prophetæ omnes Vocant, aposloli omnes vocant, Christum omnes vocant, in toto orbe terrarum sacerdotes Dci innumerabiles ones vocant ad gratiam et ad misericordiam Der et ad indulgentiam.","english":"Hence also daily in His Gospels the Lord Himself cries out to us, saying: Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will give you rest (Matt. 11:28). Hence, to teach that He repels no man from His bounty—prompt, generous, abundant, never doing less—He speaks in His Gospels, saying: Everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it shall be opened (Matt. 7:8). For even the Scripture of the Old Testament, inviting all nations to hear, said: Hear these things, all you who dwell in the world, you who are earth-born and sons of men, together in one, rich and poor (Ps. 48:2–3). And therefore the same Apostle, seeing that God wills all men, yet not all men will God, recalling the future judgment, cries out, saying: We must all be made manifest before the tribunal of Christ, that each one may receive what is proper to his body, according as he has done, whether good or evil (2 Cor. 5:10). Hence also the apostle Peter says: The grace of God is upon all, and in all of you. All the prophets call, all the apostles call, all call Christ; throughout the whole world innumerable priests of God call their sheep to the grace and mercy of God and to forgiveness.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":100,"ref":"p100","source":"Soli duo aut tres homunciores, cæcum habentes cor, egrediuntur cum his libris apostaticis, quos viri catholici esse confingentes, totum vulnerant mundum: quibus novum genus blasphemiæ inducentes, dicunt quod Deus non omnes homines vult salvos fieri, et in agnitionem veritatis venire; atque unius loci obscuritatem passi, a tanto Inmini, tamque immenso splendori, tenebrarum suarum volunt inferre caliginem. Sed quia lux lucet in tenebris, et tenebræ eam non valent comprehendere (Joan. i, 5), juvante Domino, ex ejus thesauris accipientes, locum quem putant hæresi suæ manum porrisere explanavimus. Dicamus nunc et de praescientia et de prædestinatione. Præsciit Deus et praedixit quod in semine Abrahae, hoc est in Christo, benedicerentur omnes gentes. Quod dum fieret, Judæi satis moleste ferebant. Nam ideo comprehendebant apostolos, et in custodiis retinebant, dicentes eis: Prædiximus, vobis ne prædicaretis hoc nomen; vos autem replestis omnes doctrina vestra (Act. v, 28). Apostolus autem Paulus, videns Judæos in eo deficere quod gentes introirent ad fidem, et excluderent Ju.:cos a privilegio Synagogæ per privilegium Ecclesiae, alloquitur eos ut non contristentur, dicens ( I Thess. II, 16): Quid nunc prohibetis nos gentibus loqui ne salvæ fiant, cum sciatis Deum dixisse ad Abraham, quod in semine tuo hæreditabo omnes gentes (Gen. XXII, 8; Act. III, 25)?","english":"Only two or three little men, having a blind heart, go forth with these apostate books, which, pretending that they are the work of catholic men, wound the whole world; introducing a new kind of blasphemy through them, they say that God does not will all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth; and, having suffered the obscurity of one passage, they wish to bring the darkness of their own blindness against so great a light and so immense a splendor. But because the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness does not overcome it (John 1:5), with the Lord's help, receiving from His treasures, we have explained the passage which they think lends a hand to their heresy. Let us now speak also of foreknowledge and of predestination. God foreknew and foretold that in the seed of Abraham, that is, in Christ, all nations would be blessed. While this was happening, the Jews took it rather badly. For this reason they seized the apostles and kept them in custody, saying to them: We forewarned you not to preach this name; but you have filled all things with your doctrine (Acts 5:28). But the apostle Paul, seeing that the Jews were failing in this, that the nations were entering into the faith and were excluding the Jews from the privilege of the Synagogue through the privilege of the Church, addresses them so that they may not be grieved, saying (1 Thess. 2:16): Why now do you forbid us to speak to the nations so that they may be saved, when you know that God said to Abraham, that in your seed I will give all nations as an inheritance (Gen. 22:8; Acts 3:25)?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":101,"ref":"p101","source":"Præsciit enim Deus, quod Filium ejus essent negaturi Judaci, et essent ei gentium pop uti credituri. Et ideo ait: Quos præsciit, et prædestinavit conformes fieri imaginis Filii sui, ut sit ifse primogenitus in multis fratribus (Rom. VIII, 29). Judæi enim per circumcisionem filii Abrahæ docentur, gentes autem per baptismum filii Dci fiunt, et est illis frater primogenitus Filius Dei. Unigenitus, inquam, specialiter Filius Dei, frater fit eorum qui generaliter filii Dei adoptantur; unde et dicit Patri: Narrabo nomen tuum fratribus meis (Ps. XXI, 23). Hos ergo gentium populos præsciit, ut diximus, quod Filium suum quem Jud;ci e crucifixuri erant, sincero corde susciperent, et ut decebat Dei Filium adorarent: Quos ergo præsciit, et predestinavit conformes fieri imaginis Filii sui, ut Filius ejus esset primogenitus in multis fratribus, hos prædestinavit; quos autem prædestinavit, hos vocavit. Si interrogas Apostolum, quando pixdestiavit, dicit tibi: Tunc quando dixit Abrahæ: In semine tuo hæreditabo omnes gentes. Et ideo per prophetam dicit: Audite hæc, omnes gentes (Ps. XLVIII, 2). Dicit ergo Judaeis: Nihil novum vobis vidcatur fecisse Deus, qui volut promissum patri nostro Abrahæ complere quod promiserat, ut in semine ejus hæreditentur omnes gentes. Ergo quia omnes gentes prædestinavit, i omnes gentes conclusit in incredulitatem ut omnibus misereatur (Rom. XI, 32).","english":"For God foreknew that the Jews would deny his Son, and that the peoples of the nations would believe in him. And therefore he says: Those whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers (Rom 8:29). For the Jews are taught to be children of Abraham through circumcision, but the nations become children of God through baptism, and the Son of God is their firstborn brother. The only-begotten, I say, the Son of God in a special sense, becomes a brother to those who are adopted as children of God in a general sense; whence he also says to the Father: I will declare your name to my brothers (Ps 21:23). These peoples of the nations, then, he foreknew, as we have said, that they would receive with a sincere heart his Son, whom the Jews were about to crucify, and would adore him as befitted the Son of God. Those, therefore, whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that his Son might be the firstborn among many brothers—these he predestined; and those whom he predestined, these he also called. If you ask the Apostle when he predestined them, he tells you: Then, when he said to Abraham: In your seed all the nations shall be blessed. And therefore he says through the prophet: Hear this, all you nations (Ps 48:2). He says, then, to the Jews: Let it not seem to you that God has done anything new, he who wished to fulfill the promise he had made to our father Abraham, that in his seed all the nations should be blessed. Therefore, because he predestined all the nations, he also shut up all the nations in unbelief, that he might have mercy on all (Rom 11:32).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":102,"ref":"p102","source":"Ergo quos prædestinavit, hos vocavit; quosvocavit, bos justificavit, auferendo universa peccata; quos autem justificavit, ipsos et magnificavit, id est, filios Dei feciL Quid ergo murmurantes estis, o Judæi, prohibentes nos gentes alloqui? Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos (Rom. vii, )? id est, quid in nos mittitis manus, et in apostolos Dei scandalum patimini? Si enim Dens Filio suo non pepercit, sed pro omnibus nobis tradidit eum, nota tibi, Prædestinate, quid dicat: Sed pro omnibus tradidit cum. Dicendo pro omnibus tradidit eum, et Judæis amputavit scandalum, et vestram intentionem exclusit. Miror autem prudentiam vestram sic legisse locum istum:Quos prædestinavit hos vocavit, ut ad unum versiculum qui in ante est timuissetis accedere. Quando enim venistis ad hunc locum, quasi satisfactum pulantes intentioni vestræ, noluistis in ante ad versiculum qui vos convincebat aspicere, id est, pro omnibus tradidit eum; sed clausistis codiccm, et cœpistis clamare: Non omnes vocat Deus ad gratiam suam, non omnes invitat; et dicentibus nostris: Ergo non omnes vocat? vos respondislis: Noc omnes vocat. Stupentes itaque nostri atque anxiantes, co quod audirent quod nullus unquam hæreticorum dixerat, interrogaverunt peritiam vestram dicentes: Unde probatis quia non omnes vocat Deus ad gratiam suam? Ipse Deus non vult eos vocare? an vult et non potest? an non merentur?","english":"Therefore those whom he predestined, he also called; those whom he called, he justified, by taking away all sins; and those whom he justified, he also glorified, that is, he made them sons of God. Why then do you murmur, O Jews, forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles? If God is for us, who is against us (Rom. 8)? That is, why do you lay hands on us, and take offense at the apostles of God? For if God did not spare his own Son, but handed him over for us all, understand, O Predestinate, what it says: But he handed him over for all. By saying he handed him over for all, he both cut off the offense from the Jews and excluded your contention. But I marvel at your prudence, that you have read this passage thus: Those whom he predestined, these he called, so that you feared to approach the one verse that comes before. For when you came to this place, thinking, as it were, that your contention was satisfied, you were unwilling to look back at the verse that convicted you, namely, he handed him over for all; but you closed the book and began to shout: God does not call all to his grace, he does not invite all; and when our people said: Therefore he does not call all? you answered: He does not call all. And so our people, stunned and anxious, because they heard what none of the heretics had ever said, questioned your expertise, saying: How do you prove that God does not call all to his grace? Does God himself not wish to call them? Or does he wish to and cannot? Or do they not deserve it?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":103,"ref":"p103","source":"Si vult et non potest, blasphematur impotens: si potest et non vult, videtur iuiquus; si ipsi non merentur, ergo jam gratia non est gratia, ct res meriti humani est vocatio, non gratiæ Dei: si autem gratiæ Dei est, It et non meriti hominis, omnes vocat. Omnes enim peccaverunt et egent gloria Dei, ut dicit Apostolus (Rom. III, 23); et adjecit: Justificati ilaque gratis in gratia ipsius in redemptionem quæ est in Christo (Ibid., 24). Ecce gratis, ecce et redemptio. Audenter dico: Ubi est præsumptio de merito humanitatis, non est gratia divinitatis; omnia enim quæ gratiæ Dci esse credimus, meritis nostris applicare non possumus. Ergo si gratiæ est et non meriti, quomodo vos dicitis aliquos r.on vocari, quia sunt ejus vocation e indigni? Si enim nullus ex suo merito vocatur, sed ex dono gratiæ Dei, et alius vocatur, alius recusatur, personarum, Deus blaspbematur acceptor. ArguunLur etiam apostoli ejus falsi testes indicii. Nam beatus Apostolus Petrus clamat: In veritate, inquit, comperi, quia non est personarum acceptio apud Deum (Act. x, 54); et beatus Paulus: Non eat enim personarum acceptio apud Deum (Rom. II, 11), et iterum Dominus dicit de servis: Eadem, inquit, facile illis remittentes minas, scientes quia et vester et illorum Deus in cœlis est, et non est apud illum personarum acceptio (Ephes. VI, 9).","english":"If he wills and cannot, he is blasphemed as powerless; if he can and does not will, he is seen as unjust. If they themselves do not merit it, then grace is no longer grace, and the calling is a matter of human merit, not of the grace of God. But if it is of the grace of God and not of human merit, he calls all. For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, as the Apostle says; and he added: Being justified therefore freely in his grace through the redemption that is in Christ. Behold, freely; behold, also redemption. I say boldly: where there is presumption of human merit, there is no grace of divinity; for all things that we believe to be of the grace of God, we cannot apply to our own merits. Therefore, if it is of grace and not of merit, how do you say that some are not called, because they are unworthy of his calling? For if no one is called by his own merit, but by the gift of the grace of God, and one is called, another rejected, God is blasphemed as a respecter of persons. His apostles are also accused as false witnesses of the charge. For the blessed Apostle Peter cries out: In truth, he says, I have learned that there is no respect of persons with God; and the blessed Paul: For there is no respect of persons with God; and again the Lord says concerning servants: Doing, he says, the same things to them, remitting threats, knowing that both your and their God is in heaven, and with him there is no respect of persons.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":104,"ref":"p104","source":"Si ergo ita est, immo quia ita est, unde probatis quia non omnes voeat ad gratiam suam? aut quem non vult salvare, qui pro cruci figentibus orat? In hac hærese diabolus tyrannidis sua: furore grassatur, ut. lethali plaga pene universum vulneret mundum. Infert bellum creatura Creatori, et dicit ipsum prædestinassequod punit, ipsum ut fieret constituisse quod prohibuiL. Quod quam sit impium, quamque sacrilegum, quamlibet imperitus agnoscet. Omne enim peccatum tunc peccatum recte dicitur, cum et reatus delinquentis et aequitas judicantis ostenditur; quia peccati supplicium præcedit semper meritum facti: reum autem nemo facit, nisi eum qui potuit declinare peccatum. Peccatum ergo inter praedestinantem et operantem discerne, ut i!lius factum malum hic, quasi alienum a se, aut damnet, aut corrigat. A justo autem Deo aliena sunt universa quæ damnat. Unde si prædestinatio in peccantem ostenditur, nihil justo judici probatur debere peccator; quia cujus asseritur prædestinatio, hujus etiam operatio comprobatur. Videtisne, obsecro, quam graviter blasphemetur. his assertionibus Deus? Si enim praedestinationis ejus vis eo usque adducitur, ut ejus dicatur prærdinatione peccatum, fructus malus non nisi ex impia radice procreatur.","english":"If therefore this is so—indeed, because it is so—how do you prove that he does not call all to his grace? Or whom does he not will to save, who prays for those who fasten him to the cross? In this heresy the devil rages with the fury of his tyranny, so as to wound almost the whole world with a deadly blow. The creature wages war against the Creator, and says that he predestined what he punishes, that he established that to be done which he forbade. How impious this is, how sacrilegious, even the unskilled will recognize. For every sin is then rightly called sin when both the guilt of the offender and the equity of the judge are shown; because the punishment of sin always precedes the merit of the deed. But no one makes a man guilty except him who was able to avoid the sin. Therefore discern the sin between the one who predestines and the one who acts, so that the latter may either condemn or correct the evil deed of the former as something alien to himself. But from a just God all things that he condemns are alien. Hence if predestination is shown to be in the sinner, nothing is proven to be owed by the sinner to the just judge; because whose predestination is asserted, his operation also is proven. Do you see, I ask, how gravely God is blasphemed by these assertions? For if the force of his predestination is carried so far that sin is said to be by his ordination, the evil fruit is produced from no root but an impious one.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":105,"ref":"p105","source":"Erit ergo secundum manichæum alius Dcus malorum, alius bonorum: ut quæ bona sunt, bono ascribantur; et quæ mala sunt, malo: ne videamur pejus Manichæis inclamare blasphemium, cum unum eumdemque Deum quem bonum confitemur ct justum, hunc praedestinasse omnia scelera aestimemus. Recedant igitur vana argumenta verborum. Nihil habet commune prævaricalio delinquentis et prædestinatio ulcisceris: quia peccatum in contemptu transgressoris est, ultio vero in judicis æquitate consistit. Tollite itaque e duobus unum, aut judici prædestinationem ut probetis justum, aut alterum judicem futurum ostendite. Nulla enim ratione constitutum suum poterit punire qui judicat: quia si malum prædestinationi dederis Dei, voluntati hominis dare non poteris. Aut enim accusa reatum in homine, ct tolle te a blasphemio Dei: aut si prædestinationem a Deo asseris constitutam esse peccanti, reatum quidem peccatori tulisti, sed Deo crimen impingis. Certe peccatum certum est nihil aliud esse, quam prævaricatiorem hominis, et prædestinationem nihil aliud, nisi ordinationem Dei. Quomodo ergo tam diversa sibimet tamque contraria ad unam compaginem venire potuerunt, ut quod bonum Dei est malum hominis fiat, et delinqucnlis vitium dicatur præordinatio prohibentis? Illud autem cur non consideratis, qui prædestinatione Dei putatis homines consentire peccatis?","english":"Therefore, according to the Manichee, there will be one God of evils and another of goods, so that the things that are good are ascribed to the good one and the things that are evil to the evil one—lest we seem to cry out a blasphemy worse than the Manichees, when we reckon that the one and same God whom we confess to be good and just has predestined all crimes. Let vain arguments of words therefore depart. The transgression of the delinquent and the predestination of the avenger have nothing in common, because sin consists in the contempt of the transgressor, while vengeance stands in the equity of the judge. Take away, therefore, one of the two: either [take away] predestination from the judge, so that you may prove him just, or show that there will be another judge. For by no reasoning will he who judges be able to punish what he has established, because if you assign evil to God's predestination, you will not be able to assign it to man's will. For either accuse the guilt in man and withdraw yourself from the blasphemy against God, or, if you assert that predestination was established by God for the one who sins, you have indeed taken away the guilt from the sinner, but you thrust a crime upon God. Certainly it is clear that sin is nothing other than the transgression of man, and predestination nothing other than the ordinance of God. How, then, could things so diverse and so contrary to one another come into one joining, so that what is good of God becomes evil of man, and the ordinance of the one who forbids is called the vice of the delinquent? But why do you not consider this, you who think that by God's predestination men consent to sins?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":106,"ref":"p106","source":"Omne certe peccatum vult ct desiderat diabolus fieri: et creditis quod prædestinationem suam Deus ad diaboli desiderium et ad hominis interitum posuit, et voluit prædestinationem I suam servire voluntati diaholic.c, ut e ad libitus dæmonum homines, ante propriæ voluntatis meritum, reos jam addiceret inimico? Hactenus blasphemias hujus loci detexisse sufficiat. Pavido enim corde intolerabili tremore deficio. Octoginta et novem haereses in primo libello conscripsimus; nullam ita hominibus ad crimina frena laxasse conspeximus; nullam sic blasphemias in Deum astrucntem invenimus. Fateor, i catholici confessores, crescunt eis in hac defensione blasphemiæ. Peto itaque vestrae fidei puritatem, ut dimicantem me vestris precibus adjuvetis, contra hos agentem, quorum tota verba blasphemke sunt. Fateor, inquam, charissimi, universa mei corporis membra torpescunt, animus deficit, auditus intremuit, facies pallore distabuit, capillorum seges in vertice riget, mens intus cum suis consiliis metu quassante afflicta est, lingua ipsa in suo atrio moveri non prævalet; quoniam contra eos loquimur, qui dicunt Deum diaboli voluntati servile.","english":"Certainly the devil wants and desires every sin to be committed; and do you believe that God set his predestination to serve the devil's desire and man's destruction, and willed that his predestination serve the will of the devil, so that, before any merit of their own will, he would already hand men over as guilty to the enemy, according to the whims of demons? For now it must suffice to have exposed the blasphemies of this passage. For with a fearful heart I faint under intolerable trembling. We have written of eighty-nine heresies in the first book; we have seen none that so loosened the reins for men to commit crimes; we have found none that so asserted blasphemies against God. I confess, O catholic confessors, that their blasphemies grow in this defense. Therefore I ask the purity of your faith, that you aid me as I struggle with your prayers, as I act against these men, all of whose words are blasphemies. I confess, I say, dearest ones, that all the members of my body grow numb, my mind fails, my hearing trembles, my face grows pale and drawn, the crop of hair on my head stands on end, my mind within is afflicted with its counsels as fear shakes it, my very tongue cannot move in its own court; because we speak against those who say that God is servile to the will of the devil.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":107,"ref":"p107","source":"IV. Jam enim, inquiunt, prædestinavit Deus homines, sive ad justitiam, sive ad peccatum: et idcirco quod eos voluit esse qui condidit, aliud esse non possunt. Cum interrogaveris eos, ut quid tantum blasphemiæ proferant, dicunt quia dixit Aposlolus: Quos prædestinavit, hos vocavit (Rom. VIII, 50).\n\nV. Ideoque aiunt, quos semel Deus prædestinavit ad vitam, etiam si negligant, etiam si peccent, etiam si nolint, ad vitam perducentur inviti; quos autem prædestinavit ad mortem, etiam si currant, etiam si festinent, sine causa laborant. Quis non videat, quod hoc dicto tollatur sollicitudo justis timendi ne corruant, et peccatoribus amputetur effectus sperandi ne surgant? Evasimus blasphemias Dei; ad ruinas hominum venimus. Si enim ita est, ut unusquisque hoc sit quod prædestinatus est, cessat lex, cessat sacerdos, cessat devotio populi, clauditur aula confugii, evacuatur sinus Ecclesiæ, nullus genu curvat Deo, nullus benedictionibus inclinat caput; clauduntur apices Dei, atque universa simul virtutum studia evanescunt.","english":"IV. For already, they say, God has predestined men either to righteousness or to sin; and therefore, because he willed them to be what he created them to be, they cannot be anything else. When you ask them why they utter such blasphemy, they say it is because the Apostle said: Those whom he predestined, these he also called (Rom. 8:30).\n\nV. And therefore they say that those whom God once predestined to life, even if they are negligent, even if they sin, even if they are unwilling, will be brought to life against their will; but those whom he predestined to death, even if they run, even if they hasten, labor in vain. Who would not see that by this saying the concern of the righteous to fear lest they fall is taken away, and from sinners is cut off the effect of hoping lest they rise? We have escaped the blasphemies of God; we have come to the ruins of men. For if it is so, that each one is what he has been predestined to be, the law ceases, the priest ceases, the devotion of the people ceases, the court of refuge is closed, the bosom of the Church is emptied, no one bends the knee to God, no one bows the head for blessings; the summits of God are closed, and at the same time all pursuits of virtues vanish.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":108,"ref":"p108","source":"VI. a Quantumvis enim, aiunt, quicunque studeat, et a Dei Ecclesia, et a Dei sacerdotibus, et a divinis studiis non recedat, si semel eum Deus prædestinavit ad mortem, salvus esse non poterit. Judas quotidie verbum vitæ audivit, quotidie adhæsit Domino, quotidie virtutibus occupatus, quotidie ipsum Filium Dei monitorem audivit: et quia prædestinatus est ad mortem, uno ictu subito interiit. Saulus quotidie persecutor, quolidie lapidator Christianorum, quotidie vastator Ecclesiarum:et quia prædestinatus est ad vitam, uno iclu subito vas electionis est factus. Quid ergo, inquiunt, tu qui in peccatis permanes, expavescis? Si te Deus dignabitur, sanctus eris; aut quid tu qui in sanctitate vivis, sollicitus redderis? Si Deus noluerit, nunquam formes. Uterque de Deo securi estote. Nunquid tu qui sanctus ea, et sollicitus es ne corruas, et die noctuque orationibus ades, occuparis jejuniis, et divinis lectionibus diligenter insistis, exhortationibus vacas atque omnibus sanctis studiis quotidie immines, nunquid tua voluntate salvus eris? Nunquid sanctior eris Juda, qui accepit potestatem infirmos curandi, dæmonia fugandi, mortuos suscitandi, calcandi super serpentes et scorpiones, collega apostolorum, Christi discipulus; et tamen quia prædestinatus est ad mortem, mortem æternam invenit?","english":"VI. For however much anyone, they say, may strive, and not depart from the Church of God and the priests of God and divine studies, if God has once predestined him to death, he cannot be saved. Judas heard the word of life daily, daily clung to the Lord, daily was occupied with virtues, daily heard the very Son of God as his admonisher; and because he was predestined to death, he perished suddenly in a single stroke. Saul was daily a persecutor, daily a stoner of Christians, daily a ravager of churches; and because he was predestined to life, in a single stroke he was suddenly made a vessel of election. What then, they say, do you who remain in sins tremble? If God deigns you, you will be holy; or why are you who live in holiness made anxious? If God is unwilling, you will never be formed. Let both of you be secure concerning God. Are you who are holy, and anxious lest you fall, and present at prayers day and night, occupied with fastings, and diligently intent on divine readings, free for exhortations and daily pressing on all holy studies—are you, then, to be saved by your own will? Will you be holier than Judas, who received power to heal the sick, to put demons to flight, to raise the dead, to tread upon serpents and scorpions, a colleague of the apostles, a disciple of Christ; and yet, because he was predestined to death, he found eternal death?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":109,"ref":"p109","source":"Cessa esse sollicitus, et de Dei esto voluntate securus; quoniam si te dignatur Deus ut permaneas, sanctus eris. At tu qui peccator ea, disce a Paulo apostolo. Nunquid tu aliquando pejora poteris committere quam ille commisit? et tamen quia prædestinatus est ad apostolatum, evasit subito universa peccata, et ab inferioribus inferiorum ad superna superiorum ascendit. Hic est omnis summa consilii vestri; hinc decipitis mundum, hinc penetralis domos, et captivatis mulierculas oneratas peccatis, quæ circumducuntur variis desideriis, semper discentes, et nunquam ad scientiam Dei pervenientes (II Tim. III, i, 7). Juvante itaque Domino, spiritus ille qui falsorum senum adversum Susannam agentium scidit consilia, hic spiritus nunc vos dividet adversum immaculatam Dci Ecclesiam falsa tractantes. Et sicut illi de sua sibi accusatione invenli sant pleni fallaciis, ita vos ex vestris vobis oppositionibus abscedetis superati. Ipsa itaque verba dicimus inter initia quæ ipsi dixistis, sed aliter eorumdem verborum finem colligimus. Dicimus enim juslo: Certe Judas apostolus fuit, et a Christi vestigiis non recessit, ex ore ejus die noctuque consilia salutis accepit, signa virtutum exercuit, et universa obtinuit apostolatus insignia; et tamen quia negligens fuit, cecidit. Vigila ne corruas, esto sollicitus, quia adversarius tuus sicut leo rugiens circuit quærens ut transvoret (I Pet. v, 8).","english":"Cease to be anxious, and be secure concerning the will of God; for if God deigns that you persevere, you will be holy. But you who are a sinner, learn from the apostle Paul. Can you ever commit worse things than he committed? And yet, because he was predestined to the apostleship, he suddenly escaped all his sins, and ascended from the lowest of the low to the highest of the high. This is the sum total of all your counsel; from this you deceive the world, from this you penetrate houses, and you captivate women burdened with sins, who are led about by various desires, always learning and never arriving at the knowledge of God (II Tim. 3:6-7). Therefore, with the Lord's help, that spirit which shattered the counsels of the false elders acting against Susanna—this spirit will now divide you against the immaculate Church of God as you treat false things. And just as those men were found full of deceits from their own accusation of themselves, so you will depart from your own oppositions defeated. Therefore we speak those very words among the beginnings which you yourselves spoke, but we draw the end of those same words otherwise. For we say to the just man: Surely Judas was an apostle, and he did not withdraw from Christ's footsteps; from his mouth day and night he received counsels of salvation, he exercised signs of powers, and he obtained all the insignia of apostleship; and yet, because he was negligent, he fell. Watch lest you fall; be anxious, because your adversary, like a roaring lion, goes about seeking to devour you (I Pet. 5:8).