De Physicis Liber

The Book of Victorinus on Physical Matters. (From Mai's Collection, vol. iii.) A note placed before the book On Physical Matters by Mai. I have used three Vatican library codices for the preparation of this edition of the commentaries: namely, the Orthobonianus A, from the 14th century, from which the Orthobonianus B, from the 16th century, was copied; finally, the Vaticanus 3546, also from the 16th century, taken almost entirely from one or the other Orthobonianus. Therefore, there is almost no variety of readings in these mediocre commentaries; but the same lacunae exist in all the codices, the same corruption or ambiguity and obscurity of many passages; otherwise, the orthography is somewhat older in that earlier codex A, which the more recent scribes have altered here and there in other copies. Moreover, the content of all the codices is the same, namely, of both the published and unpublished writings of Victorinus. First comes Victorinus's commentary on the Apocalypse (or "commentarium," as it is more often written in these codices), with a preliminary letter of Jerome; this work, under the disputed name of Victorinus of Pettau, appears in the great Lyons Library of the Fathers, vol. iii, p. 414, ff. Next follow Victorinus's hitherto unpublished commentaries on the Epistles to the Galatians and to the Philippians. Then two small works of Victorinus are written, namely, On the Words of Genesis: "Evening and morning were one day," and Against the Two Principles of the Manichaeans; both of which were first brought to light by Sirmond.

Taken from the codex of the monastery of Herivallis: in which codex there also lay hidden commentaries of Victorinus on several of Paul's epistles; which Sirmondus indeed mentioned, and said they were more numerous and clearer in Victorinus's usual style (Works, vol. i, p. 345 ff.); yet he did not publish them: whether hindered by various occupations, or by the will of some person, or by some other chance. However, in the Vatican codices the little work against the Manichaeans lacks its first chapter; which the published text has: conversely, the published text lacks the closing clause, which I shall now set forth. For the edition ends with "to whom is honor and glory." But the Vatican codices have "to whom is honor and glory from all creatures, and before beginnings and after ends." Thus, therefore, from the true, which is, arises also the false being; as shadows from solids: for if the solid is not, neither does a shadow occur. In the codices there follows a hitherto unpublished commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians. The last item in the codices is the little work inscribed On Physical Matters; which indeed has not been published under Victorinus's name; but whether it exists under some other name, I do not know. It certainly seems to me to be Victorinus's, both because of the similarity of style, and because in these three Vatican codices no writing is present except Victorinus's. But if the name of Victorinus is not set before this writing, I say that the same name is not prefixed even to the two little works in these codices which I said were published by Sirmondus, and which are without doubt Victorinus's.

Therefore I have not allowed Victorinus's treatise on physics to be absent from this volume of mine. HERE BEGINS THE BOOK ON PHYSICS. I. The human mind, by natural judgment and impulse, recognizes God as the creator of all things. But the natural philosophers, admiring the things themselves—nay, stupefied and blinded by the wonder of the miracle—have forgotten the creator of the whole creation itself. For some, with the utmost audacity, contend that there is no God, but that nature generates everything by itself without God. Others, confessing both God and nature, set up nature as equal to God: they say that God indeed made the power of nature, because he is taught to have fashioned it by taking from nature; but then they say he suffers violence, because nature dissolves what he himself instituted. To these two opposing groups, both blasphemous, a response must be given: and first to those, I think, who are more audacious, whom we said deny God, who is manifested through his whole creation. For who doubts that the order which exists in nature was placed there by someone, not by itself? since the times give each other measures and succession: and the sun, although it is brighter and more effective and has the greatest power, yields to the lesser moon and the chorus of stars at night, nor can it always keep the day itself in the same span: the stars and the moon yield the span of power they had: spring, autumn, winter, and summer are expected and come in a fixed ordinal span.

And yet at those same times violence is sometimes inflicted, so that they do not always do what is expected; but, with something hindering, they exceed their measure. What need is there to prolong the discourse about the sea, the rivers, the land, the mountains, and the other elements, or about the crops that are born from these? Let us now approach those things which have been promised. II. The creature itself declares some maker of itself: for it does not, by generating itself, consume itself again; since the purpose of making is one thing, and the purpose of consuming another: and if the nature of things always brought forth everything from itself, it would also have preserved everything; especially since those who grant an eternal nature and without beginning are compelled also to grant it eternal power: which power, when it is found in those things which it generates, it is necessary that those things which are generated be also eternal and without beginning: which the daily birth of things proves to be false. And if it is said that the things themselves always exist, because they succeed one another; nevertheless, in individual things, the definition of birth and dissolution shows that, with individuals constrained in this defect, through that very individuality a defect is fitted to all. Thus all things which are made cannot be without a definition: for they begin and are completed, they grow and decay. From all of which, someone is found who inflicts violence upon nature, so that it always suffers that same defect.