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":110,"ref":"p110","source":"Hoc autem quod cecidit Judas, non putes fuisse impietatis Dei; neque enim Deus illum voluit esse malignum: sed quia fur erat, et loculos habebat (Joan. XII, 6), et erat in corde ejus radix omnium malorum avaritia (I Tim. VI, iO), ideo corruit miser, et crcpuit medius (Act. I, 18), qui tanta dona divina neglexit, qui, medico præsente, vulnera sua non solum non curare, sed etiam augmentare studuit. In peccato enim Judæ vos ipsos judices petimus. Ila enim vos, juvante Christo, concludimus, ut vos ipsos ei vestro judicio superetis. In peccato Jud:e grande est sacrilcgium, incomparabile facinus, crimen immensum. Dicite nobis, cui vultis hoc crimen ascribi? Ipsi Judæ traditori, an Deo prædestinatori? Si, quod dici pejus peccatum est quam hoc quod Judas exercui, hoc peccatum Dei prædestinatoris esse probaveritis, fateor, vicistis; si autem ipsius Judae est traditoris, defensio nostra accepit palmam: non enim Deus ipsum talem vel prædestinavit, vel talem esse voluit. Defendamus ergo sanctum et immaculatum a crimihe Dominum; ne quem ille tradidit per avaritiam, nos per injustitiam accusemus; et tollentes crimen Judæ, Dominum vocemus in culpam.","english":"But do not think that the fall of Judas was due to any impiety of God; for God did not will him to be wicked, but because he was a thief and had the money-box, and the root of all evils, avarice, was in his heart, therefore the wretch fell and burst asunder in the midst, he who neglected such great divine gifts, who, with the physician present, not only did not care to heal his wounds but even strove to increase them. For in the sin of Judas we ask you to be your own judges. For with Christ's help we so conclude against you that by your own judgment you may overcome yourselves. In the sin of Judas there is great sacrilege, an incomparable crime, an immense offense. Tell us, to whom do you wish this crime to be ascribed? To Judas the traitor himself, or to God the predestinator? If you prove that this sin—which it is worse to say than the sin Judas committed—is the sin of God the predestinator, I confess, you have won; but if it is the sin of Judas the traitor himself, our defense has won the palm: for God neither predestined him to be such, nor willed him to be such. Let us therefore defend the holy and immaculate Lord from the charge; lest the one whom he handed over through avarice, we accuse through injustice; and taking away the crime of Judas, let us call the Lord into blame.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":111,"ref":"p111","source":"Si enim ideo talis exstitit, quia talem illum Deus prædestinavit, non quia ipse neglexit, ipsum quidem liberamus ab omni pondere criminis, et tollentes nos ab increpatione traditoris hominis, prædestinatoris D.ei astutiam accusamus, qui quasi voluerit apostolum fieri, ut emn ex apostolo faceret traditorem; quem quasi voluerit elevare ad cœlos, ut eum ex altQ jactaret; quem quasi voluerit dæmonia ejicere, ut eum dæmonum traderet potestati. Quid moras innectimus? ante oeulos vestros utrosque habetis, o nostri temporis tractatores, servum et Dominum, Magistrum et discipulum, Deum bonum et hominem malnm: unum accusale quem vultis. Si Deum prædestinantem, Judas immunis est; si Judam tradentem, crimen ejus Demo prædestinasse docere minime poteritis, quia Dci prædestinatio bona est, Judæ autem traditio mala. Bonus ergo rem bonam fecit, quia malum nunquam fecisse credendus est. Et si prædestinatio Dei bona est, et Judae traditio pessima, rei malæ Judæ et rei bonæ Dei convenire non potuit. Impossibile est enim tenebris et lumini, bono et malo, vitæ et morti, veritali et mendacio, simul habere consortium. Reddentes ergo Judæ soli peccatum suum ex integro, et Deo honorem xquitatis suae integerrimum exhibentes, nobis quoque reddite osculum charitatis. LaboTalis enim vano certamine, qui per Judain omnes peccatores excusatis atque defendilis, Dei autem justitiam accusatis.","english":"For if he became such a man because God predestined him to be such, and not because he himself was negligent, then we indeed free him from every weight of crime, and, withdrawing ourselves from the reproach of the traitorous man, we accuse the cunning of God the predestinator, who, as it were, willed him to become an apostle so that he might make him a traitor from an apostle; whom, as it were, he willed to raise to the heavens so that he might cast him down from on high; whom, as it were, he willed to cast out demons so that he might hand him over to the power of demons. Why do we weave delays? Before your eyes you have both, O teachers of our time, the servant and the Lord, the Master and the disciple, the good God and the evil man: accuse the one you wish. If you accuse God as predestining, Judas is immune; if you accuse Judas as betraying, you will by no means be able to teach that God predestined his crime, because God's predestination is good, but Judas's betrayal is evil. The good one therefore did a good thing, because he must be believed never to have done evil. And if God's predestination is good, and Judas's betrayal is utterly wicked, the evil deed of Judas and the good deed of God could not have agreed. For it is impossible for darkness and light, good and evil, life and death, truth and falsehood, to have fellowship at the same time. Therefore, rendering to Judas alone his sin in full, and offering to God the most complete honor of his righteousness, render also to us the kiss of charity. For you labor in vain strife, you who through Judas excuse and defend all sinners, but accuse the righteousness of God.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":112,"ref":"p112","source":"Nunc veniamus ad magistrum bonum et vere beatissimum Paulum, et amota tergiversationis insania, quod verum et integrum ncgari non potest, explicemus. Aliud est, zelo malitiæ persequi aliquem innocentem, sicut fecit Cain, aliud est zelo Dci persequi, sicut fecit Elias; nec solum persccutus est, sed etiam in conspectu suo mullum populum gladio jussit occidi. Cain unum occidit, et æterna damnatione punitur; Elias multos occidit, et ad gloriam rapitur sempiternam. Non ergo, sicut vos putatis, Cain imitatus est Paulus: sed zelo Dei ductus Etiam secutus est. Dicas forsitan: Unde hoc probas? Lege ad Galatas eumdem sibi testimonium perhibentem, atque dicentem: Persequebar, inquit, Ecclesiam Dei, et expugnabam illam super multos coaetaneos meos in genere meo; abundantius, inquit, æmulator exsistens paternarum mearum traditionum (Gal. i, 13, 44). Numquid non omnibus catholicis notum est Deum Hebraeorum hunc esse Patrem Domini nostri Jesu Christi? Quem ergo defenJebat? Patrem sine dubio, quia sacerdotes sui ei dixerant hunc non esse Filium Dei quem crucifixerant. Credens itaque legi suæ, credens sacerdotibus Dei vivi, accepit ab eis epistolas, ut pergens Damascum ad synagogas, vinctos adduceret Christianos (Act. IX, 2). Prudentissimus vir atque sapientissimus, qui sciebat se zelo Dei agere, sine dubio videbatur ei quod inimicos Dei persequerctur.","english":"Now let us come to the good teacher and truly most blessed Paul, and, having set aside the madness of evasion, let us set forth what is true and complete and cannot be denied. It is one thing to persecute an innocent man out of zeal of malice, as Cain did; it is another to persecute out of zeal for God, as Elijah did; and he not only persecuted, but even ordered a great many of the people to be killed with the sword in his sight. Cain killed one man, and is punished with eternal damnation; Elijah killed many, and is caught up to eternal glory. Therefore Paul did not imitate Cain, as you think, but, led by zeal for God, he even followed him. Perhaps you say: How do you prove this? Read his own testimony concerning himself in Galatians, where he says: I persecuted the Church of God and fought against it beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being, he says, more abundantly a zealot for the traditions of my fathers (Gal 1:13-14). Is it not known to all Catholics that the God of the Hebrews is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ? Whom, then, was he defending? The Father, without doubt, because his priests had told him that the one they had crucified was not the Son of God. Believing therefore his own Law, believing the priests of the living God, he received letters from them, so that going to Damascus to the synagogues he might bring Christians back bound (Acts 9:2). A most prudent and most wise man, who knew that he was acting out of zeal for God, without doubt thought that he was persecuting the enemies of God.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":113,"ref":"p113","source":"Pro fide enim Dei, et pro veritate currebat. Non enim Filium Dei esse Dominum Jesum Christum didicerat, sed scduclorem et deceptorem populi sui, a magistris suis et a sacerdotibus suis ut audierat, æstimabat. Animum itaque Eliæ, non Cain habens, erga novos cultores Dei fortiter insistebat, et ignorans crimina pro virtutibus exercebat. Deus autem, cordis inspector et fidei contemplator, fecit eum misericordiam invenire, quia ignorantiam ejus innocentia comprobabat. Unde hoc probamus? Ipse dicit ad Timotheum: Fui, inquit, persecutor et injuriosus; sed,Misericordiam consecutus sum, quia ignorans feci. Vides ergo quia ubi ignoranlia est, invidia non est? A justitia enim Dei ignoranti doctrina traditur; scienti vero et contemnenti dictatur sententia. Unde per obscurum ignorantiæ ambulans Paulus, putabat se inimicum Domini sui persequi: ardebat a in persecutione, quia placere Domino bonus famulus studebat. Nm quiescebat, furebal, abundantius omnibus zclator exsistens paternarum traditionum. Quorum patrum gerens zelum? sine dubio Abrahæ, et Isaac, et iacob; et qui horum Deus' sine dubio Pater Domini uostri Jesu Christi. Ergo huic placere studens, poLabat se ejus insequi inimicum; passus obscuritatem sacerdotum suorum, quibus legis divinæ imperio fidem suam testimonium dantibus exhibebat. Omnibus notum est quid habeat obscuritas.","english":"For he was running on behalf of the faith of God and on behalf of the truth. For he had not learned that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God, but, as he had heard from his own teachers and his own priests, he reckoned him a seducer and deceiver of his people. And so, having the spirit of Elijah, not of Cain, he pressed on boldly on behalf of the new worshippers of God, and, in ignorance, he practiced crimes as though they were virtues. But God, the inspector of the heart and the beholder of faith, caused him to find mercy, because his innocence proved his ignorance. How do we prove this? He himself says to Timothy: I was, he says, a persecutor and an insolent man; but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly. You see, then, that where there is ignorance, there is no envy? For by the justice of God, doctrine is handed over to the ignorant; but to the one who knows and despises, let the sentence be pronounced. Hence Paul, walking through the darkness of ignorance, thought that he was pursuing the enemy of his Lord; he burned in persecution, because as a good servant he was striving to please the Lord. For he did not rest, he raged, showing himself more abundantly zealous than all for the traditions of the fathers. Whose fathers' zeal was he bearing? Doubtless that of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; and the God of these is doubtless the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, striving to please him, he thought that he was pursuing his enemy; he endured the darkness of his own priests, to whom, by the command of the divine law, he was rendering his faith as a testimony. It is known to all what darkness holds.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":114,"ref":"p114","source":"Nunquid non ipse usus nos poterit edocere obscuritatis hanc esse naturam, ut notum et ignotum, parentem et extraneum, civem et barbarum, uno modo ante oculos afterat, qui nisi locutus fuerit, quis ille sit penitus sciri non poterit? Hic ergo, velut bonus custos viDomini sabaoth domus Israel, velut bonus circitor, apprehenso haculo, per noctem ignorantiæ circumibat, ut quoscunque inveniret legentes vindemiam Domini, Eliæ animo devastaret. Servo itaque bono, pro Domini sui vinea vigilanti, servo zelo fidei persequenti, servo Eliam imitanti, servo in tenebris ignorantiæ pro veritate certanti, servo cui se sciebat dixisse ut pro vcrilafe certaret usque ad mortem: laboranti ergo, et in obscuro fidei persequenti, et nescienti quod ipse esset Dominus suus, quem putabat inimicum Domini sui, succurrit dicens: Quiesce, ego sum Dominus tuus. Modo tu ipse judica de te ipso. Si introieris in vineam tuam nocte, nunquid homo tuus aut servus tuus, in obscuro noctis dum Le senserit, et cœperit venire ut te comprehendat, die mihi, obscero, veritatem profer ex ore tuo; die mihi, nunquid taces, et permittis te teneri ab eo, quem probas quia non zelo, non inimicitiis facieatibus te persequitur, sed te defendens, dum te æstimat furem, te ipsum pro te ipso persequitur? lluic tali servo et laus debetur et præmium.","english":"Can not experience itself teach us that this is the nature of obscurity—to bring before the eyes in one manner the known and the unknown, the kindred and the stranger, the citizen and the barbarian—so that unless he has spoken, who he is cannot be known at all? This man, therefore, like a good guard of the house of Israel for the Lord of hosts, like a good watchman, having taken up his staff, was going about through the night of ignorance, so that whomever he found gathering the vintage of the Lord, he might lay waste with the spirit of Elijah. To the good servant, therefore, keeping vigil for the vineyard of his Lord, to the servant pursuing the zeal of the faith, to the servant imitating Elijah, to the servant contending for the truth in the darkness of ignorance, to the servant to whom he knew he had said that he should contend for the truth even unto death—to him, therefore, laboring and pursuing in the obscurity of faith, and not knowing that it was his own Lord whom he thought to be the enemy of his Lord, he came to his aid, saying: Be still, I am your Lord. Now judge for yourself concerning yourself. If you enter into your vineyard by night, will your man or your servant, when he has perceived you in the darkness of the night and has begun to come to seize you—tell me, I beg, bring forth the truth from your mouth; tell me, are you silent and do you allow yourself to be held by him whom you approve because he pursues you not out of zeal, not out of hostile enmity, but defending you while he thinks you a thief—does he not pursue you on your own behalf? To such a servant as this both praise and reward are due.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":115,"ref":"p115","source":"Denique, cum dixeris ei persrquenti te et volenti percutere: Cessa, ego sum dominus tuus; statim abjecto fusle de manu sua, prosternens se pedibus tuis veniam postulat ignorantiæ; atque illa hora hoc faciet quod ei præceperis. Ita ergo tunc beatus Paulus, missus a sacerdotibus Dei, jam meritis apostolicis plenus, vas electionis erat: habens intra se spiritum Eliæ, persequebatur, ut ei videbatur, inimicos legis Dei, et quem putabat esse furem vineæ Domini sui, ipse erat Deus suus. Patiebatur enim noctem, cujus ei obscurum fecerat incredulitas sacerdotum. Justus vero Dominus in hac ipsa sibi persecutione, quam ipse patiebatur pro sua justitia, complacebat, quia ipse dederat legem quam ille servabat. Non ergo quasi personarum acceptor apprehendit nolentem et fecit volentem, apprehendit infidelem et fecit fidelcm, apprehendit inimicum et fecit amicum, apprehendit malum et fecit bonum: sed suum fidelem, et pro se laborantem alloquitur, et dicit: Quid me persequeris (Act. IX, 4)? At ille ipsa verba quæ solent in obscuro dici ait: Quis es, Domine (Ib. 5)? et Dominus: Ego sum Jesus Nazarenus quem tu persequeris (Ibid.). Statim credit, statimque transfert se a Synagoga ad Ecclesiam, non mutando Dominum, sed ipsum esse quem semper coluit agnoscendo. Non ab alio Deo ad alterum Deum veniendo, sed eumdem esse Deum quem semper coluerat, comprobando.","english":"Finally, when you, pursuing him and wishing to strike him, have said to him, \"Cease, I am your lord,\" immediately, casting the cudgel from his hand and prostrating himself at your feet, he begs pardon for his ignorance; and at that hour he will do what you have commanded him. So therefore at that time the blessed Paul, sent by the priests of God, already full of apostolic merits, was a vessel of election: having within himself the spirit of Elijah, he was persecuting, as it seemed to him, the enemies of the law of God, and the one whom he thought to be a thief of his Lord's vineyard, he himself was his God. For he was enduring the night whose darkness the unbelief of the priests had made for him. But the just Lord in this very persecution which he himself was enduring for his own justice was well pleased, because he himself had given the law which that man was keeping. Not therefore as one who accepts persons did he seize the unwilling and make him willing, seize the unbelieving and make him believing, seize the enemy and make him a friend, seize the evil and make him good: but he addresses his own faithful one, and one laboring for him, and says: Why do you persecute me? And he says those very words which are customarily spoken in obscurity: Who are you, Lord? And the Lord: I am Jesus of Nazareth whom you are persecuting. Immediately he believes, and immediately he transfers himself from the Synagogue to the Church, not by changing the Lord, but by recognizing that he is the very one whom he always worshiped. Not by coming from one God to another God, but by proving that the same is the God whom he had always worshiped.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":116,"ref":"p116","source":"Non ab infidelitate ad fidem veniendo, sed ipsam fidem quam jure habuerat, possidendo. Justus ergo Don:iuus servum suum cognovit, secundum quod ipse Apostolus ad Timotheum dicit: Cognoscit Dominus qui sunt ejus (II Tim. II, 19). His autem quos videt non veritatis defensione, sed vanæ gloriæ et cupiditate aliqua, ejus se servos esse jactantes, clamat eis dicens: Discedi e a me, quia non novi vos (Matth. VII, 23). Verum quid stamus in hoc loco, cum non solum has injurias Apostolo irrogetis, ut dicatis eum invitum tractum, cum ad unam vocem legatis eum de se dicentem: Si nolens hoc ago, dispensatio mihi credita est; si autem volens hoc ago, mercedem accipio (I Cor. IX, 17). Excludite cum a mercede sua, et dicite: Quia nolens hoc agis invitus tentus, invitus tractus, non tu curris; neque enim de cursu tuo proficis, esto jam securus. Scias te, etiam si volueris, peccare non posse. Ad hæc vobis ipse respondet: Ego sic curro, non quasi in incertum (Ibid., 26); ego quotidie festino, et ad bravium supernas vocationis extendor (Philipp. III, 14). F.t licet nihil mihi conscius sim, sed tamen non in hoc justificatus sum (I Cor. IV, 4). Nolite errare: Deus non irridelur (Gal. vi, 7). Ego enim, nisi in jejuniis multis institero, et maceravero carnem meam, et servituti tradidero, ipse reprobus efficiar (I Cor. IX, 27). magistrum bonum! o sapientem architectum, et bonorum omnium instructorem!","english":"Not by coming from unbelief to faith, but by possessing the very faith that he had by right. Therefore the just Donatus knew his servant, according to what the Apostle himself says to Timothy: The Lord knows those who are his (2 Tim. 2:19). But to those whom he sees boasting that they are his servants, not for the defense of the truth but out of vainglory and some desire, he cries out to them, saying: Depart from me, for I do not know you (Matt. 7:23). But why do we linger on this point, when you not only inflict these injuries on the Apostle, so as to say that he was dragged unwillingly, when at a single phrase you read him saying of himself: If I do this unwillingly, a dispensation has been entrusted to me; but if I do this willingly, I receive a reward (1 Cor. 9:17). Exclude him from his reward, and say: Because you do this unwillingly, held against your will, dragged against your will, it is not you who run; for you do not advance by your own running—be assured of this. Know that you, even if you wish it, cannot sin. To these things he himself answers you: I so run, not as though into uncertainty (ibid., 26); I hasten daily, and I stretch forward to the prize of the upward calling (Phil. 3:14). And although I am conscious of nothing against myself, yet I am not justified in this (1 Cor. 4:4). Do not be deceived: God is not mocked (Gal. 6:7). For unless I persist in many fastings, and mortify my flesh, and deliver it into servitude, I myself will become a castaway (1 Cor. 9:27). O good master! O wise architect, and instructor of all good things!","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":117,"ref":"p117","source":"Sic fabricat Ecclesiam, qui vult exemplum salutis offerre. Non resupinat animos in bono cursu satagentes, ut putent se ila ad Deum pervenire, ut ab animis suis tollant studium placendi Deo, et dicant: Non ei placebimus de nostro studio, quid studemus? non ei placebimus de nostro cursu, quid currimus? non ei piacebimus de nostra volunlate, quid volumus? non ei placebimus de nostra vigilantia, quid vigilamus non ei placebimus de nostra oratione, quid oramus? si prædestinati sumus ad vitam, reprobi non erimus. Hoc excludens Petrus apostolus clamat: Vigilate, quia adversarius vester sicut leo rugiens circuit aliquem vestrum transvorare festinans (l Pet. v, 8). Et apostoIus Paulus: Nolite consentire operibus infructuosis tenebrarum; magis autem et redarguite (Ephes. v, 11). Nolite, inquit, consentire. Vides consensum nostrum quam caute informat? Scit enim per consensum nostrum unumquemque decipi, unumquemque salvari. Consensum autem dico, in quo consentimus medico, qui nos gratis curare volens clamat ad nos quotidie: Venite ad me, omnes qui laboratis et onerati estis, et ego vos requiescere faciam (Matth. xi, 28). Ideo audis vocantem, ut te exhibcas respondentem. Hic qui clamat ut omnes ad cum veniant, ignoravit doclrinam vestram.","english":"Thus he fabricates the Church, who wishes to offer an example of salvation. He does not overturn the minds of those striving in a good course, so that they might think they come to God in such a way as to remove from their minds the zeal of pleasing God, and say: We shall not please him by our own zeal—why do we strive? We shall not please him by our own course—why do we run? We shall not please him by our own will—why do we will? We shall not please him by our own vigilance—why do we keep watch? We shall not please him by our own prayer—why do we pray? If we are predestined to life, we shall not be reprobate. Excluding this, the apostle Peter cries out: Watch, because your adversary, like a roaring lion, goes about seeking to devour one of you (1 Pet. 5:8). And the apostle Paul: Do not consent to the unfruitful works of darkness; but rather even reprove them (Eph. 5:11). Do not consent, he says. Do you see how carefully he instructs our consent? For he knows that through our consent each one is deceived, each one is saved. But I mean the consent by which we consent to the physician, who, wishing to heal us freely, cries out to us daily: Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will give you rest (Matt. 11:28). Therefore you hear him calling, so that you may present yourself as one responding. This one who cries out that all should come to him did not know your doctrine.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":118,"ref":"p118","source":"Nam non diceret: Venite ad me omnes; sed diceret: Veniant ad me qui sunt prædestinati ad salutem, ut salventur, recedant a me qui sunt prædestinati ad mortem, ut puniantur. Sed non ita est, ut ipsi docetis. Homo enim, si consensum suum a vocatione Dei subtraxerit, perit. Medicus hic noster gratis quidem curat, sed imperat observantiam. Qui non fuerit salvatus, aut vocantem contempsit, aut invitantem renuit, aut ab bis quæ ei abstinere sunt mandata neglexit. lloc nos dicimus de medico perfecto. Vos quid dicitis? Dicite quod vultis: si laudaiis medicum, et culpatis ægrotum, ostenditis medici diligentiam, et negligentiam ægrotantis.\n\nVII. Non hoc dicitis, sed hoc dicitis quod habclis in fallaciæ vestræ libello conscriptum. a Omnes quos scit dignos salute redemptionis suæ Deus, hos ad salutem prædestinavit; hos tantum salvat, quos se ad salutem prædestinasse cognoscit. Salus enim Dei non voluntati hominis servit. Ipse enim scit cui quid faciat. Nec enim antecedit arbitrii libertas gratiam Dei, sed antecedit gratia Dei libertatem urbitrii. Hæc vestra scripta sunt, veslra sunt dicta, veris falsa permixta. Respondemus ad singula. Si omnes quos scit dignos vocat, ergo omnes ad salutem prædestinavit, quia ones quotidie vocare non cessat. Si hos tantum salvat, quos se prædestinasse cognoscit, ergo omnes prædestinavit al salutem, quia omnium Dominus et salvator esi.","english":"For he would not say: \"Come to me, all\"; but he would say: \"Let those who are predestined to salvation come to me, that they may be saved; let those who are predestined to death depart from me, that they may be punished.\" But it is not so, as you yourselves teach. For a man, if he withdraws his consent from the calling of God, perishes. This physician of ours indeed heals freely, but he commands observance. Whoever has not been saved either despised the one calling, or refused the one inviting, or neglected the things that were commanded him to abstain from. This we say concerning the perfect physician. What do you say? Say what you will: if you praise the physician and blame the sick man, you show the diligence of the physician and the negligence of the sick man.\n\nVII. You do not say this, but you say what you have written in the booklet of your falsehood. \"All whom God knows to be worthy of the redemption of his salvation, these he has predestined to salvation; these only he saves, whom he knows he has predestined to salvation. For the salvation of God does not serve the will of man. For he himself knows what to do for whom. Nor indeed does the freedom of the will precede the grace of God, but the grace of God precedes the freedom of the will.\" These are your writings, these are your sayings, true things mixed with false. We answer each point. If he calls all whom he knows to be worthy, therefore he has predestined all to salvation, because he does not cease to call all daily. If he saves only these whom he knows he has predestined, therefore he has predestined all to salvation, because he is the Lord and savior of all.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":119,"ref":"p119","source":"Si satus Dei non voluntati hominis obtemperat, sed anticipat gratia Dei voluntatem hominis; ostendite nobis quis nolens consecutus sit baptismatis sacrosancta mysteria, et postea coepit per gratiam velle quod noluit; aut quis unquam nolens egerit pœnitendam, et postea quam reconciliatus est, sic coepit post indulgentiam pœnitere. Duæ iste res sunt salutis humanæ sacrificium et confessio. Sed et voluntarie sacrificamus Deo, et voluntarie conlitemur. Sacrificium, quo sanguine Christi redimimur, et lateris ejus unda perfundimur: confessio vero, qua confitentes errorem, iterum meremur veniam peccatorum, Ergo duas istas species, quas solas scimus humano generi posse succurrere, quas dicit sanctus Spiritus voluntarie fieri; videamus utrum, ut vos dicitis, ab homine exigantur invito, an a voluntario flagitentur obsequio. Si ab invito et a nolenle, damu3 vobis ma. nus, vicistis; si a consentiente et a dcsideraote atque volente, consensus veritatis dedit nobis victoriam per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum. Voluntarie enim sacrificamus Deo, et confitemur nomini ejus, quoniam bonus est.","english":"If the salvation of God does not obey the will of man, but the grace of God anticipates the will of man, show us who, being unwilling, obtained the most sacred mysteries of baptism, and afterward began through grace to will what he did not will; or who ever, being unwilling, performed penance, and after he was reconciled, began thus to repent after forgiveness. These two things are the sacrifice and the confession of human salvation. But we both sacrifice to God voluntarily, and we confess voluntarily. The sacrifice, by which we are redeemed by the blood of Christ and are washed by the water from his side; the confession, truly, by which, confessing our error, we again merit the forgiveness of sins. Therefore these two kinds, which alone we know can come to the aid of the human race, which the Holy Spirit says are done voluntarily, let us see whether, as you say, they are demanded from an unwilling man, or are required by a voluntary obedience. If from an unwilling and unwilling man, we give you our hands, you have conquered; if from one consenting and desiring and willing, the agreement of truth has given us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. For we sacrifice to God voluntarily, and we confess to his name, because he is good.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":120,"ref":"p120","source":"VIII. Non ita est, inqniunt: Vana est et infructuosa voluntas hominis, vanum est humanæ voluntatis arbitrium. Si ad comparationem divinæ gratiæ hoc diceretis, unum diceremus. Non enim humanam voluntatem divinæ gratiæ præponimus: omnia enim quæ bona sunt, non homini superbienti, sed Deo ascribimus miserenti. Non tamen hæc dicentes, hoc possumus dicere quod vos et dicitis et scribitis: Vana voluntas est hominis. Nos autem dicimus: Voluntas hominis non est vana; quia si vana est, nec præmium consequetur digna, nec supplicium meretur indigna. Sed ne tam hebetes sitis, ut ne negligendo nec au. diendo ista quae asserimus cognoscatis, ite cum catechumenis et cum poenitentibus vestris, ad omnium Ecclesiarum pontifices: et si videritis eos nolentibus gratiam baptismatis tradere, aut nolentibus pœnitentiae imponere manum, sciatis vos esse catho. licos. Sin vcro nec baptismatis gratiam ausi sunt tradere nisi veram et integram exploraverint voluntatem, nec manum imponcre pœnitenti nisi confessionem voluntariam ostendenti, quid insaniae vestræ vanitate attracti dicitis hoc loco: Antecedit gratia voluntatem? Major quidem est gratia Dei quam voluntas hominis; sed prior est voluntas hoc loco quam gratia. Illa merito præcedit, haec ordine. Scio hoc loco qua:; nebulas soleatis ignorantibus excitare, et calummoso calliditatis ingenio in hac voce garrire.","english":"VIII. \"It is not so,\" they say. \"Vain and fruitless is the will of man, vain is the free choice of human will.\" If you said this in comparison with divine grace, we would say one thing. For we do not set human will before divine grace; for all things that are good, we ascribe not to proud man, but to the merciful God. Yet saying these things, we cannot say what you both say and write: \"Vain is the will of man.\" But we say: The will of man is not vain; because if it is vain, it will neither obtain a reward as worthy, nor deserve punishment as unworthy. But lest you be so dull that by neither attending nor listening you fail to understand these things which we assert, go with your catechumens and with your penitents to the pontiffs of all the Churches; and if you see them refusing to give the grace of baptism to the unwilling, or to impose the hand of penance on the unwilling, know that you are catholics. But if they have not dared to give the grace of baptism except to those who have proven a true and whole will, nor to impose the hand on a penitent except to one showing a voluntary confession, why, drawn on by the vanity of your madness, do you say in this place: \"Grace precedes the will\"? Greater indeed is the grace of God than the will of man; but in this place the will is prior to grace. The former precedes by merit, the latter by order. I know that in this place you are accustomed to stir up certain mists for the ignorant, and with the crafty cleverness of your calumny to chatter about this word.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":121,"ref":"p121","source":"Ecce dicunt: Prior est voluntas quam gratia. Nos in his duobus locis dicimus priorem voluntatem quam gratiam, in baptismatis consecutione, et in pœnitentiæ conversione; ut non vestro consilio ducti homines, incipiant declinare cor suum ad excusandas excusatioi.cs in peccatis ( Ps. CXL, 4); dum unus dicit: Si vult Deus. veniet ad me indulgentia peccatorum; et si voluerit me in numero gregis sui addere Christus, fiet. Huic dicimus: Nisi volucris ex toto corde tuo credere, non ad te veniet indulgentia, neque gratia hæc, ut gregis divini particeps fias. Item in peccatis permanentibus si dicatur: Pœnitentiam agile ( III, 2; IV, 17), a appropinquat regnum Dci; hi cum dixerint: Si Deus dignatur dare veniam peccatis, in potestate ejus est; his dicimus: Nisi volueritis ex toto corde vestro poenitentiam agere, ad vos Dei indulgentia nunquam attinget. In his ergo duabus causis dicimus: Antecedit voluntas hominis gratiam Dei. Hanc ipsam rursus voluntatem hominis dicimus quomodo anteceJit gratia Dei: quia non haberet hoc ipsum velle, nisi Unigenitus nobis. de coelo veniens, omnibus officinam suæ gratiæ rescrasset. Veniens enim pro omnibus borninibus passus est. Ergo hoc ordine praecedit gratia Dei voluntatem hominis. Quod ideo dicimus, ut duobus capitibus vos excludamus. Qui euirn dicitis: Antecedit gratia voluntatem, bene sonatis, sed male percutitis.","english":"Behold, they say: \"The will is prior to grace.\" We say in these two matters that the will is prior to grace: in the obtaining of baptism, and in the conversion of penitence; so that men, not led by your counsel, may begin to turn aside their heart to make excuses in sins (Ps. 140:4); while one says: \"If God wills, forgiveness of sins will come to me; and if Christ wills to add me to the number of his flock, it shall be done.\" To him we say: \"Unless you believe with your whole heart, forgiveness will not come to you, nor this grace, that you may become a partaker of the divine flock.\" Likewise, to those persisting in sins, if it be said: \"Do penance (III, 2; IV, 17), for the kingdom of God is at hand\"—when they have said: \"If God deigns to grant pardon for sins, it is in his power\"—to them we say: \"Unless you will to do penance with your whole heart, God's forgiveness will never reach you.\" In these two matters, therefore, we say: the will of man precedes the grace of God. And again we say how the grace of God precedes this same will of man: because he would not have this very willing, unless the Only-Begotten, coming from heaven to us, had opened for all the workshop of his grace. For coming, he suffered for all men. Therefore in this order the grace of God precedes the will of man. Which we say for this reason, that we may shut you out on two counts. For you who say: \"Grace precedes the will,\" sound well, but strike badly.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":122,"ref":"p122","source":"Ideo enim dicitis: Antecedit gratia voluntatem, ut homo nec incipiat velle bonum, sed exspectet ut trahatur, exspectet ut nolens fiat bonus; et cum sit malus, dicat: Deus hoc vult, quia gratia cjus ad me non accedit. Nos in isto loco et vobis et illi qui hoc dicit, occurrimus dicentes: Antecedit voluntas hominis gratiam Dei. Non enim dixit Dominus: Accipietis prius, et sic petite; invenietis prius, et sic quærite; aperietur vobisprius, et sic pulsate; sed dixit: Pelite et dabitur vobis, quærite et invenietis, pulsate et aperietur vobis. Omnis enim qui petit accipit (Matth. vu, 7, 8). Dicendo omnis, generalem causam instituit, et prædestinationis suæ specialitatem exclusit: et dicendo qui petit accipit, priorem voluntatem hominis, quam dooum gratiæ demonstravit. Et tamen fit prior voluntas hominis quam gratia, fit et prior Dei gratia quam voluntas.","english":"For you say: \"Grace precedes the will,\" so that a man does not even begin to will the good, but waits to be drawn, waits to become good against his will; and when he is evil, he says: \"God wills this, because his grace does not come to me.\" We, in this place, confront both you and the one who says this, saying: The will of man precedes the grace of God. For the Lord did not say: \"You will first receive, and then ask; you will first find, and then seek; it will first be opened to you, and then knock\"; but he said: \"Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives.\" By saying \"everyone,\" he established a general cause and excluded the specialness of his predestination; and by saying \"he who asks receives,\" he demonstrated that the will of man is prior to the gift of grace. And yet the will of man becomes prior to grace, and the grace of God also becomes prior to the will.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":123,"ref":"p123","source":"Non enim nos ivimus ad Sanctum peccatores, sed ad peccatores Sanctus advenit; nec nos rogavimus ut veniret, sed non rogatus advenit; et ut ascenderet ad Deum homo, Deus descendit ad hominem; exinanivit se, ut nos repleret; humiliavit se, ut nos exaltaret; pauper factus est, ut nos divites faeret; esuriit panis vivus, ut nos reficeret; sitiit fons perennis, ut nos aridos melliflui ct æterni fontis unda perfunderet: tentus est, ut nos dimitteremur; ligatus est, ut nos salvaremur; venditus est, ut nos re!imeret; spineam corouam accepit in capite, ut spinas et tribulos primæ maledictionis eriperet; exspoliatus est, ut nos vestiret; in cruce suspensus est. ut nos a cruciatibus æternæ mortis auferret. Damnans de ligno crucis lignum concupiscentiæ, pandit immaculatas manus pro manibus incontinenter extensis; pro concupiscentiæ gustu esca fellis accipitur, et mors vitæ pro vita mortis infertur. Nobis enim vicit, non sibi. Semper enim ipse victoriosissimus fuit, est et futurus est. Sed quia nos omnes in Adam perdidimus vitam et paradisum, per Christum et paradisum, et vitam æternam, et adoptionem filiorum Dei, cl regnum consequimur sempiternum. Hoc loco eum qui dicit: Antecedit voluntas hominis gratiam. Dci, exsecramur vehementer.","english":"For we did not go to the Holy One as sinners, but the Holy One came to sinners; nor did we ask him to come, but he came unasked; and so that man might ascend to God, God descended to man; he emptied himself, that he might fill us; he humbled himself, that he might exalt us; he became poor, that he might make us rich; the living bread hungered, that he might refresh us; the everlasting fountain thirsted, that he might bathe us, parched as we were, with the wave of the honey-flowing and eternal fountain; he was held, that we might be released; he was bound, that we might be saved; he was sold, that he might redeem us; he received a crown of thorns on his head, that he might take away the thorns and briars of the first curse; he was stripped, that he might clothe us; he was hung on the cross, that he might carry us away from the torments of eternal death. Condemning from the wood of the cross the wood of concupiscence, he spread out his undefiled hands in place of hands wantonly stretched out; in place of the taste of concupiscence, the food of gall is received, and the death of life is brought in exchange for the life of death. For he conquered for us, not for himself. For he himself was always, is, and will be most victorious. But because we all lost life and paradise in Adam, through Christ we obtain both paradise and eternal life, and adoption as sons of God, and the everlasting kingdom. At this point we vehemently execrate him who says: The will of man precedes the grace of God.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":124,"ref":"p124","source":"Sic tamen exsecramur, ut dicamus jam ex tempore passionis et resurrectionis et in cœlos ascensionis, quo jam gratia in mundo diffusa est, et in gremio Ecclesiæ hæc dona omnia divinæ gratiae collocata; qui non cucurrerit ad ista tanta dona Dei, et ipse, non vadens ad Ecclesiam Dei, exspectet ut ad ipsum veniat Ecclesia Dei, dicimus hunc insanum. In boc loco dicimus his et talibus: Gratia Dei, absque personarum acceptione, in gremio est collocata Ecclesiæ; si quis eam voluerit quærere, invenit; si quis ad eam pulsaverit, aperictur ei; nolentibus autcra, aut tepide volentibus, gratia divina non datur; secundum id quod Philippus apostolus dicit spadoni: Si credis ex toto corde tuo, licet ut baptizeris (Act. VIII, 37). Velle enim nostrum non exclusit gratia, sed incitavit, et dormientem quotidie excitat voluntatem. Jam ergo gratia posita, sicul scriptum est, in medio terne clamat: Venite (Matth. xi, 28), hic sermo Dei anticipat venientem; petite, hic sermo anticipat petiturum; quærite, hic sermo anticipat quæsiturum; pulsate, hic sermo anticipat pulsaturum. Si quæsierit homo et invenerit, gratiæ Dci cst; quia Deus invitavit ut quæreres, Deus fecit ut invenire: si non quæsieris, nec invenies; hoc liberi arbiti ii tui est. Tantam enim habes libcri arbitrii potestatem, ut et vocantem Dominum tuum contemnere prævaleres.","english":"Nevertheless we abominate them in such a way that we say that already from the time of the passion and resurrection and ascension into heaven, from which time grace has now been diffused in the world, all these gifts of divine grace have been placed in the bosom of the Church; and whoever has not run to these so great gifts of God, and does not himself go to the Church of God but expects that the Church of God should come to him, we call this man insane. In this place we say to these men and to such as them: The grace of God, without respect of persons, has been placed in the bosom of the Church; if anyone wishes to seek it, he finds it; if anyone knocks at it, it will be opened to him; but to those unwilling, or lukewarmly willing, divine grace is not given; according to what the apostle Philip says to the eunuch: If you believe with your whole heart, you may be baptized (Acts 8:37). For grace did not exclude our willing, but stirred it up, and daily awakens the sleeping will. Therefore grace, having been placed, as it is written, in the midst of the earth, cries out: Come (Matt. 11:28); this word of God goes before the one who comes; ask, this word goes before the one who is about to ask; seek, this word goes before the one who is about to seek; knock, this word goes before the one who is about to knock. If a man has sought and found, it is of the grace of God; because God invited you to seek, God caused you to find; if you have not sought, you will not find either; this is in your free will. For you have such great power of free will that you were even able to despise your Lord when he called.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":125,"ref":"p125","source":"Quicunque ergo salvatur, gratiæ Dei est, qui ut vel les instituit; qui et per prophetas, et per se, et per apostolos suos quotidie te invitat ut velis; si volueTis et audieris, quae bona sunt terra illius æterna suscipies. Ergo et quod vis Dei est, et quod petis Dei cst, et quod consequeris Dei est, quia in hac parte anticipat gratia voluntatem. Nescircs enim quid velis, nisi te ipse et per se et per suos vocaret, et ut peteres, et qualiter peteres, educeret. Si ita est, quid nunc faciemus de te qui non petis? Deus te noluit, aut tu noluisti Deum? Deus te noluit bonum operari, aut tu noluisti bonum operari? Deus te noluit esse justum, aut tu noluisti esse justus? Ideo te interrogo, o sanctissime prædestinator, ut unum a duobus. facias. Aut enim fateberis te vinci, aut Deum blasphemare convinceris. Si enim permittis tc vinci, dic nobiscum: Homo noluit bonum, et ideo malus est; quia si voluerit peterc dabitur ei gratia Dei. Cum hoc dixeris, das manus fraternitati, et per revcrenliatn tc Deitati concilias. Si autem dixeris: Ideo malus est, quia Deus hoc voluit, non quia homo noluit, probaris blasphemasse Deum, quem malum velle confirmas, et necesse erit ut blasphemantem Deum anathematizet Ecclesia.","english":"Whoever therefore is saved, it is by the grace of God, who established even the law; who both through the prophets and through himself and through his apostles daily invites you to will; if you are willing and hear, you will receive the good things of that eternal land. Therefore both what you will is of God, and what you ask is of God, and what you obtain is of God, because in this part grace anticipates the will. For you would not know what to will, unless he himself both through himself and through his own called you, and led you to ask, and how to ask. If this is so, what shall we now do about you who do not ask? Did God not will you, or did you not will God? Did God not will you to do good, or did you not will to do good? Did God not will you to be just, or did you not will to be just? Therefore I ask you, O most holy predestinator, that you make one of two. For either you will confess that you are conquered, or you will be convicted of blaspheming God. For if you allow yourself to be conquered, say with us: Man did not will good, and therefore he is evil; because if he had willed to ask, the grace of God would be given to him. When you have said this, you give your hands to the brotherhood, and through reverence you reconcile yourself to the Godhead. But if you say: Therefore he is evil, because God willed this, not because man did not will it, you are proved to have blasphemed God, whom you affirm to will evil, and it will be necessary that the Church anathematize the one blaspheming God.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":126,"ref":"p126","source":"IX. Dicamus nunc quæ sequuntur libri vestri falsa commenta. a Errat qui se putat volendo bonum pervenire ad Christum, cum ipse Christus dicat; Nemo venit ad me, nisi quem Pater attraxerit (Joan. V!, 44). Qui metius a Christo sapitis, dicile si mentitus est Christus, et ita demum asserite nos contra Christi regulam istam fixisse sententiam. Si enim verum dixit Christus, non mentimur quod dicimus prædestinatos trahi ad vitam, quia vita ipse eat. Non est novum vocis sono decipi posse stultos. Sic vanus Arius, secutus vocis sonum, dicit Filio Patrem ejus esse majorem. Et hoc dicit nobis, quod dicitis vos: Si ipsi Filio creditis, ipsum audite. Dicit enim quia Pater major me est (Joan. xiv, 28). Vocis sonum qui attendit, sicut Arianorum hæresi, sic Praedestinatorum vanitati conjungitur. Quis enim nesciat non posse venire ad Filium, nisi quem Pater attraxerit? Tamen ante quam loci istius occultum mysterium per nos Dominus manifestet, sensum vestrum detegimus. Ideo enim dicitis hoc testimonium, ut nullus monita sacerdotum studiosa aure suscipiat, nullus festinet ad matris -Ecclesiæ gremium, et duorum testamentorum u beribus coalescat; omnes fugiant domum Dei, et quis ad quod volucrit vitium occupetur, exspectans quando mittat manum Pater de coelis, ut eum trahat invitum et nolentem atque contradicentem, et non consentientem faciat electum et sanctum.","english":"IX. Let us now speak of the false fabrications of your book that follow. He errs who thinks that by willing the good he comes to Christ, since Christ himself says: No one comes to me unless the Father who sent me draws him (John 6:44). You who savor Christ more rightly, tell us whether Christ lied, and only then assert that we have fixed this sentence against the rule of Christ. For if Christ spoke the truth, we do not lie when we say that the predestined are drawn to life, because he himself is the life. It is nothing new that fools can be deceived by the sound of a word. Thus the vain Arius, following the sound of the word, says that the Father is greater than his Son. And he says to us what you say: If you believe the Son himself, listen to him. For he says: The Father is greater than I (John 14:28). Whoever attends to the sound of the word is joined, as to the heresy of the Arians, so to the vanity of the Predestinarians. For who does not know that no one can come to the Son unless the Father has drawn him? Nevertheless, before the Lord reveals through us the hidden mystery of this passage, we expose your meaning. For you cite this testimony so that no one may receive the warnings of priests with an attentive ear, no one may hasten to the bosom of Mother Church and grow strong on the breasts of the two Testaments; so that all may flee the house of God, and each may be occupied with whatever vice he wishes, waiting for the Father to stretch forth his hand from heaven, to draw him unwilling, reluctant, and resisting, and to make him, without his consent, elect and holy.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":127,"ref":"p127","source":"Hæc vestra assertio, vestrumque deprehenditur dogma. Nos autem dicimus quod quamvis quicunque sanctus sit, ille sit apostolus, ille sit martyr, ille propheta sit, ille sit justus, vires non habet proprias ut ad Christum ascendat. Solus enim Dominus sua virtute pro sua Deitate ascendit in coelos, et sedet ad dexteram Patris. Quamvis ergo quisque sit sanctus, quamvis amicus Dei sit, non habet vires ascendendi in coelos. Et quia Filius dicit Patri: Pater, volo ut ubi sum, et isti sint mecum (Joan. XVII, 14), explanans concordiam Deitatis ait: Nemo venit ad me, id est virtute sua nemo potest venire ad me. Non est enim sanctitati hominis possibile ascedendi ad me, ubi sedeo ad dexteram Patris, nisi quem Pater attraxerit. Unde in unius persona omnis coelus sanctorum dicit Deo: Tenuisti manum dexteram meam, in voluntate tua deduxisti me, et cum gloria assumpsisti me (Ps. LXXII, 24). Unde cL adjecit: Quoniam qui se longe faciunt a te, peribunt (Ibid., 27). Non dixit, quos. tu longe facis a te; sed qui se longe faciunt a lc, peribunt, ostendens non de Dei exsecratione, sed de clongatione hominis, homini interitum evenire. Quid autem nunc dicat liber Prædestinatus audite.","english":"This is your assertion, and this is the dogma of yours that is caught out. But we say that however holy someone may be—whether he be an apostle, a martyr, a prophet, or a righteous man—he does not have powers of his own to ascend to Christ. For the Lord alone, by his own power, by virtue of his Godhead, ascended into the heavens and sits at the right hand of the Father. Therefore, however holy anyone may be, however much a friend of God, he does not have the powers to ascend into the heavens. And because the Son says to the Father: Father, I will that where I am, these also may be with me (John 17:24), explaining the concord of the Godhead, he says: No one comes to me—that is, by his own power no one can come to me. For it is not possible for the holiness of man to ascend to me, where I sit at the right hand of the Father, except the one whom the Father has drawn. Hence, in the person of one man, all the heaven of the saints says to God: You have held my right hand; in your will you have led me, and with glory you have taken me up (Psalm 72:24). Hence he added: For behold, those who make themselves far from you shall perish (ibid., 27). He did not say, \"whom you make far from you,\" but \"those who make themselves far from you shall perish,\" showing that destruction comes to man not from God's cursing but from man's own estrangement. But hear now what the book Praedestinatus says.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":128,"ref":"p128","source":"X. Quod si aggravat vos vis testimonii evangelici, et non potestis aggravati pondere sententiæ nobis dure responsum, saltem Apostoli nobis explanate sententiam, qui dicit: Non est volentis neque currentis, sed miserentis est Dei (Rom. ix, 16). e Nos et cvangelicum testimonium veris assertionibus declaravimus, et istam beati Pauli sententiam evideuti manifestamus instinctu. Prius tamen vestrum sensum detegimus, ut. cur a vobis usurpentur sancta testimonia detestentur. Vultis enim ut nemo velit bonum, nemo currat ad bonum, sed dicat in corde suo: Qua ntumcunque velim, quantumcunque curram, nihil poterit prodesse volenti, nihil poterit prodesse currenti. Non est enim volentis neque currentis, sed miserenlis est Dei. Nos autem asserimus neminem gratiam Dei consequi, nisi qui ex fide cucurrerit: quam dum fuerit consecutus, Apostoli monitis prohibetur extolli. Non enim secundum cursum et secundum voluntatem suam, accepit gratiam Der. Cursus enim et voluntas ejus, quamvis in magno sint, quamvis in amplo sint, tamen mensuram habent, Dei autem gratia mensuram non habet. Et ideo, dum etiam ad coronam pervenerit justus, non permittitur in sua corona extolli. Dicit enim Spiritus sanctus: Qui coronat te, non in merito tuo, sed in misericordia sua et miseratione sua (Ps. CII, 4). Unde et Apostolus: Quid habes, inquit, quod non accepisti?","english":"X. But if the force of the gospel testimony weighs on you, and you cannot, weighed down by the burden of the sentence, give us a harsh answer, at least explain to us the sentence of the Apostle, who says: \"It is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy\" (Rom. 9:16). We have both declared the gospel testimony with true assertions, and we manifest this sentence of blessed Paul with evident impulse. First, however, we uncover your meaning, so that they may detest why the holy testimonies are usurped by you. For you wish that no one will the good, no one run to the good, but that he say in his heart: However much I will, however much I run, nothing will be able to profit him who wills, nothing will be able to profit him who runs. For \"it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.\" But we assert that no one obtains the grace of God unless he has run by faith; and when he has obtained it, he is forbidden by the Apostle's warnings to be puffed up. For he did not receive the grace of God according to his own running and according to his own will. For his running and his will, although they are great, although they are ample, still have a measure; but the grace of God has no measure. And therefore, even when the righteous man has reached the crown, he is not permitted to be puffed up in his crown. For the Holy Spirit says: \"He who crowns you, not in your merit, but in his mercy and his compassion\" (Ps. 103:4). Hence also the Apostle says: \"What do you have that you did not receive?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":129,"ref":"p129","source":"Quod si accepisti, quid gloriaris quasi non acceperis (I Cor. IV, 7)? Ergo cursum suum et voluntatem suam ad hoc extendit, ut acciperet a donante; donum autem pro gratia donantis supergreditur meritum laborantis. Sic est enim velle nostrum inter nos et Deum, sicut est inter mendicantem atque donantem. Ille itaque qui donat eledmosynam, vult omnibus dare, si quidem hic noster largitor gratiae clamat quotidie: Venite ad me, omnes. Et iterum: Petite et accipietis. Verbi gratia, cucurrit quispiam egenus, et a donante accepit, acceptisqne divitiis coepit esse locuples qui fuerat egenus et pauper: quid nunc dicturus est? Ego de labore meo die ves sum, quia volui, quia cucurri? Non hoc dicit; sed dicit: Ego nihil pro merito voluntatis meae aut cursus mei, aliquid habere me certus sum; sed ejus est totum gratiæ qui donavit. Et hoc dicto potest die cere cum Aposlolo vere, quia non est volentis, neque currentis, sed miserentis est Dei (Rom. ix, 16). Ecce diximus de isto qui voluit et cucurrit, quia tanta sunt dona Dei, ut et cursum hominis et voluntatem superent. Cursus enim et sludium hominis, nisi invisibilius Dei adminiculis juvati fuerint, evanescunt. Nam et Apostolus certamen bonum certans, et cur sum consummans, et fidem servans, et jam tantummodo coronam exspectans (11 Tim. IV, 7), dicit: Gratia Dei sum id quod sum (I Cor. xv, 10).","english":"But if you have received it, why do you boast as though you had not received it? Therefore he extended his course and his will to this end, that he might receive from the giver; but the gift, by the grace of the giver, surpasses the merit of the one who labors. For our willing stands between us and God just as it stands between a beggar and a giver. And so he who gives alms wishes to give to all, since this bountiful giver of grace of ours cries out daily: Come to me, all. And again: Ask and you shall receive. For example, some needy man has run and received from the giver, and having received riches he began to be wealthy who had been needy and poor: what is he now going to say? \"I have these things from my own labor, because I willed it, because I ran\"? He does not say this; but he says: \"I am certain that I have nothing by the merit of my will or of my running; but the whole belongs to the grace of him who gave.