III. Therefore, having understood the physical principles themselves, to which even human sense has always borne witness, we must now respond to those who posit such a creator as being so needy that he would not fabricate from his own resources, but by usurping another's; so that he is found to be not only needy but also unjust. For what business does he have with another's material, if he could have had his own? Thus they seem compelled to confess God, yet not to understand God's power, nor to marvel at him, who would fabricate from pre-existing material like a human being. To such an extent do they diminish his dignity, as they think, that they make matter itself equal to God through its birth, which suffers force from him and acts. For it suffers when it generates; it acts when it dissolves; and both are brought to nothing. Then it must be asked of them whether each preserves the property of its own birth? For if God is overcome, he lost his own proper power in his birth. Again, if matter is reformed by God, it lost the form of its birth. Afterwards, when with the work begun it did what it never did, so that, compelled by the fabricator, it generates; it received from him for a time some power in bringing forth. But if it received what it did not have, then the potential of eternity is excluded by the power it received. On account of this, I ask, how is it proven to be unborn, which did not persist in the form of its own birth?

Nor can there be in virtue, nor in the same substance which is changed in virtue, color, form, quality, all its powers, be substance: that which succumbs to so many vices and necessities cannot be unbegotten. Since it is and is proven not to be unbegotten, it remains that what it is be recognized as born and made. IV. And indeed it is discerned that not many gods, but one, made it. For reason does not permit that there be many gods on account of the diversity of things or of powers; since in one earth diverse kinds of herbs, grains, trees are produced, brought forth by diverse bodies, adorned with diverse colors, strengthened by diverse powers. Assuredly, our soul, though it is one, sets up diverse contrivances of arts, teachings of disciplines, forms of institutions, number of measures, elevations of sounds, effects of things, thoughts, judgments of reasons. But if in such very small things the effect of so many things is granted to one substance, how much more is that divinity, the parent of these very things themselves, recognized to be one, when the diversity of things could neither impose force upon nor take away power from such great majesty? Then it must be asked by what kinds they introduce many gods: whether they are all creators of all things, or of individual things? They cannot be creators of all things, because one suffices, as has been said. But if many gods are thought to do this, it is necessary to attribute to each single thing what they bestow.

Hence that which is derived from one is imperfect; and the introduction of the other things is lacking to matter, because what it has received from one is not sufficient. And matter is already better, which alone has received the powers of all things into itself. V. Next, individual things are not proven to be constituted by all things: stone does not subsist from the same things as a tree; nor a tree from those as a beast; nor the kind of fish from those as wild animals; nor serpents or beasts from those as man: but it is necessary to acknowledge that they have less and more. Hence the creators of all things are not known to be the creators of each individual thing, nor do they rule in all things. Since they have not conferred upon all things; nor, with different kinds introduced, nor with all things equal (for one differs from another), is it necessary that they be known to introduce less and more. From which introduction, a greater and lesser is found through their power: which distance does not allow a single divinity of nativity to be constituted for all things; from which, again, innativity pertains to one, the others being excluded from innativity: hence they must have been born. Moreover, being born, they do not have what they are from themselves; nor are they proven to have power from themselves, but given. But if they are not from themselves, they also use a given power; how will they be said to have made all things, being themselves revealed as creatures? And these things indeed all touch upon, if all confer in individual things.

If not all, but each rules individual things, and one does not use the creation of another, but the whole world is cut asunder, each drawing and defending its own works to itself, and we ourselves do not permit the use of another's creation, how can living beings exist, each separate from the rest? But if, for the sake of the harmony of their goodness, they themselves permit the weak, who could not make their own stand except through the creation of another, then they do not rule their own, but use does. But if use detains, that one does not rule; from which it is known that it is not. VI. And the world itself restrains the madness of these men, showing its creator, ruler, governor, and dispenser. For who sends rains upon others' lands, nourishing what is foreign to his own operation? Who has joined together the harmful contrarieties of the seasons, by interposing a balance, to the benefit of all? Who supplies the blasts of the winds, for the sake of animation, to the creations of the newborn? God is indeed discerned from every creation, as it is written: "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament announces the work of his hands." Here the founder, ruler, governor, and dispenser of all things is found; once this is known, some, in perverse contention, not comprehending the order of things due to the weakness of their own mind, and not even understanding this very fact—that they do not know—impute causes to God with the cunning of their mind; either saying that things ought not to have happened as they did, so that they would fall; or from the fact that they fall, that ignorance or malice should be ascribed to him.