\" And having said this, he can truly say with the Apostle: it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. Behold, we have spoken of this man who willed and ran, because the gifts of God are so great that they surpass both the course and the will of man. For the course and zeal of man, unless they are aided by the invisible supports of God, vanish away. For even the Apostle, fighting the good fight, and finishing his course, and keeping the faith, and now awaiting only the crown, says: By the grace of God I am what I am.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":130,"ref":"p130","source":"Et iterum nobis dicit: Gratia salvi facti estis (Ephes. II, 5, 8). Magnus infelix est qui putat donum Dei se merito suae consequi voluntatis. Omne donum optimum desursum est a Patre gloriæ (lac. I, 17): nihil vindicamus humanae potentiæ; totum quidquid bonum est, Dei misericordiæ applicamus. Sic tamen omnia bona dicimus Dei esse dona, ut omnia mala quae agimus nostræ negligentiæ imputemus. Aliter enim veniam non meremur, nisi nos vere ostendamus nostra culpa peccasse, non præjudicio Creatoris. Et sicut diximus de bono, quia totum bonum quod fecerit, Dei est gratiæ; ita quidquid malum fecerit suæ æstimet negligentiæ. Unde clamat Spiritus sanctus: Si volueritis et audieritis me, bona terræ edetis; si auteM nolueritis, gladius vos comedet. Os enim Domini locutum est hæc (Isa. i, 19). Per occasionem itaque boni testimonii, sed mali interpretis, vos dicitis: Nolite velle, quia non est volentis; sanctus Spiritus dicit: Si volueritis. Vos dicitis: Nolite currere, quia non est currentis; sanctus Spiritus A dicit: Currite ut omnes comprehendatis (I Cor. IX, 24). Dominus Jesus Christus clamat: Currite cum lucem habetis, ne vos tenebræ comprehendant (Joan. XII, 35). Dantes ergo vobis repudium, sancto Spiritui adhæremus. Melius est enim, ut dicit apostolus Petrus, obaudire magis Deo quam hominibus (Act. v, 29). Verum quid agimus?","english":"And again he says to us: By grace you have been saved. Great is the wretchedness of the one who thinks he obtains the gift of God by the merit of his own will. Every good gift is from above, from the Father of glory: we claim nothing for human power; whatever is good, we attribute wholly to the mercy of God. Yet we say that all good things are God's gifts in such a way that we impute all the evil things we do to our own negligence. For otherwise we do not deserve pardon, unless we truly show that we have sinned by our own fault, not by any prejudice of the Creator. And just as we have said of the good, that all the good a man has done is of God's grace, so whatever evil he has done let him reckon to his own negligence. Whence the Holy Spirit cries out: If you are willing and hear me, you shall eat the good things of the land; but if you are unwilling, the sword shall devour you. For the mouth of the Lord has spoken these things. Therefore, by the occasion of a good testimony but a bad interpreter, you say: Do not will, because it is not of him who wills; the Holy Spirit says: If you are willing. You say: Do not run, because it is not of him who runs; the Holy Spirit says: Run, that you may all obtain. The Lord Jesus Christ cries out: Run while you have the light, lest the darkness overtake you. Therefore, giving you a dismissal, we cling to the Holy Spirit. For it is better, as the apostle Peter says, to obey God rather than men. But what are we doing?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":131,"ref":"p131","source":"rursus ad pejora vestrorum crescit dogma Iibrorum, in quibus legitur:\n\n11.f Quantumcunque studii sui vires ad ædificandum moveat humana voluntas, ea'ID certamine nititur; aut quid vigilantiam suam putat hominis fragilitas æternis desideriis profuturam, cum propheta evidentibus exclamet documentis, dicens: Nisi Dominus ædificaverit domum, in vanum laboraverunt qui ædificant cam. Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem, in vanum vigilaverunt qui custodiunt eam ( Ps. CXXVI, 1)? Quid est quod contra divinos apices, et contra conscientiam suam sperat se quispiam aedificationi studere, cum his sacris vocibus doceatur ædificatio hominis non esse certa, sed vana? Primo omnium quaero, quam aedificationem dicatis. Si de caementis et luto agitis, cum.Egyptiis isla tractate. Nos autem hoc loco ædificationem verbi Dei intelligimus. Verbum autem Dei in toto orbe terrarum a Dei sacerdotibus ad aedificationem Dei Ecclesiis exhibetur. Vanus est ergo sermo pontificis? inanis doctrina? inane studium? Et si vana est ædificatio hujus operis, ut quid ab Apostolo imperatur? Dicit enim Paulus apostolus: AEdificate alterutrum: omnia vestra ad aedificationem fiant (I Thes, v, 11). Et iterum: Ut sapiens architectus fundamentum posui (I Cor. III, 10). Si quis superædificat supra fundamentum noc, aurum, argentum, lapides pretiosos, ligna, fenum, stipulam, uniuscujusque opus quale sit, ignis probabit (I Cor.","english":"Again the dogma of your books grows toward worse things, in which it is read:\n\n11. However much the strength of her zeal human will may stir up for building, it strives in that contest; or what does man's frailty think its vigilance will profit eternal desires, when the prophet cries out with evident proofs, saying: Unless the Lord has built the house, they have labored in vain who build it. Unless the Lord has kept the city, they have watched in vain who keep it (Ps. 126:1)? What is it that against the divine peaks and against his own conscience anyone hopes that he studies for building, when by these sacred utterances he is taught that the building of man is not certain but vain? First of all I ask, what building do you mean? If you are dealing with stones and mud, treat of these things with the Egyptians. But we in this place understand building as the word of God. But the word of God throughout the whole world is set forth by God's priests for the building up of God's churches. Is the speech of the pontiff therefore vain? Is the doctrine empty? Is the zeal empty? And if the building of this work is vain, why is it commanded by the Apostle? For the Apostle Paul says: Build one another up: let all things of yours be done for building up (1 Thess. 5:11). And again: As a wise architect I have laid the foundation (1 Cor. 3:10). If anyone builds upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, the fire will prove what each one's work is like (1 Cor.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":132,"ref":"p132","source":"III, 12, 13). Et Dominus in Evangelio laudat virum sapientem, quia ædificat domum suam super petram, quæ nec ventorum, nec fluminum dejiciatur impulsu (Matth. vu, 24). Ergone in vanum ædificant sacerdotes Ecelesiam; in vanum vigilant, ut ovium simplicitatem luporum morsibustollant?Et quomodo omnes hæreticos aeterno anathemate ferientes gregem Christi custodiunt? Ubique catholicorum pascuntur oves, et vernantibus purae fidei pascuis, montes exsultant ut arietes et colles velut agni ovium (Ps. CXIII, 4). Ubique a solis ortu usque ad occasum, unus grex et unus est pastor, a quo lupi interficiuntur, ne noceant gregi Dei; et adhuc non videtis xdificationem bona voluntatis vanam non esse, sed certam? Quotidie ædiBeatur domus Dei per verbum bonum, per exemplum sanctum, per studium optimum. Quotidie clamat per prophetam Dominus: Ædificate vobis domos (Jerem. XXIX, 5), non luteas quae a vento moveantur, sed quae maneant in soliditatem petrae. Sed vobis ista omnia que diximus, inania videntur et vana. Dicunt enim libri vestri: Ædificatio hominis non est certa, sed vana. Ab initio omnes sancti ædificationem mentibus contulerunt. Verbi causa, primus Abel aedifica. vit justitiam, Noe innocentiam, Abrabam fidem, Isaac sacrificium, Jaccb ambitionem rerum saocta.","english":"And the Lord in the Gospel praises the wise man, because he builds his house upon rock, which is cast down by neither the force of winds nor of floods (Matt. 7:24). Do priests, then, build the Church in vain; do they watch in vain, to take away the simplicity of the sheep from the bites of wolves? And how do all who strike heretics with eternal anathema guard the flock of Christ? Everywhere the sheep of catholics are fed, and on the verdant pastures of pure faith, the mountains exult like rams and the hills like the lambs of sheep (Ps. 113:4). Everywhere from the rising of the sun to its setting, there is one flock and one shepherd, by whom the wolves are killed, lest they harm the flock of God; and do you still not see that the building of good will is not vain, but certain? Daily the house of God is built through the good word, through the holy example, through the best zeal. Daily the Lord cries out through the prophet: Build yourselves houses (Jer. 29:5), not houses of mud that are moved by the wind, but those that remain in the solidity of rock. But to you all these things we have said seem empty and vain. For your books say: The building of man is not certain, but vain. From the beginning all the saints brought building to their minds. For example, first Abel built justice, Noah innocence, Abraham faith, Isaac sacrifice, Jacob the pursuit of sacred things.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":133,"ref":"p133","source":"rum, Joseph castimoniam, Moyses sacerdotium, Jesus filius Nave constantiam animi, David defensionein populi Dei, Salomon sapientiam, Joannes pœnitentiam. Hos carptim de multis memoravimus, ut per hos caeteros quos siluimus, ad memoriam suam te. vocans, lector inquirat utrumnam homines fuerint, Si homines fuerunt, quomodo dicunt libri eorum I Ædificatio hominis oon est certa, sed vana? Unda agimus nunc conclusionibus catholicis dictum hæreticorum. Aut non fuerunt homines, quia manet ædificatio eorum; aut illi homines fuerunt, et istorum assertio evanuit.\n\nXII. e Sed si contra nos venitis, inquiunt, non contra nos venitis, sed contra eum qui dixit: Nisi Dominus ædificaverit domum, in vanum laboraverunt qui ædificant eam. Et: Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem, in vanum laboraverunt qui cu.,'odiunt eam (Ps. CXXVI, 1). Ergo nesciit quia non erat utile populo Dei qui hæc fecit scribi, et ad po. steros usque ad finem sæculi dirigi? Vos itaquequi ista reprehenditis, auferte hæc de libro Psalmorum, quia legentes et psallentes hos versiculos, ut dicitis, ædificari non possunt. Nos dictum prophetæ laudamus, probamus, confitemur, confirmamus et psallimus, atque hoc ordine secundum regulam catholicam explanamus. Ab initio, ut diximus, a sancto Abole justo usque ad Zachariam et Joannem, omnes aedificaverunt domum, non caementis, ut diximus, sed sanctis exemplis.","english":"of these, Joseph’s chastity, Moses’ priesthood, Joshua son of Nun’s constancy of mind, David’s defense of the people of God, Solomon’s wisdom, John’s penitence. These we have recalled selectively from many, so that through them you, reader, being called to remember them, may inquire concerning the rest whom we have passed over in silence, whether they were men. If they were men, how do their books say, “The building of man is not sure, but vain”? Hence we now press the heretics’ statement with catholic conclusions. Either they were not men, because their building remains; or they were men, and the assertion of these men has vanished.\n\nXII. But if you come against us, they say, you do not come against us, but against him who said: Unless the Lord builds the house, they have labored in vain who build it. And: Unless the Lord guards the city, they have labored in vain who guard it (Ps. 126:1). Therefore did he not know that it was not useful for the people of God, who caused these things to be written and directed to posterity even to the end of the world? You therefore who censure these things, take them away from the book of Psalms, because those who read and sing these verses, as you say, cannot be built up. We praise, approve, confess, confirm, and sing the prophet’s statement, and we explain it in this order according to the catholic rule. From the beginning, as we said, from the holy Abel the just even to Zechariah and John, all built the house, not with stones, as we said, but with holy examples.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":134,"ref":"p134","source":"Verumtamen nisi Dominus Jesus Christus venisset, et ipse ædificasset domum hanc in qu i illi laboraverunt, in vanum laboraverant qui ædificaverant eam. Nam et vigilanter institerunt gregi: sed nisi Dominus Jesus Christus suam custodiam exhibuisset, in vanum laboraverunt custodientes eum. Unde etiam sequitur: In vanum est vobis ante lucem surgere (Ps. CXXVI, 2). Lux enim Christus esse et a prophetis, et ab evangelistis, et ab apostolis declaratur. Prophetæ ergo omnes ante lucem surrexerunt, id est ante nativitatem Christi. His in vanum fuit ante lucem surgere; non enim potuerunt noctem patientibus veritatem ostendere. Sed venit lux, et manifestavit occulta tenebrarum: et tunc demum laus coepit esse unicuique a Deo. Nisi ergo ipse venisset et ædificasset domum, in vanum laboraverant ædificantes eam. Nunc ergo quia venit et aedificavit domum, jam non in vanum laborant qui aedificant eam. Et quia venit ut custodiat civitatcm, jam non in vanum vigilant qui custodiunt eam. Et quia lux venit, et lucet in tenebris, jam non in vanum ante lucem surgimus. Et quia panis lætitiæ de cælo descendit, jam non manducamus panem doloris. Hinc enim sequitur in psalmo versiculus. Vos, inquit, a in vanum ante lucem surgitis, qui manducatis panem doloris.","english":"Yet unless the Lord Jesus Christ had come and himself built this house, those who labored on it would have labored in vain; those who built it would have labored in vain. For they also stood watch over the flock diligently, but unless the Lord Jesus Christ had kept his own watch, those who kept watch over it would have labored in vain. Hence it also follows: It is vain for you to rise before the light (Ps. 126:2). For Christ is declared to be the light both by the prophets and by the evangelists and by the apostles. All the prophets, then, rose before the light, that is, before the birth of Christ. For them it was in vain to rise before the light, for they could not show the truth to those enduring the night. But the light came and made manifest the hidden things of darkness, and then at last praise began to be for each one from God. Unless, therefore, he himself had come and built the house, those building it would have labored in vain. Now, then, because he has come and has built the house, those who build it no longer labor in vain. And because he has come to guard the city, those who guard it no longer keep watch in vain. And because the light has come and shines in the darkness, we no longer rise before the light in vain. And because the bread of gladness has descended from heaven, we no longer eat the bread of sorrow. Hence there follows in the psalm the little verse: You, it says, rise before the light in vain, who eat the bread of sorrow.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":135,"ref":"p135","source":"Nos autem qui non manducamus panem doloris, sed panem salutis, ædificemus domum nostram super petram, et vigilemus exspectantes Dominum, quia nescimus diem neque horam (Matth. xxv, 13). Beatus -ille servus, quem dum venerit Dominus (Luc. XII, 37), invenerit vigilantem. Si videtur, accedamus ad reliqua.\n\nXIII. Sed quid putant isti se voluntate sua ad fructum ædificationis attingere, cum nec ipse vas electionis suam asserat se voluntatem implere potuisse? Dicit enim de se ipso Apostolus: Non quod volo bonum hoc ago, sed quod nolo malum illud facio (Rom. vu, 19). Si trgo Apostolus quod vult bonum implere non prævalet, quomodo isti dicunt per voluntatem suam ad fructum se posse gratiæ pervenire? Nunquam festinat ad veniam, qui longum vult esse quod peccat. Da veniam, magister gentium, quaesumus, ne nos participes injuriarum tuarum esse permittas. Videamus ergo quid Volebat Apostolus et facere hon valebat, et quid est quod cogebatur facere quod nolebat. Volebat verum loqui, mentiri autem penitus non volebat; ergo mentiebatur. Volebat pudicitiam, impudicitiam perhorrebat; ergo polluebatur. Volebat contemptum mundi, exsecrabatur omnem gloriam sæculi; ergo cenodoxus, id est inanis gloriae cupidus existebat. Postremo volebat omne bonum, omne autem quod est malum omnimodis exhorrebat; nihil erigo bonum quod volebat Apostolus operabatur, sed omne quod est nequissimum perpetrabat.","english":"But we who do not eat the bread of sorrow, but the bread of salvation, let us build our house upon the rock, and let us watch awaiting the Lord, because we do not know the day nor the hour (Matt. 25:13). Blessed is that servant whom, when the Lord comes (Luke 12:37), he finds watching. If it seems good, let us proceed to the remaining matters.\n\nXIII. But why do these men think that by their own will they attain to the fruit of edification, when not even the vessel of election himself asserts that he was able to fulfill his own will? For the Apostle says of himself: For not the good that I will, that I do; but the evil that I do not will, that I do (Rom. 7:19). If therefore the Apostle cannot prevail to fulfill the good that he wills, how do these men say that by their own will they can attain to the fruit of grace? He never hastens to pardon who wishes the time of his sinning to be long. Grant pardon, teacher of the Gentiles, we beseech you, and do not permit us to be partakers of the injuries done to you. Let us see, then, what the Apostle willed and was not able to do, and what it was that he was compelled to do though he did not will it. He willed to speak the truth, but to lie he utterly did not will; therefore he lied. He willed chastity, he abhorred impurity; therefore he was defiled. He willed contempt of the world, he execrated all the glory of the age; therefore he existed as one vainglorious, that is, desirous of empty glory. Finally, he willed every good, but everything that is evil he utterly abhorred; therefore the Apostle worked nothing good that he willed, but perpetrated everything that is most wicked.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":136,"ref":"p136","source":"Dicitis enim: Dicit de se ipso Apostolus: Non quod volo bonum hoc ago, sed malum quod nolo illud facio (Ibid.). Videtisne, obsecro, in qua blaspbemiorum fovea cacus sensus vester vos præcipites dederit? Apostolum criminibus oocupatum fuisse vultis ostendere, ut nemo se peccatorem esse suspiret, nemo imi cordis gemitum pro suis sceleribus reddat, nec studeat quispiam flentibus lavare oculis quod concupiscentibus inquinavit, cum audiat illum vas electionis, illum magistrum omnium Ecclesiarum, non bonum quod voluissc se memorat, sed malum quod noluisse se asserit perpetrasse. Aperuistis portas, non justitiæ, sed iniquitatis omoibus hominibus, et ex verbis Apostoli contra Apostolum bella sumpsistis, volentes esse magistri, cum nunquam fuisse vos discipulos ostendatis, et sonum litteræ attendentes ipsi vobis subito coepistis esse doctores. Quid nunc facimus, qui vestras blasphemias non duramus? Si tacuerimus, vos videmini recte dixisse, nec solum dixisse, sed etiam scripsisse. Loquimur, juvante Domino, fugientes gloriam hominum, nescios docentes, sLudiosos instruentes, scientcs lætificantes, vos detegentes. Scriptura libri vestri est, quæ, quod pejus est, vobis morientibus illa non moritur, et ad evertendos incautos tanquam cancer serpit. Videamus quid sequatur liber a vestra vanitate conscriptus. e Apostoli verba sunt, nostrum nihil adjungimus.","english":"For you say: The Apostle says of himself: For the good that I would, I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do (Ibid.). Do you see, I beseech you, into what pit of blasphemies the blind understanding of your mind has cast you headlong? You wish to show that the Apostle was occupied with crimes, so that no one may sigh that he is a sinner, no one may give forth a groan from the depths of his heart for his own wicked deeds, nor may anyone strive to wash away with weeping eyes what he defiled with his desires, when he hears that that vessel of election, that teacher of all the Churches, recalls that he did not do the good he wished, but asserts that he perpetrated the evil he did not wish. You have opened the gates, not of righteousness, but of iniquity to all men, and from the words of the Apostle you have taken up wars against the Apostle, wishing to be masters, while you show that you were never disciples, and attending to the sound of the letter, you yourselves suddenly began to be teachers. What now do we do, who cannot endure your blasphemies? If we keep silent, you seem to have spoken rightly, and not only to have spoken, but also to have written. We speak, with the Lord's help, fleeing the glory of men, teaching the ignorant, instructing the zealous, gladdening the knowledgeable, exposing you. The writing of your book is that which, what is worse, does not die with you when you die, and creeps like a cancer to overthrow the unwary. Let us see what follows in the book written by your vanity. The words are the Apostle's; we add nothing of our own.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":137,"ref":"p137","source":"Ipse de se dicit: Non quod volo bonum hoc ago, sed quod nolo malum illud facio (Ibid). Arius in tertio libro suo epigramma hujusmodi posuit, dicens:\n\nXIV. Nos verba Filii Dei accepimus, et vera credimus, vera etiam confitemur. Ipse dicit: Pater major me est, et: Ego et Pater unum sumus, quia ego in Patre, et Pater in me. Noluit legere; jungere enim potuit duo ista, id est, Pater major me est, et Ego et Pater unum sumus; et dum ista duo junxisset, invenerat Filium hominis et Filium Dei. Umnia enim passibilitatis genera, a Deitate sublata, soli Filio ho. minis poterant convenire. Deus enim nec minor, «« major est, sed hoc est quod est idem semper, carens incremento, carens detrimento. Nunquam augmentando proficit, nunquam deficit minuendo; sed ante omnia idem qui post omnia, et in omnibus praeteritis, præsentibus et futuris immutabilis perseverat. Hæc quasi in alio opere dicta sint. Memoravimus enim anathemabilem Arium in tertii libri sui capite hoc dixisse, ordine quo Prædestinati dixerunt: Apostoli verba sunt, nostrum nihil addidimus; ipse dicit de se: Non quod volo bonum hoc ago, sed quod odi malum hoc facio (Ibid.). Vestram nunc interrogamus prudentiam; Apostolum legimus dixisse: Viro autem, jam non ego, vivit vero in me Christus; quod autem nunc in carne vivo, in fide viro Dei (Gal. II,. Quid nunc dicitis? Carnalis erat vir iste, an spiritalis?","english":"He says of himself: For the good that I would, I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do (Ibid.). Arius in his third book set down an epigram of this kind, saying:\n\nXIV. We have received the words of the Son of God, and we believe them to be true, and we also confess them to be true. He himself says: The Father is greater than I, and: I and the Father are one, because I am in the Father, and the Father in me. He was unwilling to read; for he could have joined these two things together, that is, The Father is greater than I, and I and the Father are one; and if he had joined these two together, he would have found the Son of man and the Son of God. For all the kinds of passibility, removed from the Godhead, could belong to the Son of man alone. For God is neither less nor greater, but is that which he is, the same always, lacking increase, lacking diminution. He never advances by increasing, never fails by diminishing; but the same before all things who is after all things, and in all things past, present, and future he perseveres immutable. Let these things be as said in another work. For we have mentioned that the anathematized Arius said this in the chapter of his third book, in the order in which the Predestinarians spoke: They are the words of the Apostle, we have added nothing of our own; he himself says of himself: For the good that I would, I do not: but the evil which I hate, that I do (Ibid.). We now ask your prudence; we have read that the Apostle said: Now it is no longer I that live, but Christ lives in me; and that which I now live in the flesh, I live in the faith of the Son of God (Gal. II). What do you now say? Was this man carnal, or spiritual?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":138,"ref":"p138","source":"Si dixeritis camalis, convincemini; clamat enim: 'Vivo jam non ego, vivit vero in me Christus. Si consenseritis quod spiritalis fuerit, nobiscum istum locum explanabitis. Caput enim loci hujus in hoc sermone reperies quod infit: Scimus quod lex spiritalis est, ego autem carnalis sum (Rom. VII, 14). Si carnalis cs, beate Apostole, quomodo arguis carnales, dicens: Et ego, fratres, non potui vobis loqui quasi spiritalibus, sed quasi carnalibus (I Cor. III, 1)? Et iterum: Cum dicatur, inquit, in vobis zelus et contentio, nonne carnales estis (Ibid., 3)? Et iterum: Quotquot, inquit, spiritales sumus, hæc sapimus. Docemur autem scriptis tuis, vir Dei, quod non solum ipse spiritalis fueris, et in terra positus jure diceres conversationem tuam esse in cœlis; verum etiam hoc docemur, quod et discipuli tui spiritales fuerint. Ais enim ad eos: Si præventus quis fuerit in aliquo delicto, vos, qui spiritales estis, corripite hujusmodi in spiritu mansuetudinis (Gal. VI, 1). Quid ergo nunc nobis dicis: Scimus quia lex spiritalis est, ego autem curnalit sum (Rom. VII, 14)? Ad haec ipse nobis dignabitur dare responsum: Factus sum carnalibus quasi carnalis, ut eos qui a carnales erant lucrifacerem. Aperuit se nobis veritas, et fallacia est a veritate exclusa. Personam itaque carnalis botninis in se magister spiritalis excepit.","english":"If you say he was carnal, you are refuted; for he cries out: \"It is no longer I that live, but Christ lives in me.\" If you agree that he was spiritual, you will explain this passage along with us. For you will find the key to this passage in the statement that follows: \"We know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal\" (Rom. 7:14). If you are carnal, blessed Apostle, how do you rebuke the carnal, saying: \"And I, brothers, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to carnal men\" (1 Cor. 3:1)? And again: \"When,\" he says, \"there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not carnal?\" (Ibid., 3). And again: \"As many of us,\" he says, \"as are spiritual, think this way.\" But we are taught by your writings, man of God, that not only were you yourself spiritual, and rightly, while placed on earth, said that your conversation is in heaven, but we are also taught this: that your disciples too were spiritual. For you say to them: \"If anyone is overtaken in some fault, you who are spiritual, correct such a one in the spirit of gentleness\" (Gal. 6:1). What then do you now say to us: \"We know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal\" (Rom. 7:14)? To this he himself will deign to give us an answer: I became as carnal to the carnal, that I might gain those who were carnal. The truth has opened itself to us, and falsehood has been shut out from the truth. And so the spiritual teacher took upon himself the person of a carnal man.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":139,"ref":"p139","source":"Et ne quasi injuriosus doctor a se repelleret auditorem, se increpat ut alium corrigat. Unde hoc ipsum alibi commemorat, dicens: Aut nunquid peccatum feci me humilians, ut vos exaltemini (II Cor. xi, 7)? Quid ergo? Ego, inquit, carnalis sum: qui tu? Ego, inquit, qui venundatus sum sub peccato (Rom. vii, 14). Nunquid tu, Apostole, venundatus es sub peccato, qui olim, Christi sanguine redemptus, innumerabilem per Cbristum Deo populum redemisti? Constat ergo quod non suam Apostolus, sed alterius, id est carnalis viri, voluit hoc loco declarare personam. Ille est venundatus sub peccato, qui adhuc Christi sanguine redemptus non est, qui adhuc carnalis; et ideo dicitur: Quod operor non intelligo (Rom. VII, 15). Non enim intelligit operationem suam gentilis contra salutem suam esse; qui licet sit gentilis, bonum sibi vult provenire, bonum adipisci, bonum possidere, bonum acquirere, bonum salutis suæ, bonum vitae suæ: sed non quod vult bonum hoc exercet, sed quod odit malum hoc facit. Odit mortem, sed opera mortis exercet; odit periculum sed operatio ejus plena est periculo; odit omnia mala, sed quæ odit hæc operatur. Quare? quia non habitat in carne mea, inquit, bonum, id est, non habitat in me Deus verus. Nam velle adjacet mihi, Deum verum me velle certum est, sed hoc quod volo non invenio (Ibid.. 18).","english":"And so that he might not, like an offensive teacher, drive the listener away from himself, he reproaches himself in order to correct another. Hence he recalls this very thing elsewhere, saying: Or did I commit a sin in humbling myself, so that you might be exalted? (2 Cor 11:7). What then? I, he says, am carnal: what of you? I, he says, who have been sold under sin (Rom 7:14). Were you, Apostle, sold under sin—you who once, redeemed by the blood of Christ, redeemed for God through Christ a people without number? It is clear, therefore, that the Apostle wished to set forth in this passage not his own person, but another's, that is, the person of a carnal man. He is the one sold under sin who has not yet been redeemed by the blood of Christ, who is still carnal; and therefore it is said: What I do, I do not understand (Rom 7:15). For the Gentile does not understand that his action is against his own salvation; though he is a Gentile, he wishes good to come to himself, to attain good, to possess good, to acquire good, the good of his salvation, the good of his life: but he does not practice this good that he wishes, but the evil that he hates, that he does. He hates death, but he practices the works of death; he hates danger, but his activity is full of danger; he hates all evils, but the very things he hates, these he does. Why? Because the good, he says, does not dwell in my flesh, that is, the true God does not dwell in me. For to will is present with me—it is certain that I will the true God—but this that I will I do not find (Rom 7:18).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":140,"ref":"p140","source":"Occurrunt enim mihi homini carnali, homini venundato sub peccato, homini qui quod operor non intelligo, homini qui non quod volo bonum hoc ago, sed quod nolo malum illud facio, homini in cujus carne non habitat bonum; occurrunt niihi ista omnia, Ut perficere bonum non inveniam. Condelector tamen legi Dei secundum interiorem hominem (Ibid., 22); id est interior homo meus in quo est intellectus meus, condelectatur legi Dei, quæ dicit unum et invisibilem Deum debere aJorari. Quamvis enim earnalis sim, scio lignum et lapidem Deum esse non posse: sed video aliam legem contra sensum meum repugnantem legi mentis meae, quæ dicit et probat hot deos esse non posse; repugnat tamen lex haec car. nalis Legi mentis meæ, captivum me ducit in lege peccati, quae lex non est in mente mea, sed in membris meis. Corpore enim ducor, ubi animo non consentio. Infelix ego homo! Non hoc de se dicit Paulus. Non enim erat infelix, sed beatus et sanctus est. In felix, inquit, ego homo! quis me liberabit de corpore mortis hujus? gratia Dei per Dominum no. strum Jesum Christum (Ibid., 24). Veniet ergo gratia baptismatis sacri, et carnalem hunc faciet spiritalem, et venundatum sub peccato redimet a peccato; et jam non dicit: Quod operor non intelligo. Non enim quod odit malum hoc agit, sed quod vult bonum hoe faciet.","english":"For these things confront me, a carnal man, a man sold under sin, a man who does not understand what I do, a man who does not do the good that I will, but the evil that I do not will, that I do, a man in whose flesh no good dwells; all these things confront me, so that I do not find a way to accomplish the good. Yet I delight in the law of God according to the inner man; that is, my inner man, in which my understanding is, delights in the law of God, which says that one invisible God ought to be worshiped. For although I am carnal, I know that wood and stone cannot be God; but I see another law warring against my understanding, resisting the law of my mind, which says and proves that these cannot be gods; yet this carnal law resists the law of my mind, leads me captive in the law of sin, which law is not in my mind but in my members. For I am led by the body, where I do not consent in my mind. Wretched man that I am! Paul does not say this of himself. For he was not wretched, but he is blessed and holy. Wretched man, he says, that I am! Who will deliver me from the body of this death? The grace of God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore the grace of sacred baptism will come, and will make this carnal man spiritual, and will redeem the man sold under sin from sin; and now he does not say: What I do I do not understand. For he does not do the evil that he hates, but he will do the good that he wills.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":141,"ref":"p141","source":"Scit enim quoniam jam habitat in carne ejus bonum, id est Spiritus sanctus, per quem et velle et adjacet, et perficere inveniet pro sua bona voluntate. Jamque securus est, et condelectatur legi Dei secundum interiorem hominem, quia non videt aliam legem in membris suis. Solam enim legem Christi in se habet, quæ non repugnat legi mentis ejus, et non eum ducit captivum in lege peccati, sed liberum eum ducit ad vitam aeternam. Et jam non infelix homo, sed felix ego homo, quia haec omnia mala evasi, et hæc omnia bona inveni. Quis autem boc inihi pra stitit, si requiris: Gratia Dei per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum. Et ne remaneret expositionis hujus ambiguitas, qua putaretur Apostolus de se ista dixisse, ponit verba increpativo modo legenda, quibus ait: Jgitur ipse ego mente servio legi Dei, carne au. tem legi peccati (Ibid., 25). Nihil ergo damnationis est in Christo Jesu his qui secundum carnem ambulon' (Rom. VIII, ). Hoc est, si ego, qui sum Apostolus, carnalis existimor, nihil habebunt damanationis hi qui carnaliter vivunt? et adjecit: Lex autem spiritus et vitæ liberavit te a lege peccati et mor. tis (Ibid., 2). Unde et in alio loco dicit: Cum servi essetis peccati, liberi fuistis justitiæ. Nunc autem liberati a peccato, servi facti estis Dei (Rom. VI, 20). Deus autem in eo de servitiis omnium gloriatur, quia servitia quæ habet nullis poterunt servitiis comparari.","english":"For he knows that the good already dwells in his flesh, that is, the Holy Spirit, through whom both to will is present to him, and he will find the power to accomplish it according to his good will. And now he is secure, and he delights in the law of God according to the inner man, because he does not see another law in his members. For he has in himself only the law of Christ, which does not fight against the law of his mind, and does not lead him captive into the law of sin, but leads him free to eternal life. And now he is not an unhappy man, but I am a happy man, because I have escaped all these evils and found all these good things. But who has granted this to me, if you ask: the grace of God through our Lord Jesus Christ. And lest any ambiguity of this exposition remain, by which it might be thought that the Apostle said these things about himself, he sets down words to be read in a tone of rebuke, when he says: Therefore I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh the law of sin. There is therefore no condemnation in Christ Jesus for those who walk according to the flesh. That is, if I, who am an Apostle, am considered carnal, will those who live carnally have no condemnation? And he added: But the law of the Spirit of life has freed you from the law of sin and death. Hence he also says in another place: When you were servants of sin, you were free with respect to righteousness. But now, freed from sin, you have been made servants of God. But God glories in him over the servitude of all, because the servitude he has can be compared to no other servitude.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":142,"ref":"p142","source":"Universa enim servitia coactiva noscuntur; Dei autem servitia, nisi volunlaria fuerint, stare non pos* sunt, secundum hoc quod scriptum est: Pater nemi nem trahit invitum. Unde propheta plenus Spiritu sancto clamat: Ex voluntate mea confitebor Domino (Ps. XXVII, 7). Et iterum: Voluntarie sacrificabo tibi (Ps. LIII, 8). Sed his omnibus contrarii e librum nobis proferant cæcis ambagibus circumdatum, et quasi nescium sui, iterum eadem repetentem atque dicentem:\n\nXV. Non vocantur nisi prædestinati; antecedit enim gratia Dei voluntatem hominis; prior eat enim Deus in bono hominis, homo autem in omni bono vix novisiimus invenitur. Date prima. partes Deo, ut tuperbiam evacuetis humanam. Quod si volueritis superbiam a nutrire hominibus, apparet vos ruinam generis humani perquireret qui docetis in bono opere non Deum antecedere, sed hominis voluntatem, ut ipsi videantur magis Deum ut bonum faciat suis suggestionibus admonere, quasi qui non faceret bonum niti ipsi dixitsent; cum constet Deum, nullo suggerente, nullo rogante, bona omnia hominibus condonare. Non enim dicit Apostolus: Cum rogaremus, et peteremus, et curreremus, et vigilaremus, sed, Cum inimici essemus, reconciliati sumus Deo; non per voluntatem nostram, sed per martem Filii ejus (Rom. v, 10). Ubi est voluntas hominis? exclusa et.","english":"For all servitudes are known to be compulsory; but God's servitudes cannot stand unless they are voluntary, according to what is written: The Father draws no one unwilling. Whence the prophet, full of the Holy Spirit, cries out: With my own will I will confess to the Lord (Ps. 27:7). And again: I will sacrifice to you willingly (Ps. 54:8). But against all these let them bring forth for us their book, wrapped in blind windings and, as if ignorant of itself, again repeating the same things and saying:\n\nXV. None are called except the predestined; for the grace of God precedes the will of man; for God comes first in what is good in man, but man is scarcely found last in every good. Give the first parts to God, that you may empty out human pride. But if you wish to nourish pride in men, it appears that you are seeking the ruin of the human race, you who teach that in a good work God does not come first, but the will of man, so that they themselves seem rather to admonish God by their suggestions to do good, as if they had said that he does not do good unless they tell him; when it is certain that God, with no one suggesting and no one asking, bestows all good things on men. For the Apostle does not say: When we were asking, and petitioning, and running, and keeping watch; but, When we were enemies, we were reconciled to God; not through our will, but through the death of his Son (Rom. 5:10). Where is the will of man? It is excluded and.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":143,"ref":"p143","source":"Non ergo omnis qui vult salvatur; quia si omnis qui velet salvaretur, nullus poterat a salute effici alienus. Omnis itaque homo.alvari vult, sed non omnia salvatur homo. Salvatur enim is quem voluerit Deut. Utique, inquam, is quem voluerit Deus; ut exclusa hominis voluntate, suam plenam ex integro gratiam manifestet. L Bcatos dico priores nostros, qui tantum facinoris usum minime cognoverunt. Quis unquam suspicaretur de rebus bonis contra bonitatem agendum, et contra justitiam, armis justitix dimicandum? Non vocantur, inquit, nisi pRædestinati. Et nos vobiscum dicimus: Non vocantur nisi praedestinati. Nam qui omnes gentes jussit discipulis suis ut vocarent, dicens: Euntes baptizate omnes gentes (Matth. XXVIII, 19), omnes ipse ante adventum suum prædestinavit. Omnes ergo gentes prædestinavit ad vitam, quia omnes gentes vocavit ad vitam. Qui veterit, imputabit divinae clementix pracdestinanti pariter et vocanti: qui autem non venerit, imputet suas negligentiæ contemnenti pariter et nolenti. Non est eniin divinae prædestinationis ut hominis perditio fieret; nec voluntas Dei est, quando diaboli voluntas impletur. Inimicx enim sibi sunt istæ et contrariæ voluntates, et non potest una fieri absque contemptu alterius. Quod si non vocantur aliqui ad vitam, in illis qui non vocantur diaboli voluntas impletur.","english":"Therefore not everyone who wills is saved; for if everyone who willed were saved, no one could be made a stranger to salvation. And so every man wills to be saved, but not every man is saved. For he is saved whom God has willed. Yes, I say, him whom God has willed, so that, with man's will excluded, He may manifest His own grace full and complete. I call those first ones of ours blessed, who did not in the least know the practice of so great a crime. Who would ever suspect that one must act against goodness in matters of good, and against justice fight with the arms of justice? They are not called, he says, unless they are predestined. And we say with you: they are not called unless they are predestined. For He who commanded His disciples to call all nations, saying: Go, baptize all nations, Himself predestined all before His coming. Therefore He predestined all nations to life, because He called all nations to life. He who has come will impute it to the divine clemency that both predestines and calls; but he who has not come, let him impute it to his own negligence that both despises and refuses. For it is not of divine predestination that man's perdition should come to be; nor is it the will of God when the will of the devil is fulfilled. For these wills are hostile and contrary to one another, and one cannot be fulfilled without contempt of the other. But if some are not called to life, in those who are not called the will of the devil is fulfilled.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":144,"ref":"p144","source":"Et miror qua fronte ejus intretis Ecclesiam quem dicere non timetis diaboli voluntati subjectum; diaboli enim voluntatem implere probatur, qui non vult omnes homines pertingere ad salutem. Sicut enim in his quos vult salvare suam creditur voluntatem implere, sic in istis quos non vult, diaboli voluntas impletur. Sed bonus Deus bonos esse vult omnes; et hinc errorem patimini, quia omnes quos bonos esse vult, boni non sunt. Soletis enim dicere: Qui non sunt boni, Deo eos a se repellente, mali sunt, ut hi qui peccant vidcantur non suo vitio esse peccantes. Si ergo hinc errorem patimini, quod Dci voluntas non impleatur, cur non magis hinc judicium detis peccantibus, quo laudetur Deus de suæ paticntia pictatis, et culpetur homo de impatientia propriæ voluntatis?\n\nXVI. Dicitis enim: Ergo homo vincit Deum. Vincit enim Deum, si Deus eum vult ease bonum, el bonus non eat. Quid ergo hoc loco attenditis vos? Nunquid luctantem videtis Deum et hominem, ut ista dicatis? Si luctantem videretis, recte uni parti victoriam traderetis. Nunc autem quia medici normam tenens Salvator hominum, dat monita, non suae utilitati necessaria, sed nostræ saluti utilia, quædam fleri jubet ut vitam obtineas, quaedam prohibet fieri ut mortem evadas, si audieris, imputabis Salvatori quod vives; si contempseris, tuae reputabis ignaviæ, dum coeperis mortis sentire tormenta.","english":"And I am amazed at the boldness with which you enter his Church, when you do not fear to call him subject to the will of the devil; for he is proved to fulfill the will of the devil who does not will that all men attain salvation. For just as in those whom he wills to save his own will is believed to be fulfilled, so in those whom he does not will, the will of the devil is fulfilled. But the good God wills all to be good; and from this you suffer error, because all whom he wills to be good are not good. For you are accustomed to say: Those who are not good, with God driving them away from himself, are evil, so that those who sin may be seen to sin not by their own fault. If therefore you suffer error from this, that the will of God is not fulfilled, why do you not rather from this render judgment to sinners, whereby God may be praised for the patience of his loving-kindness, and man may be blamed for the impatience of his own will?\n\nXVI. For you say: Therefore man conquers God. For he conquers God, if God wills him to be good, and he is not good. What therefore do you attend to in this place? Surely you do not see God and man struggling, that you should say these things? If you saw them struggling, you would rightly hand victory to one side. But now, because the Savior of men, holding to the physician's rule, gives warnings not necessary for his own advantage but useful for our salvation, commanding certain things to be done that you may obtain life, and forbidding certain things to be done that you may escape death—if you have listened, you will impute to the Savior that you live; if you have despised, you will reckon it to your own sloth, when you begin to feel the torments of death.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":145,"ref":"p145","source":"Quod si tu dicas mortem ægroti medici imperitia evenisse, nos docemus medicum ex omni parte perfectum. Si autem dixeris ejus voluntate mortis interituri devolutum, ipse tibi exclamat, dicens: Nolo mortem peccatoris (Ezech. XXXIII, 11). Quem si interrogare merearis, et dicas: Si hoc non vis, ostende quid velis; respondebit: Volo ut convertatur et vivat. Unde facimus et nos clausutam catholicam vestris astutiis obviaatem. Si potest homo Deo nolente delinquere, quanto magis potest Deo volente delictis finem imponere? Si potest homo velle quod Deus non vult, quanto magis potest homo velle quod Deus vult? Si potest homo Deo nolente perire, quanto magis potest Deo volente salvari? Si potuit homo Deo nolente implere voluntatem diaboli, quanto magis potest Deo volente implere voluntatem Dei? Si potuit homo pradestinationem Dei sua aversatione contemnere, quanto magis potesl prædestinationem Dei sua conversione complere? Dixit itaque Deus: Hoc nolo, illud volo; id est, dixit: Nolo mortem morientis, volo ut convertatur et vivat. Quod dixit volo, hoc prædestinavit, nihil enim prædestinavit invitus; quod dixit nolo, destituit. Si potest homo velle et facere quod Deus non vult, quanto magis potest et velle et facere quod Deus vult? De perditione hic agitur hominis et salute. Deus vult ut salvemur, diabolus vult ut pereamus.","english":"But if you say that the sick man's death came about through the doctor's inexperience, we teach that the doctor is perfect in every respect. If, however, you say that he fell into the death of one about to die by his own will, he himself cries out to you, saying: I do not will the death of the sinner (Ezek. 33:11). And if you should deserve to question him and say: If you do not will this, show what you do will; he will answer: I will that he be converted and live. Hence we too make the Catholic enclosure, standing in the way of your cunning. If a man can sin when God does not will it, how much more can he put an end to his sins when God wills it? If a man can will what God does not will, how much more can a man will what God wills? If a man can perish when God does not will it, how much more can he be saved when God wills it? If a man could fulfill the will of the devil when God did not will it, how much more can he fulfill the will of God when God wills it? If a man could despise the predestination of God by his own turning away, how much more can he fulfill the predestination of God by his own conversion? And so God said: This I do not will, that I will; that is, he said: I do not will the death of the dying man, I will that he be converted and live. What he said I will, that he predestined, for he predestined nothing unwillingly; what he said I do not will, he abandoned. If a man can will and do what God does not will, how much more can he both will and do what God wills? Here the matter concerns the perdition of man and his salvation. God wills that we be saved, the devil wills that we perish.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":146,"ref":"p146","source":"Si potest fieri perditio hominis quam vult diabolus, per nostram negligentiam; quanto magis potest fieri liberatio hominis quam vult Deus, per diligentiam bonæ et fidelissimæ voluntatis?\n\nXVII. e Sed dicit liber vester: Antecedit gratia Dei voluntatem hominis. Nos dicimus: Non solum antecedit, sed ctiam sequitur Dei gratia bominis voluntatem. Prius tamen quam ostendamus quomodo anteceJat et quomodo sequatur, vos esponimus quid velitis ostendere. Dicitis itaque: Antecedit gratia Dei hominis voluntatem, ut dum audient homo tam dignam tamque veram sententiam, illud quod sequitur non attendat, sed vobis exponentibus discatur ut cesset voluntas hominis; nedum coeperit velle, Deum excitare videatur in zelum; exspectet ut prius gratia veniat quæ nolentem trahat, quæ cogat fastidientem, quae teneat fugientem. Volutetur homo in coeno, efficiatur fæx cloacarum, et criminum gurgilibus demergatur, et sit securus ex vitio. Si enim venerit gratia antecedens, erit homo recedens a crimine. Non enim prior erit homo Dei gratiæ, sed gratia Dei prior erit hominis voluntati. Deteximus hoc vestrum studium. Nunc contra hoc quid catholici teneamus, necesse est ut justis assertionibus demonstremus. Memores estote quia vobiscum dicimus: Antecedit gratia Dei hominis voluntatem. Dicimus itaque: Et antecedit, et sequitur.","english":"If a man's destruction, which the devil wills, can come about through our negligence, how much more can a man's deliverance, which God wills, come about through the diligence of a good and most faithful will?\n\nXVII. But your book says: The grace of God precedes the will of man. We say: The grace of God not only precedes but also follows the will of man. Yet before we show how it precedes and how it follows, we set forth what you wish to prove. You say, then: The grace of God precedes the will of man, so that when a man hears so worthy and so true a sentence, he may not attend to what follows, but, with you expounding it, may learn that the will of man should cease; lest, as soon as he begins to will, God be seen to be stirred to jealousy; let him wait for grace to come first, which drags the unwilling, compels the reluctant, holds the fleeing. Let man wallow in the mire, be made the dregs of sewers, and be plunged into the whirlpools of crimes, and let him be secure in his vice. For if antecedent grace has come, man will be one who withdraws from crime. For man will not be first in relation to the grace of God, but the grace of God will be first in relation to the will of man. We have laid bare this zeal of yours. Now, against this, it is necessary that we demonstrate by just assertions what we catholics hold. Remember that we say with you: The grace of God precedes the will of man. We say, therefore: It both precedes and follows.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":147,"ref":"p147","source":"Antecedit, quia non petentibus, non rogantibus, non etiam volentibus nobis, venit Filius Dei universum mundum a morte eripere; et ut ascenderet ad Deum homo, sicut jam diximus, Deus descendit ad hominem. Venit invitare esurientes ad epulas, sitientes ad fontem, miseros ad fortitudinem, mendicos ad divitias, tristes ad laetitiam, venditos ad redemptionem, servos ad libertatem, captivos ad requiem. Ecce hoc loco docemus quod antecedit gratia Dei voluntatem hominis. Nunc videamus quomodo iterum ipsa sequatur quae antecesserat subsequendo. Gratia enim quae antecessit, ostendit quid petas, quem petas, et qualiter petas, ostendit quid quaeras, qualiter quæras, ubi quæras; ostendit quid pulses, ubi pulses, qualiter pulses; et ab hac indagine nullum exclusit. Non solum nullum exclusit, sed etiam cunctos universaliter invitavit: Omnis enim qui petit accipit, et qui quærit invenit, et pulsanti aperietur (Matth. VII, 8). Et iterum dixit: Nunquid filius si petit panem patrem suum, lapidem porriget ei? aut si piscem petierit, nunquid serpentem porriget ei? Si. ergo vos, cum sitis mali, nostis bona data dare filiis vestris, quanto magis Pater vester qui in cælis est, dabit bona petentibus se (Ibid., 9-11)? Petentibus utiquc.","english":"He comes first, because while we were not asking, not begging, not even willing, the Son of God came to snatch the whole world from death; and so that man might ascend to God, as we have already said, God descended to man. He came to invite the hungry to a banquet, the thirsty to a fountain, the wretched to strength, the poor to riches, the sorrowful to joy, the sold to redemption, slaves to freedom, captives to rest. Behold, in this passage we teach that the grace of God precedes the will of man. Now let us see how that same grace which had gone before follows after by following. For the grace that went before shows what you should ask, whom you should ask, and how you should ask; it shows what you should seek, how you should seek, where you should seek; it shows what you should knock at, where you should knock, how you should knock; and from this search it excluded no one. Not only did it exclude no one, but it even invited all universally: For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened (Matthew 7:8). And again he said: If his son asks his father for bread, will he hand him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will he hand him a serpent? If therefore you, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him (Ibid., 9-11)? To those who ask, certainly.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":148,"ref":"p148","source":"Sicut ergo tecum dixi in superiori loco, quia antecedit gratia Dei voluntatem hominis, ita nunc mecum die in isto loco, antecedit voluntas bominis gratiam Dei; uon superbiendo, sed petendo; non extollendo, sed quaerendo; non luctando, sed pulsando. Nisi enim ex fiJe voluerit, nullus ei baptismatis donum gratiae divinæ impertit; nisi, inquam, ex fide voluerit credere, non erit particeps indulgentiæ; nisi ex fide desideraverit, ad donum Dei pervenire non poterit. Si enim ad Christum veniens dixerit gentilis: Nolo baptizari, baptizari non poterit. Si ad pœnitentiæ fructum delinquens veniens dixerit: Nolo reconciliari, reconciliari non poterit. Utrosque sacerdotalis censura examinat, quibus nihil gratiæ conferre prævalet, nisi integerrimam ex ore eorum didicerit voluntatem: aut si ausus est, vos ipsi cognoscite. Majus aliquid dicamus. Si etiain infirmitatis vis sermonis auferat facultatem, nullatenus poterit tacenti gratiae Dei copia ministrari. Mentis enim secretum nisi linguæ internuntio fuerit declaratum, consequi non valebit gratiam. Corde enim creditur ad justitiam, ore autem fiet confessio ad salutem (Rom. X, 10). Dicente ergo Domino: Omnis qui petit accipit (Matth. VII, 8), antecedere vidctur voluntas petentis, ut possit concedi petentibus gratia retribuentis. Et ne forte fluctuantem te in hoc loco videar reliquisse, qui omne bonum gratiæ tribuis,.","english":"Therefore, just as I said with you in the earlier place, that the grace of God precedes the will of man, so now say with me in this place: the will of man precedes the grace of God—not by being proud, but by asking; not by exalting itself, but by seeking; not by struggling, but by knocking. For unless he has willed it by faith, no one imparts to him the gift of baptism of divine grace; unless, I say, he has willed to believe by faith, he will not be a partaker of forgiveness; unless he has desired it by faith, he will not be able to attain to the gift of God. For if a Gentile coming to Christ has said, \"I do not wish to be baptized,\" he will not be able to be baptized. If a sinner coming to the fruit of repentance has said, \"I do not wish to be reconciled,\" he will not be able to be reconciled. The priestly judgment examines both, and it can confer nothing of grace upon them unless it has learned from their mouth a most sincere will; or if it has dared otherwise, you yourselves know. Let us say something greater. Even if the weakness of the body takes away the faculty of speech, the abundance of the grace of God can in no way be ministered to one who is silent. For unless the secret of the mind has been declared by the messenger of the tongue, it will not be able to obtain grace. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation (Rom. 10:10). Therefore, since the Lord says, \"Everyone who asks receives\" (Matt. 7:8), the will of the one asking seems to precede, so that the grace of the one repaying may be granted to those asking. And lest I seem to have left you wavering in this place—you who attribute every good thing to grace.