For He made them to exist; but if it happens that they do not exist, either He was ignorant, when making them, of what would happen; or, knowing, He was willing but unable to free them; or, being able, He delivered them through malice. None of these is admitted to divinity: for it is not right that divinity should have been ignorant of future things, nor that, being willing to free, it was unable, nor that malice be ascribed to it: He who willed and made, by the very fact that the will to make excludes the malice of neglecting. With these removed, they bring forward a third charge, of impossibility for God. All these must be explained. For He is not evil who willed and made, and because He willed, He made. He who can do all things, or can do what He wills, will not be weak, nor subject to ignorance: He who always is, without whom future things cannot come to be. VII. Now, therefore, let us seek the cause of things, lest by prolonging the discourse we allow a place of error to deceivers. He made all things to exist: this we profess without doubt. It happens that they do not exist: nor can we deny this. But contraries cannot exist in the same thing, so that being and not-being should simultaneously occur to His will. Because if He made them to exist, He always wills them to exist; and if He wills them not to exist, He ceases to will what He was willing: which defect certainly cannot fall upon God. But with two persons established in the case, the creator and the created, since the creator is free from fault, it remains that what is created is itself the cause of its own injury, and could not have fallen into not-being without some fault.

Again, if the fault of the creature has voided the will of God, that fault is stronger than the Creator. Therefore it is necessary to be reborn, so that, coming to Him who we were, we may void that which has come about through fault, and the will of God, which was that we should not exist, may prevail. Hence, condemned on account of fault, we are recalled, the justice and power of God remaining the same: justice, by which He judges; power, by which He recalls. He is not prevented from saving, who is able, from that which has fallen, to recall that which He Himself had made from nothing. And He who made from nothing will much more recall from something. And, with a just judgment, the condemned would fall by the word of God; likewise, by the word of His mercy, let it rise again. Nor is He who always is excluded from recalling; and His power, obedient to His will, is the justice of His power. And, with power perfecting, it does what it wills, at the time it wills, indeed at the appropriate time. Nor does the death of condemnation hinder His power; nor does condemnation overcome the purpose of His will. But His mercy is not in vain; nor is the grace of renewal without reason. For these are given to those who ask, just as the condemned are those who do not ask.

VIII. That was the reason for not granting indulgence to the first sinners: those whom He summoned to repentance by His questioning, and whom He saw repelling their own salvation, He condemned. But those who were born from them, and who fled to Him, He pitied. For it is just that those who are willing and penitent, and who flee to Him who is able to grant it, should obtain it; but that the ungrateful, the resistant, those who cast the blame for their deed upon God, having constituted themselves the cause of their own condemnation, should be dismissed. That justice did not permit this grace to be given to the first-formed: it was not that He Himself, who condemns, was unwilling to grant it. He was the same before, as He is now, and will be: He who is now good, and was good before; He who is now merciful, and was merciful before; always remaining in that which is immutable. And since He condemned them on account of their fault, it is necessary to examine that fault itself, which we shall again investigate from physical principles. Man was not made to provide something to his Creator, but so that he himself might enjoy the world, being constituted from better elements, and was rightly made rational: and this very thing the nature of creation demanded, so that, with diverse things established in the world, and constructed from the combination of all the elements, he who is better than all should have power over the rest—not, however, forgetful of his Creator, but subject to dominion through commandment, holding the rest subject to himself. But the subjection of this rational being requires a law, lest he himself be a god free from law; and it is necessary to see in what things that law, demanded by reason, should be given.

That reason teaches that the law was to be given concerning that food which he then enjoyed. And since that food is found to have been given at that time, reason demanded that the law be given concerning it, and it is declared that he sinned concerning it. IX. Now, as we investigate the cause, reason has led us thus far. For the rest—what food, for what use, in what manner the law was given—as we inquire, history is necessary, which is consistent with these physical reasons already investigated by us. And since there is no other history than that which we have learned in the divine scriptures, with those same physical reasons leading us into it, let us inquire whether it is consistent that a law was given to man to abstain from one tree while enjoying the others abundantly. Scripture teaches that this man, after the command was transgressed, was punished by death. Some indeed accuse this severely, saying that a law was given which could not be kept; that He, foreknowing the future, gave this command which He knew they would not observe; that He commanded abstinence from that food, the desire for which would overcome the command. They also say that many other things are contrary to the case: for either He ought not to have given this command, they say, which He gave knowing they would not observe it; or He should not have placed that tree as a stumbling block to the command. For it was permissible to command in other matters in which desire did not arise, or to give this precept which man could keep.