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":149,"ref":"p149","source":"non mecum laboras: non solum tunc dicam antecessisse gratiam, cum Deus, adjungi homini non dedignatus, non petentibus nobis venire dignatus est; sed et usque hodie antecedit voluntas Dei voluntatem hominis. Vult enim ut salvemur, et, nos nolumus. Væ autem mihi et mei similibus, quia quotidie antecedit voluntates nostras et gratia, et invitatio, et voluntas Dei, et compunclio, et promissio gaudii sempiterni, et terror aeterni supplicii. Quotidie ergo præcedit voluntates nostrat gratia Dei, innumerabilibus plena suffragiis: sed nostra voluntas universa ista Dei dona non sequitur. a Quid ergo dicit liber vester? Præcedit voluntatem hominis voluntas Dei. Et nos quid diximus? et præcedit, et sequitur. Quid ergo laboravimus loquentes, quia vos tantummodo præcedit dicitis, sequitur denogalis. Ipsum autem quod dicitis quia præcedit, idcirco dicitis, ut homo in criminibus positus velle suum faciat quiescere, et exspectet ut veniat ad eum prior gratia, ne incipiat velle suum anteponere gratiae Dei. Nos autem catholici hæc exsecramur, et dicimus: Antecedit gratia voluntatem hominum, ostendendo vitam æternam in qua delectentur, ostendendo inceadium sempiternum in quo terreantur, ut a peccatorum delectationibus revocentur. Antecedit, inquam, quotidie gratia voluntates nostras: sed nostra, quod est pejus, voluntas non sequitur. lude.","english":"You do not labor with me: I will not say only that grace came first at that time when God, not disdaining to be joined to man, deigned to come to us when we were not asking; but even to this day the will of God precedes the will of man. For he wills that we be saved, and we do not will it. But woe to me and to those like me, because daily both the grace and the invitation and the will of God and the compunction and the promise of eternal joy and the terror of eternal punishment precede our wills. Daily, therefore, the grace of God, full of innumerable aids, precedes our wills; but our will does not follow all these gifts of God. What then does your book say? The will of God precedes the will of man. And what did we say? It both precedes and follows. Why then have we labored in speaking, because you say only that it precedes, while you deny that it follows. But the very thing you say—that it precedes—you say for this reason, that man, placed in sins, should make his own will quiet and should wait for grace to come to him first, lest he begin to put his own will before the grace of God. But we catholics abominate these things and say: Grace precedes the will of men, by showing eternal life in which they may delight, by showing everlasting fire in which they may be terrified, so that they may be recalled from the delights of sins. Grace, I say, daily precedes our wills; but our will, which is worse, does not follow. Hence.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":150,"ref":"p150","source":"est quod flemus orantes, gemimus poenitentes, quia antecedentem non sequimur, invitantem contemnimus, et neque blandientem patrem ut filii lionoramus, neque terrentem dominum timemus ut servi. Unde etiam ipse ad nos loquitur per prophetam: Filius honorat patrem, et servus timet dominum. Si Dominus ego sum, ubi est timor meus? Si pater, ubi est honor meus (Malach. i, 6)? Interrogamus nunc. Aliquid exigit a nobis antecedens gratia, an non exigit? procul dubio exigit. Quid exigit? hoc utique quod ipsi dicitis, voluntatem ipsam. Ergo antecedit gratia. Quid est gratia? ut quod petieris, gratis accipias. Et ideo non dixit: Emite et dabitur vobis, sed: Petite et dabitur vobis. Et unde apertius fratrum simplicitas hunc sensum agnoscat, aliquam similitudinem offeramus. Ostensa est Salomoni sapientia: ecce gratia; quid nunc dicat cui ostensa est, ipsum Salomonem loqucntem ausculta. Amator, inquit, factus sum formæ ejus, et hanc quæsivi assumere mihi, et currebam post eam; I eo magis illa elongabat a me (Sap. VIII, 2). Non tibi videtur puellam pulcherrimam illicientem et provQcantem amatorem in cursu? Ut quid nunc voluerimus hujus exempli facere mentionem? Audite gratiam Dei. Ponamus filiam patris. Hanc tibi,.o homo, scias evidentibus indiciis a suo patre manifestatam, ut videas cl amator efficiaris pulchritudinis ej is.","english":"It is for this that we weep in prayer, groan in repentance, because we do not follow the one who goes before us, we despise the one who invites us, and we neither honor the father who coaxes us as sons nor fear the lord who terrifies us as servants. Hence he himself also speaks to us through the prophet: A son honors his father, and a servant fears his lord. If I am the Lord, where is my fear? If a father, where is my honor? Let us now ask: does preceding grace demand anything of us, or not? Without doubt it demands. What does it demand? Surely this very thing that you yourselves say: the will itself. Therefore grace goes before. What is grace? That what you have asked for, you receive for free. And therefore he did not say: Buy and it shall be given to you, but: Ask and it shall be given to you. And so that the simplicity of the brethren may more openly recognize this meaning, let us offer some comparison. Wisdom was shown to Solomon: behold, grace; now hear Solomon himself speaking, to whom it was shown. \"I became,\" he says, \"a lover of her form, and I sought to take her for myself, and I ran after her; and the more she withdrew far from me.\" Does it not seem to you that a most beautiful girl is enticing and provoking her lover in the race? Why then have we wished to make mention of this example? Hear the grace of God. Let us set forth the daughter of the father. Know, O man, that this one has been made manifest to you by her father with evident signs, so that you may see and become a lover of her beauty.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":151,"ref":"p151","source":"Ostendit etiam quantae sint cjus divitiae, quanta dilectio, quanta affabilitas, quanta fides. Est ergo pulchra, est dives, est iidelis, est sapiens, est etiam summi regis filia. Hanc tibi, homo, ad hoc ante oculos tuos patcr exhibuit, ut amator cjus factus petas eam tibi in matrimonio, et ex ea Deo filios facias, sicut fecit ille qui dicebat: Si deeem millia pedagogorum habeatis in Christo, non tamen habebitis multos patres; nam in Christo Jesu per Evangelium ego vos genui (I Cor. IV, 15). De qua conjuge nos genuit Paulus Deo? utique de gratia Christi, cujus amator factus, universa pro amoro ejus suavia habere se asserebat supplicia. Cape ergo a carnis exemplo comparationem puellæ, ut ad sensum melius spiritalem attingas. Ergo est tibi ostensa puella a patre: ecce gratia patris antecessit voluntatem. Jam tu incipe velle. Ostensa utiqae gratia ejus qui ostendit, ut quantum te amare credi debeat ex boc consideres, quia ut te suum faceret, filiam suam tibi ostendit, pulchram, divitem, sapientem, ad hoc ut amator ejus effectus possis eam assumere tibi in matrimonio. Ecce gratia antecedens voluntatem, ecce gratia stimulans pectus, ecce gratia illiciens mentem, ecce gratia excitans dormienlem. Quid nunc jubetis ut faciat pater non petenti, non roganti, non concupiscenti, et calorem amoris tui non ostendenti?","english":"He shows also how great are his riches, how great his love, how great his affability, how great his faithfulness. She is therefore beautiful, she is rich, she is faithful, she is wise, she is even the daughter of the supreme king. It is for this, O man, that the father has set her before your eyes, so that, having become her lover, you may ask for her in marriage and beget sons for God from her, as did he who said: If you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, yet you will not have many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I begot you through the Gospel (1 Cor 4:15). From what wife did Paul beget us for God? Surely from the grace of Christ, whose lover he became, and for love of her he declared that he counted all torments sweet. Take, then, from the example of the flesh a comparison of the girl, so that you may attain the spiritual sense more fully. She has therefore been shown to you by the father: behold, the grace of the father preceded your will. Now begin to will. The grace of him who shows her has surely been shown, so that from this you may consider how much he ought to be believed to love you, because in order to make you his own, he showed you his daughter, beautiful, rich, wise, so that, having become her lover, you might take her to yourself in marriage. Behold the grace that precedes the will, behold the grace that stirs the heart, behold the grace that entices the mind, behold the grace that rouses the sleeper. What now do you command the father to do for one who does not ask, does not entreat, does not desire, and does not show the warmth of your love?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":152,"ref":"p152","source":"Tollit filiam suam, et jungit eam tibi fastidiis occupato, aut aliis amoribus circumdato? Non hoc facit. Sed nisi quæsieris eam ut argentum, et nisi ut thesaurum vestigaveris eam, et nisi ex fide volueris, et nisi ex fide cucurreris, et nisi tuam veram dilectionera ostenderis, non eam omnino percipies. Sufficiat tibi, quia cum tu mendicus sis, et illa sit dives, suis te divitiis locupletat; degener tu, illa summi imperii filia, et sua te generositate nobilitat. Quid autem dicat pater ejus amatoribus filiæ suæ sollicitus diligenter ausculta: Qui diligit, inquit, patrem et matrem plus quam me, non est me dignus (Matth. x, 37). Non dixit: Qui pauper est, aut qui degener, abt qui miser est: sed qui diligit aliquid plus quam me, non est me dignus. It gratia antecedens voluntatem, amorem solum flagitans! homo, ama et accipe; sed si amas, factis ostende. Omnis qui amat, vult, cupit, rogat, vigilat, currit, festinat, satagit per amicos, per natos, per familiares, per servos, per se ipsum opportune, importune, obsecrationibus, promissionibus, fixo pacto, integroque amoris indicio. Et ut aperiam tibi oculos, tu qui te putas invitum et nolentem gratiæ divinæ posse sociari, quid est quod quando eam dat pater, per familiares suos gratia antecedens exprimitur?","english":"Does he take his daughter and join her to you when you are preoccupied with disdainful pursuits, or surrounded by other loves? He does not do this. But unless you seek her as silver, and unless you search her out as a treasure, and unless you desire her from faith, and unless you run from faith, and unless you show your true love, you will not receive her at all. Let it be enough for you that, though you are a beggar and she is rich, she enriches you with her riches; though you are base-born and she is the daughter of the highest sovereignty, she ennobles you with her generosity. But listen carefully to what her father, solicitous for his daughter, says to her lovers: \"He who loves father and mother more than me,\" he says, \"is not worthy of me\" (Matthew 10:37). He did not say: \"He who is poor, or who is base-born, or who is wretched\"; but \"he who loves anything more than me is not worthy of me.\" O the grace that goes before, demanding only love! Man, love and receive; but if you love, show it by deeds. Everyone who loves wills, desires, asks, keeps watch, runs, hastens, strives through friends, through children, through household members, through servants, through himself, in season and out of season, by entreaties, by promises, by fixed agreement, and by an unbroken token of love. And to open your eyes, you who think that you can be joined to divine grace unwillingly and against your will: what is it that, when the father gives her, is expressed by grace going before through his household?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":153,"ref":"p153","source":"Inquiritur ab eo qui eam accipit, quomodo veniat, si abrenuntiet omnibus amoribus mundi, omnibus pompis inimici; qui nisi velle suum expresserit verbis, nunquid datur ei gratia quam poposcit? Quid ergo vult, quid cucurrit, quid desideravit homo? gratiam consequi; et quid promittit? abrenunlio omnibus pompis diaboli et voluptatibus ejus. Ostendit se nolle quod voluit, et incipit velle quod noluit; et tunc jam gratiae participio incipit delectari, per quam et dives et regis filius nuncupetur. Ecce gratiam Dei vobis et antecedentem et sequentem ostendimus. Antecedit, quia vocat, quia provocat, quia invitat ut venias: sequitur, quia dum veneris, et volueris, et petieris, donat. Videamus nunc quo vestra pergat intentio. Dicit enim anathemabilis liber a vestra vanitate conscriptus:\n\nXVIII. Non enim cum rogaremus neque cum peteremus, sed cum inimici essemus, reconciliati sumus Deo, non per nostram voluntatem, sed per mortem Filii ejus. e Jubetis ergo ut non rogent homines Deum ut reconcilientur ei, sed efficiantur inimiti ejus, ut possit stare apostoli Pauli sententia; neque voluntatem suam bonis nisibus tradant, quia hoc quod reconciliantur homines Deo, dicitis: Dixit nos Apostolus reconciliari Deo, non per voluntatem nostram, sed per mortem Filii ejus. Ergo qui inimicus fuerit Deo, ipse reconciliandus est Deo, ipse salvandus secundum vos? Hi qui Chri.","english":"He is asked by the one who receives her how she comes—whether he renounces all the loves of the world and all the pomps of the enemy; for unless he has expressed his will in words, is the grace he has asked for given to him? What then does a man will, what has he run after, what has he desired? To obtain grace; and what does he promise? I renounce all the pomps of the devil and his pleasures. He shows that he does not will what he willed, and begins to will what he did not will; and then at last he begins to take delight in a share of grace, through which he is called both rich and a son of the king. Behold, we have shown you the grace of God both preceding and following. It precedes, because it calls, because it provokes, because it invites you to come; it follows, because when you have come, and willed, and asked, it gives. Let us now see where your intention proceeds. For the anathematized book written by your vanity says:\n\nXVIII. For it was not when we were asking or when we were petitioning, but when we were enemies, that we were reconciled to God, not through our own will, but through the death of his Son. You therefore command that men should not ask God to be reconciled to him, but should be made his enemies, so that the sentence of the apostle Paul may stand; nor should they hand over their will to good endeavors, because you say that this—that men are reconciled to God—is what the Apostle said: We are reconciled to God, not through our own will, but through the death of his Son. Therefore, according to you, is the one who has been an enemy to God himself to be reconciled to God, himself to be saved? These who Chri.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":154,"ref":"p154","source":"stum crucifixerunt, hi salvandi sunt, et qui dixerunt: Nolumus hunc, ipsi sunt liberandi? Hi autem qui inimici non fuerunt, sed amici, et vQhierunt animam suam in amore ejus ponere, hi erunt in exsecratione Altissimo? Probatis vos omnibus hæreticis acrius blasphemare, qui nolentes rectum tramitem ingredi, anfractibus vos plenis erroribus tradidistis. Non enim inimicitias nostras ad Deum Apostolus, sed charitatem invitat. Dicit namque: Commendat itaque charitatem suam Deus in nobis; quoniam si cum inimici essemus, reconciliati sumus Deo per mortem Filii ejus, multo magis reconciliati salvi erimus ab ira per ipsum fRom. v, 8). Commendat ergo hoc opere charitatem suam in nobis, ut vel sic amorem nostrum ei ex integro conferendo, videamur saltem amoris voto rependere quod viribus non valemus. Nam quod nos diligit Deus. nobis prodest; nos si diligimus Deum, illi prodesse non possumus. Deus enim nullius eget, nullo honorante sublimatur, nullo contemnente dejicitur. Ergo ut quid commendat charitatem suam in nobis? Ut dicamus utique: Si cum inimici essemus ita nos dilexit, ut etiam unicum suum pro nostra omnium pateretur salute interfici; quanto magis nunc jam recocciliatos sibi salvos faciet in vitam ipsius? Unde excludens vestram specialem defensionem, generalem gratiam introduxit, dicens: Considerantes hoc, quod unus pro omnibus mortuus est.","english":"crucified, these are to be saved, and those who said, \"We do not want this man,\" are these to be delivered? But those who were not enemies but friends, and who wished to lay down their soul in love for him—will these be in abomination to the Most High? You prove yourselves to blaspheme more sharply than all heretics, who, unwilling to enter the straight path, have handed yourselves over to winding ways full of errors. For the Apostle invites us not to enmity with God but to love. For he says: \"God therefore commends his love in us; for if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved from wrath through him\" (Rom 5:8). He commends, therefore, by this work his love in us, so that even thus, by conferring our love upon him wholly, we may seem at least by the vow of love to repay what we cannot by our strength. For that God loves us profits us; if we love God, we cannot profit him. For God needs nothing, is exalted by no one's honoring, is cast down by no one's contempt. Therefore, to what end does he commend his love in us? That we may surely say: If, when we were enemies, he so loved us that he even suffered his only Son to be killed for the salvation of us all, how much more now, already reconciled to him, will he save us unto his own life? Hence, setting aside your special defense, he introduced general grace, saying: \"Considering this, that one died for all.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":155,"ref":"p155","source":"Et adjecit: Ergo omnes mortui sunt; quia pro omnibus mortuus est, ut et qui vivunt, jam non sibi vivant, sed ei qui pro omnibus mortuus est (II Cor. v, 14, 15). Occurrit nobis hoc loco insanus liber vester, et dicit:\n\nXIX. Vos, inquit, ubicunque omnes legitis, generaliter omnes vultis intelligi, cum omnes sæpe pro parte dicantur. Nam cum dicitur: Omnes declinaverunt (Psal. XIII, 3); non tamen omnes declinaverant. Et: Omnis homo mendax (Ps. CXV. 11); non tamen omnis homo mendax, quia legimus de quodam: Erat homo verax. Pars ergo maxima omnes videtur significare, cum utique constet non debere omnes intelligi. Nullum in libro vestro locum sine blasphemiis invenimus. Hæc assertio ubi attendii? Ut consentientes vobis dicant Christum non pro omnibus passum. Si hoc non vultis intelligi, ergo non pro parte hoc loco Apostolus nominavit omnes, sed omnes generaliter memoravit. Corrigite ergo librum vestrum, quia Christus pro omnibus passus est, omnibus hominibus subvenire festinat. Omnes vocat, omnes invitat: qui salvatus fuerit, imputabit gratiæ Dei vocanti, invitanti, succurrenti; qui non salvatus fuerit, imputabit sibi negligenti, contemnenti pariter et deserenti. Omnia enim bona nobis a Domini gratia conferuntur petentibus; omnia autem mala a diabolo nobis Deum contemnentibus irrogantur. Non enim poterit potestatem suam exercere diabolus in his qui divinis defensionibus vivunt.","english":"And he added: Therefore all are dead; because he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves, but for him who died for all (2 Cor 5:14-15). At this point your insane book confronts us and says:\n\nXIX. You, it says, wherever you read \"all,\" you want it understood universally, although \"all\" is often said for a part. For when it is said: All have turned aside (Ps 13:3); yet not all had turned aside. And: Every man is a liar (Ps 115:11); yet not every man is a liar, because we read of a certain one: He was a truthful man. Therefore \"all\" seems to signify the greatest part, although it is certainly established that it should not be understood as all. We find no passage in your book without blasphemies. Where is this assertion attended to? So that those who agree with you may say that Christ did not suffer for all. If you do not wish this to be understood, then the Apostle did not name \"all\" here for a part, but mentioned all universally. Correct your book, therefore, because Christ suffered for all, and hastens to come to the aid of all men. He calls all, he invites all: whoever is saved will impute it to the grace of God who calls, invites, and assists; whoever is not saved will impute it to himself, who is negligent, despising alike and abandoning. For all good things are conferred on us by the grace of the Lord when we ask; but all evil things are inflicted on us by the devil when we despise God. For the devil will not be able to exercise his power in those who live by divine defenses.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":156,"ref":"p156","source":"Nunquid potest sibi subjicere victoris sui vasa captivus? Nemo, inquit Dominus, intrat in domum fortis, et vasa ejus diripiet, nisi prius fortem ligaverit, et tunc vasa ejus diripiet (Matth. XII, 29). Fortem vos ponitis inimicum; sed nos religatum et crucis tropæo credimus esse subjectum; insidiosum, sed insidias ejus detectas ostendimus. Nunquid signo victorie munitum contingere prævalet victus? nunquid scuto Domini circumdatum, eL lorica fidei indutum, et galea spei et salutis munitum, ictus possunt invadere sagiltarum (Ephes. vi, 16,17)? Non vincitur a diabolo homo, nisi quando a suo recesserit defensore, dicente Apostolo: Subditi estote Deo; resistite autem diabolo, et fugiet a vobis (Jac. IV, 7). Invisibilis hostis est, ab invisibili defensore prosternitur. Sed contradicit hic etiam liber vester insanus, et ausus est dicere tanture diabolum posse, ut homines trahat invitos, etiam hos quos Christus suo cruore redimens Deo filios fecit.","english":"Can a captive subject to himself the vessels of his own conqueror? No one, says the Lord, enters into the house of a strong man and plunders his vessels, unless he first binds the strong man, and then he will plunder his vessels (Matt 12:29). You make the strong man an enemy; but we believe him to be bound and subjected by the trophy of the cross; crafty, but we show his snares exposed. Can the conquered prevail to touch one fortified by the sign of victory? Can the blows of arrows invade one surrounded by the shield of the Lord, clothed in the breastplate of faith, and protected by the helmet of hope and salvation (Eph 6:16-17)? Man is not conquered by the devil, except when he has withdrawn from his own defender, as the Apostle says: Be subject to God; but resist the devil, and he will flee from you (Jas 4:7). He is an invisible enemy; he is laid low by an invisible defender. But here too your insane book contradicts, and has dared to say that the devil can do so much as to drag men against their will, even those whom Christ, redeeming them by his blood, made sons of God.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":157,"ref":"p157","source":"XX. Dicitis: Clausis oculis transistis hostis unsidias vos qui dicitis volunlatem hominis aliquid posse virtutis acquirere, non attendentes quanta damna Deus quotidie e patiatur, quantæ ruince castitati, per diabolum fiant, quantæque criminum concupiscentiæ. Quæ utique si videretis, non laboraremus vobis ostendere damna virtutum, et victorias vitiorum. Dicite, obsecro, damna quæ Deus quotidie patitur; diabolo vincente hæc patitur, an homine contemnente? Si diabolo vincente dicatis, e blasphemia vestra in caput vestrum refundimus; si homine contemnente, assertio nostra victoriam cepit. Diabolus enim nec dominus, nec creator, nec pater est. Deus autem nobis et dominus, et creator, et pater esse dignatur. Corpus suum victoriosissimum nostro corpori sociavit, ut corporis nostri fragilitatem excluderet. Sanguinem suum nostro sanguini miscuit, ut fervor genuini caloris quiesceret divino sanguine temperatus.Chrismatis sui virtute nos unxit, ut luctantem contra nos diabolum vinceremus. Scuto bonæ voluntatis suae nos sese protegere repromittit: Qui sperat, inquit, in me, ego liberabo eum, protegam eum, quia cognovit nomen meum (Psal. xc, 14). Unde et supcrius ait propheta de eo: Qui habitat in adjutorio Altissimi (Ibid., 1), quod non cum possit invadere, nec sagitta quæ volat per diem, nec negotium quod perambulat in tenebris,. nec ruina aut daemonium meridianum, ct cætera.","english":"XX. You say: With eyes closed you passed through the ambushes of the enemy, you who say that human will can acquire something of virtue, not considering how great the losses God suffers daily, how great the ruins of chastity are brought about by the devil, and how great are the lusts of crimes. If you saw these things, we would not need to labor to show you the losses of virtues and the victories of vices. Tell me, I beg, what losses God suffers daily: does he suffer them with the devil conquering, or with man despising? If you say with the devil conquering, we pour back your blasphemy upon your own head; if with man despising, our assertion has won the victory. For the devil is neither lord, nor creator, nor father. But God deigns to be our lord, and creator, and father. He joined his most victorious body to our body, that he might shut out the frailty of our body. He mingled his blood with our blood, that the fervor of our inborn heat might be quieted, tempered by the divine blood. By the power of his chrism he anointed us, that we might conquer the devil struggling against us. He promises that he will protect us with the shield of his good will: He who hopes in me, he says, I will deliver him, I will protect him, because he has known my name (Ps. 90:14). Hence also the prophet says above concerning him: He who dwells in the help of the Most High (Ibid., 1), which he cannot invade, neither the arrow that flies by day, nor the business that walks in darkness, nor ruin or the noonday demon, and the rest.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":158,"ref":"p158","source":"Unde his indiciis declaratur diabolus tunc habere virtutem, cum nos invenerit negligentes, cum nos invenerit dormientes in fide. Amnis enim qui ex fideinvocaverit nomen Domini, hic salvus erit (Rom. 13). Verum quid prodest, quod humanum genus ostendimus per Dei victoriam a diabolo liberali, et suo vitio homines capi? Additur nobis alter oppositionis articulus. Dicit enim liber eorum:\n\nXXI. Per prævaricationem primi hominis periit ab hominibus libertas arbilrii. Nos autem dicimus: Per prævaricationem primi hominis manifestata est libertas arbitrii, quæ potuit hominem facere velle quod Deus non vult. Si ergo periit libertas arbitrii, unde sumus homines peccatores? Aliunde non sumus peccatores, nisi quia volumus quod Deus non vult, et nolumus quod Deus vult; committimus quod fleriprohibet, et facere nolumus quod praecepit adimpleri. Per quid hoc tantum mali facimus, si nolentes haec facimus? Alius est qui per nos operatur; ipsi ergo debuit lex dari, non mihi. Non lex gladio datur, no occidat hominem; sed illi datur lex, qui per gladium jugulat. Gladius enim, sive occidat, sive non occidat, idem est; nec laudem enim quiescendo acquirit, nec occidendo culpam incurrit. Si ergo et nos agimur, non agimus; exclusi sumus a peccatis dum delinquimus, exclusi sumus a fide dum credimus. Hinc itaque superati ad calumniam convertuntur.","english":"From these indications it is declared that the devil has power at the time when he has found us negligent, when he has found us sleeping in faith. For everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord from faith, this one shall be saved (Rom. 13). But what does it profit that we have shown the human race to be freed from the devil by God's victory, and that men are captured by their own fault? Another article of opposition is added to us. For their book says:\n\nXXI. By the transgression of the first man, the freedom of the will perished from men. But we say: By the transgression of the first man, the freedom of the will was made manifest, which could make man will what God does not will. If, therefore, the freedom of the will perished, how are we men sinners? We are sinners from no other source than that we will what God does not will, and do not will what God wills; we commit what he forbids and are unwilling to do what he commands to be fulfilled. By what means do we do so great an evil, if we do these things unwillingly? It is another who works through us; therefore the law ought to have been given to him, not to me. The law is not given to the sword, lest it kill a man; but the law is given to him who slays by the sword. For the sword, whether it kills or does not kill, is the same; nor does it acquire praise by being at rest, nor incur guilt by killing. If, therefore, we too are acted upon and do not act, we are excluded from sins when we transgress, we are excluded from faith when we believe. Hence, therefore, being overcome, they turn to calumny.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":159,"ref":"p159","source":"Ait enim liber eorum:h Hæresem Pelagianam iterum renovatis, cum dicitisper libertatem arbitrii homines finem ponere posse peCcatis. Pelagium i non hinc corvdemnavitEcclesia. Ohjicit enim ei quod in tantum exaggerasset libertatem arbitrii, ut Dei adjutorium recusaret.\n\nXXII. Nos autem dicimus: Por libertatem arbitrii peccatum omne committimus; ab omni autem peccato per Dei gratiam liberamur consensu arbitrii. Deum autem gratiam suam non petentibus non dare, ex isto loco docuimus quod ipse ait: Petite et accipietis (Matth. VII, 1; Joan. XVI, 24.). Ostensum est nobis non petentibus quid petamus; ostensum est nobis non quaerentibus quid quæramus; ostensum est nobis non pulsantibus quid pulsemus. Si noluerimus petere, non accipiemus; si noluerimus quaerere, non inveniemus; si noluerimus pulsare, non aperietur nobis. Omnis enim qui petit accipit, et qui quærit invenit, et pulsanti aperietur (Matth. VII, 8). Libertas ilaque a arbitrii ita in nobis Viget, ut Deo posset obedire; ita infirmata est in nobis, ut etiam ipsum Deum possit contemnere, a quo ipsa libertas est data. Quæ utique ad hoc data est, ut de ea solus diabolus contemneretur. Si enim cessasset libertas arbilrii per prævaricationem primi hominis, cessasset utique lex, quænon potest loqui nisi illi qui eam potest et contemnere et audire.","english":"For their book says: You are renewing the Pelagian heresy again, when you say that by free will men can put an end to sins. The Church did not condemn Pelagius on this account. For it objects to him that he had exaggerated free will to such an extent that he refused the help of God.\n\nXXII. But we say: By free will we commit every sin; but from every sin we are freed by the grace of God with the consent of the will. That God does not give his grace to those who do not ask, we have taught from this passage where he himself says: Ask and you shall receive. It has been shown to us who do not ask what we should ask; it has been shown to us who do not seek what we should seek; it has been shown to us who do not knock what we should knock at. If we are unwilling to ask, we shall not receive; if we are unwilling to seek, we shall not find; if we are unwilling to knock, it shall not be opened to us. For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it shall be opened. Therefore free will is so vigorous in us that it can obey God; it has been so weakened in us that it can even despise God himself, by whom that very freedom was given. And it was given for this purpose, that by it the devil alone should be despised. For if free will had ceased through the transgression of the first man, the law would certainly have ceased, which cannot speak except to him who can both despise it and hear it.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":160,"ref":"p160","source":"Sed non cessavit lex, sive naturalis, per quam placuit Abel, Enoch, Noe, Sem et Japhet, Melchisedech, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph et cæteri. Hi placuerunt, legis utique naturalis instinctu. Econtra displicuerunt, sive ii quos diluvii charybdis bibit, sive ii quos sulturea flamma consumpsit. Nec illi enim placuerant, nec isti displicuerant, si lex naturalis non exstitisset, et libertas in eis arbitrii non fuisset. Quid ergo agimus? calumniam non evadimus, nisi Dei solam gratiam dixerimus. Latrat enim liber eorum dicens:\n\nXXIII. Excluditis gratiam per libertatem arbitrii. Aut enim libero arbitrio liberamur, aut gratia Dci eripimur. Eligite quid dicatis. Si gratiæ totum datis, unum sumus; si libero arbitrio, sciatis nos vobis consentire non posse. Audite, calumniosi, et hoc quod timetis audite. Nos liberum arbitrium ibi dicimus esse,. ubi divina gratia consistit. Sine gratia enim Dei non est liberum, sed caplivum arbitrium. Ubi enim spiritus Domini, ibi libertas (II Cor. III, 17). Nos libertalem istam non hominis superbiæ tradimus, sed gratiae Dei et ejus gloriae definimus: quæ tantum concedit ut plus faciartt alii quam præcepit bonum, ex quo etiam plus faciant alii quam prohibet malum. Manus enim quæ exspoliare potest vestitum quod prohibet Deus, haec vestire potest nudum quod præcepit Deus. Quid tu dicis?","english":"But the law did not cease—whether the natural law, through which Abel, Enoch, Noah, Shem and Japheth, Melchizedek, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph and the rest pleased God. These pleased him, to be sure, by the instinct of the natural law. Conversely, others displeased him—whether those whom the whirlpool of the flood swallowed, or those whom the flame of sulphur consumed. For neither would the former have pleased him, nor the latter displeased him, if the natural law had not existed, and if there had not been in them freedom of will. What then do we do? We do not escape their calumny, unless we say that God's grace alone is the cause. For their book barks, saying:\n\nXXIII. You exclude grace by freedom of will. For either we are freed by free will, or we are rescued by the grace of God. Choose what you say. If you give everything to grace, we are one; if to free will, know that we cannot agree with you. Listen, you slanderers, and hear this very thing that you fear. We say that free will exists there where God's grace is present. For without God's grace the will is not free but captive. For where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom (2 Cor. 3:17). We do not hand down this freedom to human pride, but we define it as belonging to God's grace and his glory: which grants so much that others do more good than he commanded, and likewise do more than he forbids evil. For the hand that can strip a man of his clothing, which God forbids, is the same hand that can clothe the naked, which God commands. What do you say?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":161,"ref":"p161","source":"una manus est quæ nudum vestivit, et quae vestitum exuit; culpatur cum exspo.Hiavit, quia vestire potuit; laudatur cum vestivit, quia potuit denudare. Tolle utriusque rei arbitrium liberum, et neque ex vitio culpam incurrit, neque ex virtute laudem acquirit. Ut autem dispungam tibi libertatem arbitrii, arbitrium in anima est, libertas in corpore. Libertas sine arbitrio non peccat, cum arbitrium sine libertate delinquat. Denique si aliquem furem tenueris clausum, libertatem ei furandi tulisti, arbitrium non tulisti; manus enim eius ligasti, non mentem. Si cæcus fiat aliquis, cum esset concupiscentiis deditus oculorum, libertas quidem oculorum ejus est vincta, arbitrium in suo jure permansit; animi enim arbitratu concupiscentiis exercetur. Unde et non mœchantem mœchum Christus appellat eum qui ad concupiscendum viderit mulierem (Matth. v, 28); arbitrium enim habet, licet non habeat libertatem. Fit per arbitrium suum sine facto reus; voluntas enim perfecta pro facti opere a justo judice reputatur; et implesse dicitur omnia, qui quod potuit fecit. Corpus enim prohibetur ab impossibilitate ejus rei, quia arbitrium animi non tenetur. Nunc ergo quid facit gratia? non tollit liberum arbitrium, sed curat, sed amplificat, sed ornat, sed instruit et exaltat. Non tamen nolentem, sed volentem exaltat Nisi enim ex fide volueris, et ex fide cucurreris, aliter a gratia liberari non poteris.","english":"It is one hand that clothed the naked man and stripped the clothed man. He is blamed when he has stripped, because he was able to clothe; he is praised when he has clothed, because he was able to strip. Remove the free exercise of choice in either case, and he neither incurs blame from vice nor acquires praise from virtue. But to set out for you the freedom of choice: choice is in the soul, freedom in the body. Freedom without choice does not sin, whereas choice without freedom does wrong. In short, if you hold some thief shut up, you have taken away his freedom to steal, but you have not taken away his choice; for you have bound his hands, not his mind. If someone becomes blind when he had been given over to the desires of the eyes, the freedom of his eyes is indeed bound, but his choice has remained in its own right; for by the judgment of the mind he exercises his desires. Therefore Christ calls him an adulterer who is not committing adultery—the one who has looked at a woman to desire her (Matt. 5:28)—for he has choice, though he does not have freedom. By his own choice he becomes guilty without the deed; for a perfected will is reckoned by the just judge in place of the work of the deed; and he is said to have fulfilled all things who has done what he could. For the body is prevented by the impossibility of the matter, because the choice of the mind is not held bound. Now, then, what does grace do? It does not take away free choice, but heals it, enlarges it, adorns it, instructs and exalts it. Yet it exalts not the unwilling but the willing. For unless you will by faith and run by faith, you cannot otherwise be set free by grace.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":162,"ref":"p162","source":"Certi ergo efficiamur, quod nos gratia non recusat dum delinquimus, sed nos recusamus gratiam quando peccamus. Unum enim hic e duobus censura judicantis attendit, aut gratiam recusantem, authominem contemnentem. Si enim gratia recusavit, hominem a peccato liberum fecit. Nunquid culpandus est qui non prandit apud eum qui eum a suo convivio recusaverit; et non potius miseratione dignus ostenditur, cum alios vocaverit et hunc recusaverit? Immanis crudelitas est, si prohibiius est pranderecum prandentibus; et cur non pranderit, ab eo qui eum simul prandere noluerit jubeatur occidi. Tandem aliquando liber vester, vanus effectus, concedere videtur libertatem arbitrii, ea tamen conditione, ut de mensuris agat, non de specie.\n\nXXIV. e Unde, inquit, illi major libertas arbitrii in bono, unde isti minor est, nisi quia Dei diapensatione censetur? In alio enim tenuem se exhibet gratia, in alio abundantem et largam, prout ipsa vult gratia, non prout nos volumus. Non tecum hic ego B concertor: hic te enim et Christus vincit et Paulus. Nam Christus dicit •: Qui plus diligit, plus illi dimittitur; qui minus diligit, minus (Luc. V!!, 47). Et Paulus asserit, dicens: Qui parce seminat, parce metet (II Cor. IX, 6). Non ergo est gratia per personarum acceptionem in Deo, sed per hominis dilectionem in mente; sive sit magna dileclio, sive sit parva. Quis enim plus diligens Deum, minus diU..","english":"Let us therefore be assured that grace does not reject us while we do wrong, but we reject grace when we sin. For here the judgment of the one who judges attends to one of two things: either grace rejecting, or man despising. For if grace has rejected, it has made man free from sin. Is he to be blamed who did not dine at the house of one who refused him from his own banquet; and is he not rather shown worthy of compassion, since he called others and refused this one? It is monstrous cruelty if one who has been forbidden is forbidden to dine with those who are dining; and why he did not dine, let him be ordered to be killed by the one who was unwilling for him to dine together. At last, at some time, your book, having been made empty, seems to grant freedom of will, yet on this condition, that it deal with measures, not with appearance.\n\nXXIV. Whence, he says, is there greater freedom of will in good for that one, whence is it less for this one, unless because it is reckoned by God's dispensation? For in one grace shows itself slender, in another abundant and generous, according as grace itself wills, not as we will. Here I do not contend with you: here Christ and Paul conquer you. For Christ says: He who loves more, more is forgiven him; he who loves less, less (Luke 7:47). And Paul asserts, saying: He who sows sparingly will reap sparingly (2 Cor 9:6). Therefore grace is not in God through respect of persons, but through the love of man in the mind; whether the love be great or small. For who is he who, loving God more, less...","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":163,"ref":"p163","source":"gitur a Deo? Immo, ut verius dicam, non diligens Deum a Dco diligitur. Qualiter autem diligi Deus possit, ipse Dominus edocet, dicens: Qui audit verba mea et facit ea, hic est qui diligit me (Joan. XIV, 21). Unde et discipulis suis ait: Si diligitis me, præcepta mea servate (Ibid., 15). Videamus itaque, homo, ipsam libertatem arbitrii quid faciat, ut Dei gratiam perfecte conquirat. Exinanit libertatem suam, et servum se efficit Dei. Quod autem nostro hæc arbilrio faciamus, ipse Apostolus edocet dicens: Nescitis quia cui vos servos exhibetis ad obediendum, servi estis ejus cui obeditis, sive iniquitatis ad peccatum, sive justitiæ ad sanctificationem (Rom. V!, 19)? Qui ergo se sub jugum miserit Dei, exinanivit sIn libertatem arbitrii, ut per libertatem divini arbitrii liberetur. Non tibi videtur exinanire libertatem arbitrii sui, qui sibi esurienti denegat panem, sitienti denegat polum, dormitanti denegat somnum? Sed in his dignus esse non poterit, nisi se voluntarium comprobaverit. Non enim ex tristitia, inquit Apostolus, nec ex necessitate, hilarem enim datorem diligit Deus (II Cor. II, 7). Unde et propheta dicit Deo: Voluntarie sacrificabo tibi (Ps. LIII, 8). Et iterum: Refloruit caro mea, inquit, et ex voluntate mea confitebor illi (Ps. XXVII, 7). De injusto autem legimus: Notuit intelligere ut bene ogeret (Ps. XXXV, 4).","english":"...by God? Nay, to speak more truly, the one who does not love God is loved by God. But how God can be loved, the Lord himself teaches, saying: He who hears my words and does them, this is the one who loves me (John 14:21). Whence also he said to his disciples: If you love me, keep my commandments (Ibid., 15). Let us therefore see, O man, what free will itself does, so that it may perfectly obtain the grace of God. It empties its own freedom, and makes itself a servant of God. But that we do these things by our own will, the Apostle himself teaches, saying: Do you not know that to whomever you present yourselves as servants to obey, you are servants of him whom you obey, whether of iniquity unto sin, or of justice unto sanctification (Rom 6:19)? Therefore he who has submitted himself to the yoke of God has emptied his freedom of will, so that through the freedom of the divine will he may be set free. Does it not seem to you that he empties the freedom of his own will, who denies bread to himself when hungry, denies a draught to himself when thirsty, denies sleep to himself when drowsy? But in these things he will not be able to be worthy, unless he has proven himself voluntary. For not from sorrow, says the Apostle, nor from necessity, for God loves a cheerful giver (2 Cor 9:7). Whence also the prophet says to God: I will sacrifice to you willingly (Ps 54:6). And again: My flesh has flourished again, he says, and from my own will I will confess to him (Ps 28:7). But of the unjust we read: He refused to understand how to do good (Ps 36:3).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":164,"ref":"p164","source":"Unde et beatus Jacob: Simeon, inquit, et Levi fratres consummaverunt iniquitatem ex voluntate sua (Gen. XLIX, 5, 6). Si ergo antequam vera et integra liberlas nostra veniret, Dominus Jesus Christus, a justus voluntarie sactificavit Deo, et ex voluntate sua confessus est, peccator ex voluntate deliquit; quanto magis nunc, instaurata npbis libertate per Christum, universa nostro jure sunt reddita, non natura dominante, ut Pelagius et Cœlestius definivit, non natura hominis dominante, sed Christi gratia condonante? Non suis viribus imputando, sed de Dei adminiculis præsumendo; non sibi aliquid usurpando, sed totum Dci gratiæ imputando? Totum, inquam, totum dixi; totum repeto, totum, sed bonum; malum autem ex nostro vitio, ex nostra negligentia, et ex nostra incurrimus vofuntate. Quid convertitis caput ad calumnias et Pelagii nobis dogma objicilis? Anathemamas omnes qui dicunt, adjotorio Dei sublato, posse hominem sine peccato esse si velit; anathemamus qui dicunt, nec per Adam mors, nec per Christum vita; anathemamus qui dicunt de duobus baptizatis qui nascitur baptismum indigere non posse; anathemamus qui dimot nantes non debere in remissionem peccatoram baptismatis Sanctificatione censeri; anathemamos omnia quæ in omnibus hæreticis damnat Eccledia; anathemamus et librum vestrum vobiscum, qui dicit:","english":"Hence also the blessed Jacob says: Simeon and Levi, brothers, accomplished iniquity out of their own will (Gen. 49:5-6). If therefore, before our true and whole liberty came, the Lord Jesus Christ, being just, sanctified himself to God voluntarily, and out of his own will confessed, while the sinner out of his own will sinned, how much more now, with our liberty restored through Christ, are all things rendered to our own right—not with nature ruling, as Pelagius and Caelestius defined, not with man's nature ruling, but with the grace of Christ forgiving? Not by imputing to our own strength, but by presuming on God's aids; not by usurping anything for oneself, but by imputing the whole to the grace of God? The whole, I say, I have said the whole; the whole I repeat, the whole—but the good; the evil, however, we have incurred from our own vice, from our own negligence, and from our own will. Why do you turn your head to calumnies and object to us the dogma of Pelagius? We anathematize all who say that, with the aid of God set aside, a man can be without sin if he wishes; we anathematize those who say that there is neither death through Adam nor life through Christ; we anathematize those who say that one born of two baptized persons cannot need baptism; we anathematize those who think that the baptized ought not to be reckoned by the sanctification of baptism for the remission of sins; we anathematize all things that the Church condemns in all heretics; we anathematize also your book with you, which says:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":165,"ref":"p165","source":"IXV. e In tantum vitiatam per prævaricationem Adæ hominis naturam agnovimus, ut instaurationem suam per Christum non in re sed in spe fuerit consecuta, dicente Apostolo: Spe salvi facti sumus; spes autem quæ ridetur, non est spes (Rom. VIII, 24). Si ergo a; e salvi facti sumus, adhuc rem in præsenti sæcolo non tenemus. Ideo denique baptizati iterum curnaliter concupiscunt, et illos, motus corporis patiuntur, quia spe, non re consecuti sunt instaurationis auxilium. Si enim re consecuti fuissent, post baptismatis gratiam non esset peccati nec possibilitas, nec voluntas, Verum quia virtus baptismatis tanta est, ut universa peccata deleat, pullutatio tamen peccatorum baptismaIi, unda non abluitur; inesse enim per Adam naturaliter perdocetur. Nam illa membra quæ in baptismatis hora confusione carent, postea confusionem recipiunt, qua ritant ubique conspectum, et quærunt pudendo secretum. Quas enim Deus membra fecerat, prævaricatio in pudenda convertit; et non dicuntur membra, sed pudenda. Quæ pudenda in puncto illo baptismatis menabra fiunt, sed mox iterum pudenda efficiuntur ex membris. Non enim re, sed spe instaurati sunt. Concupi.. scentia enim carnis quOe per prævaricationem Adm regnat in corpore tanquam lex peccati, iterum sibi vindicat baptizatum, totumque anitnum ejus conatur evertere.","english":"We have recognized the nature of man so corrupted by Adam's transgression that its restoration through Christ has been obtained not in reality but in hope, as the Apostle says: We have been saved in hope; but hope that is seen is not hope (Rom. 8:24). If therefore we have been saved in hope, we do not yet hold the reality in the present age. For this reason, even after baptism, people again desire carnally and suffer the motions of the body, because they have obtained the help of restoration in hope, not in reality. For if they had obtained it in reality, after the grace of baptism there would be neither the possibility nor the will to sin. But because the power of baptism is so great that it wipes away all sins, yet the defilement of sins is not washed away by the wave of baptism; for it is clearly taught that it is present naturally through Adam. For those members which at the hour of baptism are free from shame afterward receive shame, by which they provoke the gaze everywhere and seek privacy through modesty. For the members that God had made, transgression turned into shameful parts; and they are not called members, but shameful parts. Those shameful parts at that moment of baptism become members, but soon again from members they are made shameful parts. For they have been restored not in reality but in hope. For the concupiscence of the flesh, which through Adam's transgression reigns in the body as the law of sin, again claims the baptized person for itself and strives to overthrow his entire mind.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":166,"ref":"p166","source":"Hæc est enim radix illius plagæ, quam Christus salvavit; aalvavit autem sic, sicut Apostolus dicit: Spe salvi facti sumus. Et jubet nos animum ad invisibilia contemplanda transferre: nec de his quce videntur, præsumendo corruere. Et ideo dicit: Spes autem quæ videtur, non est spes; ne forte æstimarentur per baptismum ita tolli peccata, ut etiam radices ipsce peccatorum simul putarentur auferri. Motus enim ille pollutionis qui per prævaricationem naturam invasit, ita remanet in baptizato, sicut radix capilli cum fuerit novacula in superficie emundatus et rasus. Rasus enim est ut emundaretur tocus; non est eradicatus, ut ulterius non nasceretur. Si enim ex integro per baptismum omnis prævaricationis Adas fragilitas tolleretur, baptizatiomnes nullo caloris motu traherentur ad crimi. na, nullus sordibus inquinaretur humanis, nullus concupiscentiæ stimulo pungeretur; sed quia spe salvi facti sumus, quod adhuc non videmus, per patientiam exspectamus. Veniet tempus, in quo neque nubant feminæ, neque viri uxores ducant, sed sint sicut angeli in cælis (Matth. XXII, 50). Cum enim corruptibile hoc induerit incorruptionem, et mortale hoc indice. rit immortalitatem, tunc fiet sermo qui scriptus est: Absorpta est mors in victoriam; ubi est, mors, victoria tua? ubi est stimulis tuus? Stimulus autem mortis peccatum est, virtus vero peccati lex.","english":"For this is the root of that wound which Christ healed; and he healed it in such a way as the Apostle says: We have been saved in hope. And he bids us transfer our mind to the contemplation of things invisible, and not to collapse by presuming on the things that are seen. And therefore he says: But hope that is seen is not hope; lest perhaps they should suppose that sins are so taken away through baptism that even the very roots of sins are thought to be removed at the same time. For that impulse of pollution which invaded nature through transgression remains in the baptized person just as the root of a hair remains when it has been cleansed and shaved on the surface with a razor. For it has been shaved so that the surface might be cleansed; it has not been uprooted so that it might not grow again thereafter. For if the whole frailty of Adam's transgression were entirely taken away through baptism, all the baptized would be drawn to crimes by no impulse of heat, no one would be stained with human filth, no one would be pricked by the sting of concupiscence; but because we have been saved in hope, what we do not yet see we await through patience. The time will come in which women shall not marry, nor men take wives, but they shall be as the angels in the heavens (Matthew 22:30). For when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: Death is swallowed up in victory; where, O death, is your victory? where is your sting? But the sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":167,"ref":"p167","source":"Tunc dicemus: Deo gratias, qui dedit nobis victoriam per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum (I Cor. xv, - 57). * Hic est libellus vester, quem nulli datis legendum nisi sub sacramento. Vide ne prodas, ne des legendum imperitis; regnum Dei paucorum est. In hoc apparet quia te Deus prædestinavit ad vitam, si hunc libellum tu sicut tuam animam serves. Maxima pars mułiercularum a vobis hunc meretur libellum accipere. Denique quæ eum prodidit, femina corpore sed vir animo, dum istum a vobis libellum sub sacramenlo suscepisset, scriptum lcgens exhorruit, et his quos catholicos noverat examinandum dedit. Legimus eum et nos, quod semper timuistis; et, juvante Domino, blasphemias ejus evidenter detegentes; omnes catholicos admonemus ut hunc libellum fugiant, exsecrentur, et æterno anathemate feriant. Damnabilitas enim ejus eo usque pervenit,,ut universamysteria Salvatoris evacuet. Dicit baptisinum Christi fructum ullum penilus, dum traditur, non habere. Spes, inquit qu;e videtur non est spes, id est, remissio peccatorum: et quidquid in praesenti promittitur, non est, quia in futuro servatur; hic tamen, id est in hoc mundo, non accipitur. Dicit enim Apostolus: Spes quæ videtur non est spes. Ergone hoc Apostolus ad istum vestrum sensum dixil?","english":"Then we shall say: Thanks be to God, who has given us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. This is your little book, which you give to no one to read except under an oath. See that you do not betray it, see that you do not give it to the unlearned to read; the kingdom of God belongs to few. In this it appears that God has predestined you to life, if you keep this little book as you keep your own soul. The greatest part of the little women among you deserves to receive this little book. Finally, she who betrayed it—a woman in body but a man in spirit—when she had received this little book from you under oath, reading what was written she shuddered, and gave it to those whom she knew to be catholics to be examined. We too have read it, which you have always feared; and, with the Lord's help, plainly exposing its blasphemies, we admonish all catholics to flee this little book, to execrate it, and to strike it with eternal anathema. For its damnability has reached such a point that it empties out all the mysteries of the Savior. It says that the baptism of Christ has no fruit at all while it is administered. Hope, it says, which is seen is not hope, that is, the remission of sins; and whatever is promised in the present is not, because it is reserved for the future; here, however, that is, in this world, it is not received. For the Apostle says: Hope which is seen is not hope. Did the Apostle then say this in accordance with that sense of yours?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":168,"ref":"p168","source":"Prius itaque beati Pauli cum debita reverentia sensum exponemus; et ita demum per partes concidemus pedes libri vestri, in his quæ conclusio ejus circa nos finem se autumat invenisse perfectum. Apostolus, consolationem filiis Dei afferens, dicit, ut in istomundo nihil quærant, ne forte considerantes impios et iucredulos prosperis successibus gratulari, se vero affligi, dicerent, Ecce hi peccatores et abundantes in sæculo obtinuerunt divitias (Ps. LXXII, 12); nos autem usque in hac hora, et esurimus, et sitimus, et nudi sumus, et colaphis cædimur (I Cor. iv, 11). Tollens ergo præsentis saeculi considerationem, gaudia futura promittit. Et quamvis magnis, inquit, passionibus fatigemini, non sunt tamen condignæ passiones hujus temporis ad futuram gloriam quae revelabitur in nobis (Rom. VIII, 18). Et ideo, spe, inquit, salvi facti sumus (Ibid., 24). Nota tibi salvi facti: non dixit salvandi, sed salvi facti. Praeteritum fecit salutis; dum credidimus, salvi facti sumus. Quare spe? Speramus enim nos resurgere, non enim jam resurreximus. Quia ergo speramus nos pro bonis præmia accepturos, et pro malis gehennæ posse incurrere supplicia; sperantes bona et timentes mala, salvi facti sumus: et qui eramus filii iræ, facti sumus filii Dei (Ephes. II, 3). Unde et alius ApostoIus clamat: Charissimi, filii Dei sumus ( I Joan. III, 2).","english":"Therefore first we shall expound the meaning of the blessed Paul with due reverence; and then at last we shall cut off, piece by piece, the feet of your book, in those matters in which its conclusion claims to have found its perfect end concerning us. The Apostle, bringing consolation to the sons of God, says that in this world they should seek nothing, lest perhaps, considering that the impious and unbelieving rejoice in prosperous successes while they themselves are afflicted, they should say: Behold, these are sinners and those abounding in the world have obtained riches (Ps. 72:12); but we, even to this hour, both hunger and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted (1 Cor. 4:11). Therefore, setting aside the consideration of the present age, he promises future joys. And although, he says, you are wearied with great sufferings, yet the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the future glory that shall be revealed in us (Rom. 8:18). And therefore, he says, by hope we have been saved (ibid., 24). Note for yourself: \"we have been saved\"—he did not say \"we are to be saved,\" but \"we have been saved.\" He made it a past matter of salvation; when we believed, we have been saved. Why \"by hope\"? For we hope to rise again, for we have not yet risen. Therefore, because we hope that we shall receive rewards for good things, and that for evil things we can incur the punishments of hell—hoping for good things and fearing evil things—we have been saved; and we who were children of wrath have been made children of God (Eph. 2:3). Hence also another Apostle cries out: Beloved, we are the sons of God (1 John 3:2).