If he could not protect him from sinning by his own help, he was powerless; or he did not allow the tempter to approach, by whose persuasion he fell into guilt. But now all things are contrary at once: by making him such, he made him capable of being overcome; and he planted a harmful tree; and concerning this he gave a command which he knew they would not observe; and with his foreknowledge, foreseeing that he would sin, he let him go, and did not forbid the adversary from approaching to overthrow the man; and moved by anger, he condemned to death the one whom he had placed in life. Now you say that he came to free him, to suffer for him, the one whom at that time he was unwilling to spare. They set forth such empty words from the sluggishness of their own mind; to all of which a response must be given. X. And we have already proved that the law had to be given rightly: that he was subject to God through the law, to whom so many things had been subjected. This law was not burdensome, as they say; on the contrary, we teach that it was light and easy to keep. For although he enjoyed all things, he was ordered to abstain from one. But if he had been ordered to use only one, with all others forbidden, would it not seem just to you that he should keep the command of the one who gave him the freedom to enjoy? Yet he who gave it did not do this; which is also declared to be possible for him. Do we not also in this world abstain from many things because of the harm of death or disease? Thus the command is shown to be possible. But if this is possible, how much more possible is it for one who enjoys all things to keep himself from one?

And how could a law have been given, if not even in one case is it permitted to command? Therefore, because a law had to be given, and it had to be given in those things which he enjoyed, it is rightly understood to have been given in those very things. Yet the tree was not an offense, nor should the commandment have passed to another tree rather than this one: since in whatever tree the commandment had been placed, desire would have followed in that same tree. And the tree was not the occasion of desire, but he himself was the author to himself, who chose to desire. Nor does a complaint now arise as to why he chose, since he had power over himself, being constituted rational. The law itself also requires that the one to whom it is given have this power over himself; for one who does not have the power to act, the law is void for him: and if he is naturally confined by someone, and a law is placed to seem to restrain him by that same person, the law is given more to the one who rules the confined person than to the one prohibited. Therefore, power over himself was fittingly given: and having fittingly used that power, the man is justly condemned in that over which he had no power.

XI. The aforementioned sentence of transgression from the Lord had already been given, and assistance had also been given to her so that she would know both what she ought to beware of and what she would suffer from negligence if she did not beware. Nor was nature weak. For when the serpent approached to persuade the woman, the woman prevailed where it wished; and at the beginning of the words she understood him to be deceitful and repelled him, as Scripture says: And the serpent said to the woman: Why indeed did God say that you shall not eat from every tree that is in paradise? believing he could deceive by falsehood; also thinking her forgetful of the divine command. To which she immediately responded, repelling him thus. And the woman said to the serpent: From every tree that is in paradise we shall eat; but from the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of paradise, God said: You shall not eat from it nor touch it lest you die. With great judgment she placed the divine command first; by which he was convicted, he turned to another device, saying: You will not die by death; for God knew that on the day you eat from it, your eyes will be opened, and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil. Hence, having conceived a desire for divinity, she cast aside what she had previously foreseen; now seeing something else from lust rather than what she saw.

Then the woman said that the wood was good for food, and that it pleased the eyes; she saw from desire, not from judgment of the mind, so that before she ate, she pronounced the wood to be good for food. And neither the natural appearance of the tree nor its use attracted her, though she had previously seen it and refrained from it, but the desire for divinity enticed her. XII. Nor is it to be asked why He permitted her to be tempted, whom He had protected with His aid, equipped with foreknowledge of the future, so that she would not be deceived. But he, forgetful of his own safety and unmindful of the words of God, preferring the persuasions of the woman, was deceived. She made her husband a participant in the sin. To this, her husband accepted and took it without question. And she herself ate, the Scripture says, and gave to her husband, and they ate. Thence came a more just condemnation, and the judgment of death approached; so that, having been warned, he did not observe; and having been called to repentance, he not only rejected it, but also imputed the blame for his deed to God, saying: The woman whom you gave to me, she gave it to me, and I ate; ascribing to the Lord the fault of the sin, because He gave the woman, when he especially, knowing the small portion of his own body to which he had also given a name, ought not to have submitted to her, knowing her to be subject to him in every way; also recognizing himself as the author of her body, origin, procreation, and even of her name: whom he ought not to have preferred to himself, much less to the Lord God who commanded. One sentence was given for so many crimes.