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":169,"ref":"p169","source":"Non ergo adoptio filiorum promittitur in baptismo, sed confertur. Vos autem de hoc quod jam accepimus, dicitis: Spes quæ videtur, non est spes. Nobis spes tota videtur in baplismatis sanctificatione constare; crgo (;uod nobis videtur spes, non est spes; In chrismatis Christi unctione spci nostræ cernimus firmamentum; ergo spes quæ videtur non est spes. Corpus Christi spem nostram videmus; ergo spes quae videtur non est spes. Sanguinem Christi redemptionem nostram attendimus; ergo spes quae videtur non est spes. Evacuastis omnia sacramenta, exinanistis mysteria, et quasi fidi et idonei metatores Antichristi, locum ei ubi possit succedere ejectis nobis ab aliquibus præparatis. Nam hæc quæ Apostolus de mundi istius gaudiis dicit: Spes quæ videtur non est spes, vos ea ad divina mysleria transmigraslis. Quod ille de caducis rebus et labentibus memorat, hoc vos etiam ipsi sacro baptismati ascripsistis. Non habeamus partem vobiscum in æternum, nec sensus noster ultra bis blasphemiis inquinetur.","english":"Therefore adoption as sons is not promised in baptism, but conferred. But you say concerning what we have already received: \"A hope that is seen is not hope.\" To us the whole of hope seems to consist in the sanctification of baptism; therefore what seems to us to be hope is not hope. In the anointing of Christ's chrism we discern the firmament of our hope; therefore a hope that is seen is not hope. We see the body of Christ as our hope; therefore a hope that is seen is not hope. We regard the blood of Christ as our redemption; therefore a hope that is seen is not hope. You have emptied out all the sacraments, you have made void the mysteries, and, as it were, faithful and fit surveyors of Antichrist, you have prepared a place for him to succeed us once we have been cast out by certain persons. For these things which the Apostle says about the joys of this world—\"a hope that is seen is not hope\"—you have transferred to the divine mysteries. What he mentions concerning fleeting and slipping things, this you have ascribed even to holy baptism itself. May we have no part with you for eternity, nor let our understanding be defiled any further by these blasphemies.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":170,"ref":"p170","source":"XXVI. Ideo, inquiunt, baptizati iterum polluuntur, et carnaliter concupiscunt, quia spe non re consecuti sunt inataurationis auxilium. Nos aulem sic a spem tendimus ad futura præmia, ut in præsenti quod accepimus non negemus. Nos enim meretur consequi beneficia, qui non confitetur accepta. Si quod accepisti jam denegas, confutaris ingratus. Ergo si adhuc non estis gratiam consecuti, sed consecuturi estis, quid nobiscum clanculo communicatis? Exspectate alterum Christi corpus, alterum Christi sanguinem; istum enim non in re, sed in spe esse jactatis.\n\nXXVII. Si enim re, inquiunt, consecuti essemus, post baptismatis gratiam non esset peccati nec pouibilitas, nec voluntas. e Ideo ergo vultis ostendere baptismatis gratiam non rem contulisse, quia iterum post baptisma possumus et velle malum, et operari malum. Et cui habebat dari lex Dei, si possibilitas mali fuisset ablata? Aut quis de custodia mandatorum Dei praemium peteret, si prævaricari non posset sicut nec mutus de taciturnitate, nec spado de virginitate laudatur. Carent enim laude in bono, quibus ad malum transitus denegatur. Nos ergo dicimus possibilitatem mali bonam esse his qui eam contemnunt. Dabo his singulis titulis breve responsum. Potuit quis exspoliare vestitos: ecce malum potuit; sed quia noluit, facta est possibilitas mali bona, qui eam consilio prudentiore contempsit.","english":"XXVI. Therefore, they say, the baptized are again defiled and desire carnally, because they have obtained the help of renewal not in reality but in hope. But we so stretch toward future rewards in hope that we do not deny what we have received in the present. For he deserves to obtain benefits who does not confess having received them. If you deny what you have received, you are refuted as ungrateful. Therefore, if you have not yet obtained grace, but are going to obtain it, why do you communicate with us in secret? Wait for another body of Christ, another blood of Christ; for you boast that this one is present not in reality but in hope.\n\nXXVII. For if we had obtained it in reality, they say, after the grace of baptism there would be neither the possibility nor the will of sin. Therefore you wish to show that the grace of baptism did not confer the reality, because after baptism we can again both will evil and do evil. And to whom was the law of God to be given, if the possibility of evil had been taken away? Or who would seek a reward for keeping the commandments of God, if he could not transgress, just as neither a mute man is praised for silence, nor a eunuch for virginity. For those who are denied passage to evil lack praise in good. We therefore say that the possibility of evil is good for those who despise it. I will give a brief answer to each of these points. Someone could have despoiled those who were clothed: behold, he could do evil; but because he was unwilling, the possibility of evil became good for him, who by a wiser counsel despised it.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":171,"ref":"p171","source":"Potuit quis creditam sibi pecuniam rapere, potuit adulteria perpetrare: ecce possibilitas mali; et qui eam contempsit, ipsa possibilitas eum fecit tam de pecunia non Curata laudari, quam coronari de castitate servata. Diximus unum titulum, id est de possibilitate mali, quod bona sit his qui eam contempserit. Nunc videamus quomodo e contrario possibilitas boni, mala in his qui eam contempserint. Habet quispiam pecunias positas: ecce possibilitas boni, potest enim cunctis necessitatem patientibus subvenire. Hanc autem possibilitatem boni dum contempserit, efficitur possibilitas mala, et tam mala ut radix malorum omnium comprobetur (I Tim. v!, 10). Verum quid agimus? Baptismatis nobis status in pcriculo ponitur, et nos de avaritiæ veneno tractamus. Omnibus noturo est avaritiæ crimen satis esse gravissimum; baptismatis autem gratiam cxinaniri ab hominibus perfidis, nuper coepit innotescere, nuper coepit catholicis propalari.","english":"Someone could have seized money entrusted to him, could have committed adulteries: behold the possibility of evil; and the one who despised it—that very possibility made him as much praised for not having cared for the money as crowned for having preserved chastity. We have spoken of one heading, that is, concerning the possibility of evil, that it is good for those who have despised it. Now let us see how, on the contrary, the possibility of good is evil in those who have despised it. Someone has money laid up: behold the possibility of good, for he can come to the aid of all who suffer need. But when he has despised this possibility of good, the possibility is made evil, and so evil that it is proven to be the root of all evils (1 Tim. 6:10). But what are we doing? The state of our baptism is placed in danger, and we are treating of the poison of avarice. It is known to all that the crime of avarice is grave enough; but that the grace of baptism is emptied out by faithless men has only recently begun to become known, only recently begun to be disclosed to catholics.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":172,"ref":"p172","source":"XXVIII. Aiunt namque per baptismum ita tolli peccatum, ut capillum novacula erasum. Rasus enim est, inquiunt, ut emundaretur locus, non erudicatus est, ne ulterius nasceretur. Si enim ex integro omnis prævaricationis Adæ fragilitas tolleretur, baptizati omnes nullo caloris motu traherentur ad crimina, nullo concupiscentiæ stimulo pungerentur. Hinc ergo cxinanitis baptismatis sacrosancta mysteria, quia eoncupiscentia T ut ipsi dicitis, lex peccati est, et ipsa sibi iterum vindicat baptizatum. De hac ergo concupiscentia si fueritis exclusi, integra erit in baptismo et peccatorum remissio et vera consolatio gratiarum. Gratiarum autem ideo pluraliler posui, quia cum una sit gratia, ut vitis una palmitibus pluralis efficitur, et tot vites dicuntur, quot fuerint propagines de una vite compressae. Datur ergo ex uno baptismatis fonte in præsenti peccatorum remissio, et regnum promittitur in futuro; efficitur filius hominis filius Dei; fit adoptione filius; fit consors regni; fit civis ex advena; fit ingenuus qui servus exstiterat inimici; fit locuples qui fuerat ante mendicus; et qui fuerat dudum ignobilis, incipit esse et illustris et magnus. Sed ista omnia evacuat liber vester, et dicitis","english":"XXVIII. For they say that sin is thus removed through baptism, as a hair is shaved off with a razor. For, they say, it is shaved so that the place may be cleansed, not so that it may not grow again. For if the whole frailty of Adam's transgression were entirely taken away, all the baptized would be drawn to crimes by no impulse of heat, would be stung by no goad of concupiscence. Hence, therefore, the sacred mysteries of baptism are emptied out, because concupiscence—as you yourselves say—is the law of sin, and it claims the baptized person for itself again. If, therefore, you were excluded from this concupiscence, both the remission of sins and the true consolation of graces would be complete in baptism. But I have put \"graces\" in the plural for this reason, because although grace is one, as one vine is made plural by its branches, and as many vines are said to be as there are shoots pressed from one vine. Therefore, from the one font of baptism there is given in the present the remission of sins, and the kingdom is promised in the future; a son of man is made a son of God; he is made a son by adoption; he is made a sharer in the kingdom; he is made a citizen from a stranger; he is made free who had been a slave of the enemy; he is made rich who had before been a beggar; and he who had long been ignoble begins to be both illustrious and great. But your book empties out all these things, and you say","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":173,"ref":"p173","source":"XXIX. a Si darentur quæ promittuntur in baptismo, nullus post baptismatis undam concupiscentice stimulo pungeretur. Videamus ergo utrumnam hæc concupiscentia, sicut dicitis, lex peccati sit. Nos concupiscentiam dicimus esse rem naturalis certaminis, et hanc dicimus ad propagationem hominum a Deo ereatore visceraliter esse firmatam. Adhuc enim primi homines nondum de praevaricationis ligno gustaverant, quando eos benedixit Deus dicens: Crescite et multiplicamini, et replete terram (Gen. I, 28). Qui ergo ante peccatum benedicendo genus hominom multiplicari jussit, ipse sine dubio huie naturæ per quod propagari posset inseruif. Dispar etenim sexus multiplicari minime potuisset, si incrementa naturalis concupiscentiæ non haberet. Non est bonum, ait Dominus, esse hominem solum; faciamus ci adjutorium (Gen. n, 18). Hoc adjutorium disparis sexus ad consolandum vultis esse factum a Domino, an ad generandum? Si enim concupiscentia mala est quae materia generationis ostenditur, constat secundum vos a Deo mulierem non ad adjutorium boni, sed ad occasionem factam esse peceati. Quod si adjutorium mulieris, non ad reparationem, sed ad consolationem nescio quam dicatis fuisse concessum, dispar sexus sine causa est conditus ab eo, de quo legimus quod omnia in sapientia fecerit (Ps. cui, 24).","english":"XXIX. If what is promised in baptism were given, no one after the wave of baptism would be stung by the goad of concupiscence. Let us see, then, whether this concupiscence is the law of sin, as you say. We say that concupiscence is a matter of natural contest, and we say that it was firmly established from the depths by God the Creator for the propagation of men. For the first men had not yet tasted of the tree of transgression when God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth (Gen. 1:28). He therefore who before sin, by blessing, commanded the human race to be multiplied, undoubtedly implanted in this nature that by which it might be propagated. For the disparate sex could by no means have been multiplied if it did not have the increase of natural concupiscence. It is not good, says the Lord, for man to be alone; let us make him a helper (Gen. 2:18). Do you wish this helper of the disparate sex to have been made by the Lord for consolation, or for generation? For if concupiscence is evil, which is shown to be the matter of generation, it follows according to you that woman was made by God not for a helper of good, but as an occasion of sin. But if you say that the helper of woman was granted not for reparation but for some consolation I know not what, then the disparate sex was created without cause by him of whom we read that he made all things in wisdom (Ps. 103:24).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":174,"ref":"p174","source":"Verum quia Testamenti veleris forte vos auctoritas non tenet, de primis hominibus quid ipse Dominus noster Jesus Christus dixerit auscultate. Qui fecit, inquit, masculum et feminam benedixit eos et dixit: Propter hoc relinquet homo patrem et matrem, et adhærebit uxori suæ, et erunt duo in carne una (Matth. XIX, 4-6). Et his dictis adjunxit: Quod ergo Deus junxit, homo non separet. A Deo igitur factos, a Deo benedictos, a Deo legimus esse conjunctos.\n\nXXX. e Et miror qua fronte concupiscentiam istam, per quam conjugia celebrantur, dicatis a diabolo esse humano generi inflictam. Quis enim dubitet rem malam, si tamen mala est, a Deo bono bomini non potuisse conferri? Si enim a Deo est data, bona esse dignoscitur; si autem mala est, constat a diabolo esse infusam. Sic enim dicit liber vester:\n\nXXXI. Quæ Deus membra fecit, illi prævaricando pudenda fecerunt. Si hoc non est in membris quod Deus condidit, et super fabricam Dei inimicus apparuit, et Deo invito fecit creaturam ejus alterum ordinem continere, non quem ipse instituit, maledictæ sunt nuptiæ, et ex maledictione universa humani generis massa veniens diabolo auctore subsistit. Unum vobis eligite e duobus. Aut bona est generatio homiais, et bona est concupiscentia; aut malae sunt nuptiæ, et iniqua concupiscentia.","english":"But perhaps the authority of the Old Testament does not hold you; then listen to what our Lord Jesus Christ himself said concerning the first human beings. He who made them, he says, made them male and female, and blessed them and said: For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh. And to these words he added: What therefore God has joined, let no man separate. We read, then, that they were made by God, blessed by God, and joined together by God.\n\nXXX. And I marvel with what boldness you say that this concupiscence, through which marriages are consummated, was inflicted on the human race by the devil. For who would doubt that a bad thing—if indeed it is bad—could not have been conferred by a good God upon a good man? For if it was given by God, it is recognized to be good; but if it is bad, it is evident that it was infused by the devil. For thus says your book:\n\nXXXI. The members that God made, they made shameful by their transgression. If what God created is not in the members, and the enemy has appeared over God's handiwork, and against God's will has made his creature contain another order than the one he himself established, then marriage is accursed, and the whole mass of the human race, coming from that curse, subsists with the devil as its author. Choose for yourselves one of the two: either human generation is good, and concupiscence is good; or marriages are evil, and concupiscence is wicked.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":175,"ref":"p175","source":"Emendate ergo Ecclesiae regulam; damnate quod intoto orbe fuit sacerdotes, nuptiarum initia benedicentes, consecrantes et in Dei mysteriis sociantes. Miror qua fronte intratis ecclesiam, ubi quidquid agitur contra vestras sectas venire cognoscitis. Negatis itaque Deum hanc, unde nascimur, dedisse concupiscentiam. Ergo non sumus creatura ejus, si non est ejus creatura concupiscentia conjugalis. Tollite enim hanc, quam vosdicitis legem esse peccati, et videamus quis adhaerere possit uxori. Sed qui dederat virtutem seminis in benedictionem, ipse ob multiplicandam sobolem concupiscentiae inseruit charitatem, et amari voluit quod multiplicare constituit. Incrementum enim est generis concupiscentia naturalis. Quod si per hanc, ut dicitis, omniS constat esse causa peccati, ipse crimen creavit in genere, qui posteritatem multiplicari voluit per amorem, et super paternæ pietatis jura diligi præcepit uxorem. Denique ipse Dominus noster Jesus cum dicit: Quod Deus conjunxit, homo non separet (Matth. xix, 6), tale est quasi qui diceret: Odisse tibi uxorem non licet, quam me auctore amare coepisti. Zelabatur enim con. junctionem a se factam odiis e jugalibus maculari. Rerum nova perversitas! cum a Deo puniatur uxoris odium, damnatur ab hominibus concupiscentia maritorum. Sed justus Judex non damnat desiderium naturale, qui, ut multiplicaret prolem, ideo inseruit charitatem.","english":"Correct, then, the rule of the Church; condemn what throughout the whole world priests have done—blessing the beginnings of marriages, consecrating them, and joining them in the mysteries of God. I am amazed at the boldness with which you enter the church, where you know that whatever is done is contrary to your sects. You therefore deny that God gave this desire from which we are born. Then we are not his creature, if conjugal desire is not his creature. For take away this thing, which you say is the law of sin, and let us see who can cleave to a wife. But he who had given the power of seed in blessing, himself implanted love in desire for the multiplying of offspring, and willed that to be loved which he established to be multiplied. For natural desire is the increase of the race. But if, as you say, every cause of sin consists in this, then he himself created the crime in the race, who willed that posterity be multiplied through love, and commanded a wife to be loved beyond the rights of paternal affection. Finally, our Lord Jesus himself, when he says, What God has joined together, let not man put asunder (Matthew 19:6), it is as if he were saying: You are not permitted to hate your wife, whom you began to love with me as author. For he was jealous for the union made by himself, lest it be defiled by the hatreds of married couples. What a strange perversity of things! When hatred of a wife is punished by God, the desire of husbands is condemned by men. But the just Judge does not condemn natural desire, who, in order to multiply offspring, therefore implanted love.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":176,"ref":"p176","source":"Nam cum de conjugio et repudio tractaretur, tunc Dominus istam dictavit sententiam, dicens: Quod Deus junxit, homo non separet. Hoc autem ideo dixit, ut specialiter nuptiarum conjunctionem ex Deo esse monstraret. Nec enim esse potuit, aut sine conjunctione commixtio, aut absque commixtione conjunclio. Si non ex creatura factoris, sed ex peccato, inquiunt, concupiscentia maritalis; ergo secundum vos Deus hoc in benedictione conjunxil quod diabolus per praevaricationem inseruit. Quod si itaest, non fuit adversarius sed adjutor Dei, si quos Deus in carne una esse voluit, per concupiscentiam inseparabiles fecit, et quod ille jussit augeri et crescere, hic per quod hoc. ipsum quod jusserat ut impleretur invenit. O quam inCelix impietas est a Prædestinatis inventa, ut ex prævaricatione dicatur evenisse hominis, quod est ex benedictione Creatoris insertum! Hanc vos dicitis legem peccati; sed hanc nos legem generis comprobamus, quam vos criminis accusatis; et hanc nos dicimus causam essevirtutum, quam vos vultis ostendere materiam vitiorum. Nam cum ejus adjutorium faciat parentes fecundos in so. bole, hujus certamen et continentes præstat et virgi* nes gloriosos. Et ne alicubi hujus esse æstimes detrimentum, majora repugnando quam adjuvando largilur; quia dum adjuvat, fructum exhibet generis; dum repugnat, confert præmium castitatis.","english":"For when marriage and divorce were being discussed, the Lord then dictated that sentence, saying: What God has joined, let man not separate. He said this so as to show specifically that the joining of marriage is from God. For neither could there be intercourse without union, nor union without intercourse. If marital desire is not from the creature of the Maker but from sin, they say—then, according to you, God joined in blessing what the devil inserted through transgression. But if that is so, he was not an adversary but a helper of God, if those whom God willed to be one flesh he made inseparable through desire; and what God commanded to be increased and to grow, the devil found the very means by which what God had commanded might be fulfilled. O how unhappy is the impiety invented by the Praedestinati, that it should be said that what was implanted by the blessing of the Creator came about from the transgression of man! This you call the law of sin; but we prove it to be the law of kind, which you accuse of crime; and this we say is the cause of virtues, which you wish to show as the material of vices. For while its aid makes parents fruitful in offspring, its struggle renders both the continent and virgins glorious. And lest you think there is any harm in it anywhere, it bestows greater things by resisting than by helping; because while it helps, it brings forth the fruit of kind; while it resists, it confers the reward of chastity.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":177,"ref":"p177","source":"Illic sine culpa operatur, hic exercet pugnam cum munere. Tolle concupiscentiam, et cessant conjugia; tolle concu; iscentiam, et cessant praemia castitatis. Quale hoc, rogo, malum est, quod duplicis boni causa esse monstretur; quod alios in generationis gaudio exhibet, alios in triumpho virtutis? Alii enim pcr eam operantur licite, alii per eam dimicant gloriose. Quod si etiam in omnibus hæc dicitur esse peccatum, constat et conjuges, et continentes, et virgines per hanc esse damnandas; omnibus enim inesse cognoscitur per naturam. Nos non ita esse sentimus: sed laudamus eam ordinem suum custodientem, et Deo reverentiarn exhibentem. Et ideo in baptizatis etiam ipsa benedicitur, non fugatur, et ornatur magis quam tolliiur. Qui enim fontem aquae perennis nunc benedixit ut renasceremur spiritaliter, ipse tunc benedixit conjuges ut carnaliter nasceremur. Hunc ergo concupiscentiæ motum, sicut cætera alia membra, a Creatore suscepimus. Si ideo est concupiscentia malum, quia pcr hanc aliquoties adulterium geritur; ergo etmanus mala est, quia per hanc homicidium perpetratur. Accusate et linguam, quia per ipsam blasphematur Deus; damnate et pedem, quod hominem duxerit ad lupanar. Sic fit ut non sola concupiscentia, sed universa a vobis membra damnentur. Respondeam vobis ore catholico, quoniam sicut manus facta est, non ad.","english":"There it works without fault; here it exercises struggle with its gift. Remove concupiscence, and marriages cease; remove concupiscence, and the rewards of chastity cease. What kind of evil, I ask, is this, which is shown to be the cause of a twofold good; which displays some in the joy of generation, others in the triumph of virtue? For some act through it lawfully, others strive through it gloriously. But if this is said to be a sin even in all things, it is evident that both married people and the continent and virgins are condemned through it; for it is known to be present in all by nature. We do not hold that it is so; but we praise it as keeping its own order and showing reverence to God. And therefore even in the baptized it is itself blessed, not put to flight, and is adorned rather than taken away. For he who now blessed the fountain of ever-flowing water that we might be reborn spiritually, himself then blessed married couples that we might be born carnally. This motion of concupiscence, therefore, like the other members, we have received from the Creator. If concupiscence is therefore evil because adultery is sometimes committed through it, then the hand is also evil because murder is perpetrated through it. Accuse the tongue too, because God is blasphemed through it; condemn the foot too, because it has led a man to the brothel. Thus it comes about that not concupiscence alone, but all the members are condemned by you. I would answer you with a catholic mouth, that just as the hand was made, not for","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":178,"ref":"p178","source":"occidendum, sed ad operandum; et lingua non ad blasphemandum, sed ad gloriam Creatoris et laudem; et membra omnia, non ut vitiis serviant, sed divinis præceptis insistant; ita et concupiscentia naturæ est insita, non ad adulterandum, sed ad generandum: quam utique comprobavimus non modo conjugibus fecunditatis adjutorium, sed etiam continentibus palmam posse afferre virtutis. Vultis nosse bonam hanc esse concupiscentiam? mysteriis eam comparabo divinis. Non enim solum appetita mala, sed etiam bona præsumpta condemnant. Pone aliquem ante baptismatis illuminationem corpus Domini præsumpsisse; nunquid non iste de boni præsumptione damnabitur? Quod enim aliis collatum secundum ordinem confert salutem, hoc aliis damnationem facit extra ordinem, extra tempus acceptum. Similiter si usurpet laicus sacerdotium, vel si sacriOcium offerre præsumat; nunquid non iste de non concessa sibi potestate damnandus est? Quod si de tam sanctis rebus præsumptio reum facit, non actio, quanto magis in concupiscentia, non actio suum ordinem tenens, sed extra ordinem vadens, vocatur in crimine, et facit maledictum extra ordinem euntem, quem benedictum Creator in suo ordine collocavit? Quod si ita est, immo quia ita est, quid patimini, infelices, qui volentes exinanire baptismatis restaurationem, dicitis hanc concupiscentiam ideo remansisse, ne tota ex amussim homini peccata viderentur indulta?","english":"to be killed, but to be worked; and the tongue not for blaspheming, but for the glory and praise of the Creator; and all the members, not to serve vices, but to attend to the divine precepts; so also concupiscence is implanted by nature, not for committing adultery, but for generating: which we have certainly proved can bring not only the aid of fecundity to married couples, but even the palm of virtue to the continent. Do you wish to know that this concupiscence is good? I will compare it to the divine mysteries. For they condemn not only evils that are sought, but also goods that are presumed upon. Suppose someone has presumed upon the body of the Lord before the illumination of baptism; is not this man to be condemned for the presumption of a good? For what, conferred on others according to order, brings salvation, this same thing makes for damnation in others outside of order, outside of the accepted time. Similarly, if a layman usurps the priesthood, or if he presumes to offer the sacred office; is not this man to be condemned for a power not granted to him? But if presumption concerning such holy things makes one guilty, not the action, how much more in concupiscence is it not the action keeping its own order, but going outside of order, that is called into crime, and makes accursed that which goes outside of order, which the Creator placed as blessed in its own order? But if this is so, indeed because it is so, what do you suffer, unhappy ones, who, wishing to empty out the restoration of baptism, say that this concupiscence has therefore remained, lest all sins seem to have been forgiven to man by exact measure?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":179,"ref":"p179","source":"Cur non magis binc vobis debet esse suspicio, hanc non esse peccatum, quod in baptizatis hominibus non deleturt Si enim esset peccatum, utique sicut caetera tolleretur. Igitur qui per concupiscentiam baplismatis dona exinanire contenditis, conditorem concupiscentiæ diabolum esse monstratis: per quem docetis et Creatorem in sua operatione dum conderet defecisse, et baptismum tribuentem ex integro non potuisse succurrere. Habebunt vobiscum partem qui vos ad se libenter admittunt. Scriptum est enim reos fore, non solum qui iniquitatem faciunt, sed etiam eos quos eis constiterit consensisse (Rom. I, 32).","english":"Why should you not rather suspect from this that it is not a sin, since it is not destroyed in baptized persons? For if it were a sin, it would certainly be taken away like the rest. Therefore, you who strive to empty the gifts of baptism through concupiscence, show the devil to be the creator of concupiscence; through whom you teach both that the Creator failed in his operation when he created, and that the one granting baptism could not fully succor. Those who willingly admit you to themselves will have a share with you. For it is written that they shall be guilty, not only who do iniquity, but also those whom it is established consented to them (Rom. 1:32).","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]}]}