Nevertheless, he did not judge, moved by wrath, as they say; for this vice cannot fall upon God, that he should appear passible, that, roused by wrath, he should impose the condition of death. For he is provoked by wrath who, moved by sin, pronounces a sentence; but he who proclaimed judgment before the deed of transgression cannot be said to have been angry, he who warned; since admonition is not wrath, but defense. XIII. Then, in the event itself, let us see what sentence he gave. He who ate, that he might be eternal, as God himself judged by condemning, lest what man indeed thought would happen should come to pass; and since all food pertains to strengthening substance, this food indeed served to dissolve substance. Thus neither did he, who warned, predict in hostility, nor afterward did he condemn in wrath what man had presumed by dissolving. Yet envy did not forbid eating, nor did envy remove divinity, by forbidding a food that harmed; for it was not fitting that one know evil who could not guard himself from it. But knowledge of evil came from transgression of the command; into which he would not have fallen, if he had not wished to eat. For by following the Lord without discrimination, he found the good itself; by passing over the command, conscious of himself, he came to know evil. Therefore, to follow the command simply is good; to pass it over by desiring more is shown to be evil. For by distrusting the Lord’s words, he passed over the precept.

Now also the knowledge of good and evil began, as he reflected on what he had done. The commandment freed him from this entanglement. Therefore, guided by reason, conscious of his own evil, he fled; and he was reduced from the highest wisdom to such great folly that he thought, by hiding under a tree, he could elude the creator of all things, to whom the leaves of all trees and the tresses of all herbs are numbered; and who said of us that even our hairs are numbered. Into such great evil did he fall who began to have knowledge of evil and good! With such great evil did God free him at the time when he forbade! XIV. Now that it has been revealed that it was not envy that forbade eating, it remains to show that it was not envy that removed divinity: which, however, is easily proven by the fact that we demonstrate it was restored. For from the beginning of creation up to the condemnation of death, we have recognized that God did everything rightly. Yet God's purpose seems to have been excluded by man's deed; since he himself made them to exist, but it turned out that they do not exist, through fault. But if the matter stands so far that they do not exist, his purpose who made them is defeated. But if it returns, sin is stirred up by the revocation, and the thing itself is restored to that for which it was made; so that the Lord of man's deed conquers, and is not conquered. And his possibility also requires this, that he be shown omnipotent.

For if there is something that He could not do, His diminished possibility excludes omnipotence: but omnipotence prevails over all things: and since it prevails over all things, it is necessary that it also prevail in this very thing, that He who made from nothing should recall from death. XV. Therefore it was fitting that we return to what we were. But let us inquire how. That first ungrateful one was condemned, who, called to repentance, did not obey. Yet he lived for some time afterward after the sentence, because God by His presence provided that from these very ones the just were to be produced: nor was it just that he be immediately dissolved, who had the hope of generating the just: and those who are generated just show that nature did not sin, but will, since, born of the same parents, they themselves keep the commandments: nor is will a part of natural substance, but a movement; a movement, however, as an index of thoughts by joining something. But these just ones, of whom we have spoken, are of the same parents in nature; unlike them in character, by repenting. And justice demands that repentance not pass over; that it grant to the one repenting. The order of repentance proceeds so that it has effect, through which, by pleasing God, hoping from His possibility, it seeks grace. The petition calls its own creator into absolution; nor does anyone else follow to give by recalling, except the one who made. For if He Himself made them to exist, but it happens that they do not exist, He who restores into eternity will be better than He who made what fell.

Therefore, to renew it, He seeks the Creator God; and He who made from nothing also recalls from the dead. He is invoked to grant, as one who will teach, how the grace that is to be granted may be preserved, lest so great a gift be lost: again, so that one who feels himself freed from the earth by the present sentence, just as he was previously condemned, may differ in the conduct he has used, and by imitating God, may come to divinity; and that divinity which he once thought he had usurped for himself through the tree, without God, he may now be able to receive from God. For I also said, "You are gods and all sons of the Most High; but you will die as men, and you will fall as one of the princes." Here He who complains that they have lost what He said, and is not proven to have taken away divinity through envy before; and He who complained, comes to give that very thing which we have lost, when asked; by showing Himself, by speaking, by giving, by recalling. XVI. Yet it offends some that He is in a body: since He would not otherwise have been seen by men except in a body; nor could they see His own preservation except in a body; indeed, He ought not to free from the condemnation of death otherwise than by a body, so that He might show that very thing which had perished as freed. But let us see how. The first woman sinned: she sinned, however, while she was a virgin. This cause made all later-born mortals. For the virgin received the sentence, by which, when she had been made mortal, she produced the rest as mortals. Through this virgin, death held sway. For this reason, it was necessary that through a virgin should come the one who would give life.

The occasion of death entered through the wood, but the woman from the side of the man. Therefore the side of the Lord is pierced by the wood, so that He might suffer also for the woman. And it is not the whole side of the woman, but a portion of the side: for one of the ribs was taken and built up. Therefore not the whole side is opened, but the place itself of the side is struck, whence it was taken. Thorns and thistles the sentence of damnation produced from the earth: therefore He is crowned with thorns and thistles: the substance of thorns, accursed. The crown was a form of victory: and so through those things by which sin began, the Lord triumphed by passing through them. XVII. To those who examine human matters, it seems impossible that what is said, that He who was to be born should be proclaimed born contrary to nature from a virgin; since this does not fall within human reason, that He should be born in this way beyond all others, and be a son from a mother without a father: although nevertheless this especially befits Him, that He who has a heavenly father should not have an earthly father. Nor had He come to deny His own father, so as to be born from another; but what was lacking in the nature of the begetter, a virgin should be His mother. Nor ought the creator of all to be held under this condition of our generation; since even the first authors were not generated from coition. There are also many kinds of begetters in the world which are generated without union in many ways. The reason for conception, however, to one who examines carefully, is possible. He is proclaimed to have been born from the Holy Spirit who is holy; nothing incredible.

But His holiness seems to be polluted by mixture, when there is no mixture. For to the virgin who was asking and inquiring into the causes of conception, the angel Gabriel said: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you," naming mixture in neither case; but by the coming of the Spirit, by the power of the Most High, nature is congealed, so that what in others the seed effects, by joining more holily, as befits God, might be born through the uncontaminated body of the virgin. XVIII. Nor is this recognized as incredible, since we know that many things in the world itself are thus constrained; when the sea was struck by the rod for the crossing Jews, the sea is violently divided; but the wind, the spirit of the world, constrained the waves, as Scripture shows, which says thus: "Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord brought the sea into a strong south wind all night, and made the sea dry," not indeed emptied of water but constrained. For it says: "And the water was divided; and the children of Israel entered through the middle of the sea on dry land; and the water was a wall to them on the right and on the left." Thus it is taught that it was constrained, which was effected through the south wind. Nor does the prophet and psalmist David, interpreting this same sign, fail to say: "He tore apart the sea, and led them across; he set the waters like a wineskin.

If anyone, through weakness of his own mind, preparing hardness of heart for himself, does not believe these proofs, let him consider the force of the winds and understand the world's breezes themselves working this, which so constrict the rains running down in icicles that they freeze in their very falls. Why is it necessary to enumerate the other things which, constituted from moisture, are solidified by the aforementioned force? Nor is it necessary to delay long, since the effects of things cry out more than our assertions, which, with God establishing, happen in nature; how much more, in His so necessary coming, could the body of the virgin, from which He was expected to flow, be constrained into the formation of the body to be assumed through the Holy Spirit? XIX. This indeed seems unclean to some, but to those rightly considering, it is proven so clean. Before the flow of the body, the part still constituted of the body, and wholly mixed and congealed, does not receive the name of unclean while it lives. But when it has flowed down, and from that has been made dead, then it is unclean and dead; which is now alien from nature, and cannot be given life: which, while it is in nature, congealed and coagulated, generates, not unclean. Thus the truth finds that that was not unclean.

But if we allow that they say it is unclean, still it is declared that sanctity could not be contaminated by the unclean, since we see the sun, which we cannot deny is His creature, so constrict the filth of refuse, the seeds of the marsh, the putrefactions of mire, that when it sends its force through its rays upon these things, it is not polluted. But if in these filths the creature is not polluted, much less is the divinity itself polluted in a living saint, because it is not polluted by the body. XX. Now that the holy and uncontaminated birth has necessarily been manifested through the form of the body, in which the reason for our salvation required it to be present, it remains to be proved why, in our likeness, He was born a little child, grew, hungered, ate, thirsted, and undertook the other functions of the body, so that He even suffered death, and such a shameful death; after which death (which is incredible to those who oppose) He is said to have been buried and to have risen again. And indeed, that the savior who came in the flesh of the flesh, which He had to take up as our own, not another's, is manifest: for if another's flesh had been taken up, salvation would not pertain to us. Also, with our own flesh taken up, He had to be born a little child from a virgin: for it was not fitting that a full-grown man be born through a virgin, as is taught thus. He was said to be born, yet He was not proved to be born: for how could a full-grown man be born through a virgin? So that you who do not believe He was born a little child would much less believe He was brought forth a man.

XXI. Let us nevertheless acknowledge how divine its smallness is. Man was conceived, but without the origin of human seed. He was born as a man, but from a virgin, which is holy. Lowly and misshapen, but glorious; placed as an infant in swaddling clothes by nature, but proclaimed king by angels and Son of God; savior of the human race, unifier of heaven and earth in glory, and maker of peace. This is taught most plainly to the shepherds. For it is written thus: Now it happened that when they were there (he says, in Bethlehem), her days were fulfilled (that is, Mary's) for her to give birth; and she bore her firstborn son, and they wrapped him and placed him in a manger, because there was no room in the inn. But shepherds were in that region spending the night and keeping night watches over their flocks. Then an angel of the Lord stood there, and brightness shone around them, and they were greatly afraid; and the angel said to them, "Do not be afraid; for behold, I announce to you a great joy, which is for all people; because today a savior has been born for you, who is Christ Jesus in the city of David. And this is your sign: you will find an infant wrapped in cloths and placed in a manger." And suddenly, with the angel, there was a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, "Glory to God in the highest, and peace on earth to men of good will.

One angel announces the nativity, that he who was a little one before the age was born to us today, because he began to exist for men then. And lest he seem to be announced as king only to those to whom it was said, "He is born to you today," the host of angels runs together and says, "Glory to God in the highest, and peace on earth to men of good will." This glory of his appeared in heaven, and peace on earth to men of good will is announced by the angels. Do you perceive whether it seems similar to our infancy, or not? XXII. Is it a wonder that angels announced the king, whom the Magi, placed in a distant land, also knew? When the sign had appeared to them from heaven, they understood that he was born, and after long seeking they found him, and when found they adored him. The sign of which star preceded the insignia of the other stars: for the star which was the index of the Lord's nativity did not, like the others, shine in the darkness, but shone by day in the sun, surpassing both sun and day in splendor; not as if it were fixed in the sky, but proceeding with a wondrous appearance, it showed the way on the journey to those going to seek the Lord. Finally, it stood still above the house where it showed that he whom it announced was. Which the scripture testifies: "But when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of King Herod, behold, Magi came from the east to Jerusalem, saying, 'Where is he who is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the east, and we have come to adore him.'

When the Magi saw him as a little child, they worshipped him as king, as man, as God; and they offered gifts, from which gifts it was also announced that he would suffer. For they offered incense as to God, gold as to king, myrrh to the one who would suffer. Such is the divine infancy known, nurtured, and educated! But without a teacher, knowing all things. The Jews marvel at this when they saw him knowing letters without instruction, saying: How does this one know letters, who has not learned? Confessing that he knew, and not denying that he had not learned: yet not comprehending whence he had this. When he speaks with the teachers of the Jews, he is found to be the teacher of teachers. When he, still a little child of about twelve years, sat in the midst of the masters, the masters marveled at his teaching with astonishment. For Scripture says thus: And all who heard him marveled at his wisdom and his answers. These things are proven by the Scriptures, but by physical reasoning it is found more fully: for God born in man ought to have shown such signs of his infancy.

XXIII. But if you seek the cause of his coming, it was necessary that man appear again. Such great divinity had to be hidden not from those who believed, but from the prince of this world, against whose oppression he had descended, but for the sake of our liberation. For that prince held his power not by his own authority, but by the Lord's decree, because he had commanded that a sinner who did not repent should die. But the merciful one had to free the repentant. This justice, this divine possibility demanded, that he who held the guilty one by decree, if he did not seize the guilty one, by passing over the decree would lose his power. But no one is not guilty, since by origin and birth they are from mortals. But he who was born is proven to have himself given the decree; by that decree he himself is not held guilty, he who, having taken on flesh, lived among men without sin. As it is written: This is our God, and no other will be reckoned besides him. He found every path of wisdom, and gave it to his servant Jacob. After this he was seen on earth, and lived among men. This is he who lived without sin, as it is also written: He who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in his mouth. He produced this flesh without sin: which the prince of this world, foreseeing it as opposed to him and not inclined to his own wills, esteeming him only a man, dared to attack him who permitted it.

The Lord, however, permitted that the prince himself be the cause of his own loss; for when he had claimed for himself those guilty by his own judgment, usurping this one who was not guilty, he came against the judgment which he held, and lost his power. Thus it was fitting for the functions of the flesh to be performed, so that he himself might show that it was the same flesh which he had taken up, that flesh which had previously been condemned; while the other, seeing the functions of the flesh, would not understand the divinity, and thus, coming against the judgment of God, would lose his power, because he dared to attack one whom he saw to be without guilt. XXIV. For this reason, therefore, it happened that he showed the functions of the flesh, yet was not subject to those functions themselves. To prove that the flesh was true, he hungered; not that he might eat, overcome by fasting. Finally, when, to prove our flesh, he had fasted beyond the capacity of nature for a space of days and nights, he is found indeed to have hungered, but not also to have eaten; as the Scripture says: "And when the days and nights were completed, afterwards he hungered." Yet he did not eat; he hungered, however. This was done manifestly for this reason: so that, because the devil, fighting against the Lord in the desert with his continuous temptations, had been overcome, he would not be; and so that, understanding that he was God, he would not flee; and so that the so necessary benefits of his passion would not perish, he hungered.

Thinking him soon weakened, he attacked him again as a man, saying to him that he should turn stones into bread, if only for the need of his body; but he neither did so nor ate. Thus he hungered for a reason; yet he was not subject to the cause. And not only in this place, but also when the disciples offered bread to the hungry one and said, "Rabbi, eat," he replied: "I have food to eat which you do not know. My food is to do the will of him who sent me, to accomplish his work." XXV. He thirsted, so that through thirst he might demonstrate the nature of the body; not that he needed drink, since he himself is the fountain of living water. Finally, the Samaritan woman, where he is found to have thirsted, when he had asked for water, and she, thinking him a Jew, had not given it, he offered the woman water through which he would quench her thirst perpetually, as it is written: Jesus was sitting upon the well; and it was about the sixth hour; and a certain Samaritan woman came to draw water. And Jesus was sitting; and Jesus said to her: "Give me a drink." For his disciples had gone into the city to buy food. The woman, however, answered Jesus, saying: "You, since you are a Jew, how do you ask me for a drink, when I am a Samaritan woman?" And Jesus answered her: "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that said to you: 'Give me a drink,' you would rather have asked him, and he would have given you living water." And the woman said to him: "Lord, you have no pitcher, and the well is deep; whence have you living water to give me?

Are you greater than our father Jacob, since he himself gave us a well from which he drinks with his sons and with his flocks? And Jesus answered her: Everyone who drinks from that water will thirst again; but whoever drinks from the water which I will give him will never thirst again; but it will be a spring of gushing water into eternal life. Therefore he had not thirsted to receive, but to give, who by promising the divine gave, so that his woman, leaving her water jar, forgetful of her old thirst, proclaimed his coming to the other Samaritans of Samaria. This the Lord thirsted to teach the woman, whom he already knew was ready: not seeking earthly water, but from the request giving living water, which made a spring gush into eternal life. XXVI. Jesus thirsted again on the cross, and cried out: I thirst. But the cause of his thirst was this. They had crucified him, yet they were not thus satisfied: they still had to sin; and when even to evil men placed in punishment the common natural affection of mercy is owed, to him, whose benefits they had felt in curing infirmities, and whom they had attacked without crime, contrary to the natural motion of mercy they insulted even after the cross; so filled with a spirit of fury that they gave vinegar to the thirsty one. And he who undertook the passion with a ready spirit did not receive this unwillingly; and the bolder they were in inflicting punishments, the milder he was in receiving the injury; seeing that the works of their malice were not yet complete, he cried out: I thirst.

Those who, to heap up the injury, gave him vinegar: yet he himself did not provoke them to give him vinegar; but what they gave him, he willingly received. Such was the Lord's thirst. Finally, having received it, he exclaimed: It is finished. And immediately he gave up the spirit. Jesus also slept, not overcome by sleep so as to appear so, but so that there might be an order for the virtue to be performed. For he slept so that the sea might be stirred up, so that the frightened disciples might ask for help, so that the prophecy of David might be fulfilled, which in the one hundred and sixth psalm proclaimed, saying: Let his works be announced in exultation. Those who go down to the sea in ships, who make profit in many waters, they themselves have seen the works of the Lord and his wonders in the deep. The spirit of power spoke and stood still, and his waves were raised up. But that he, by so conducting, completed the entire dispensation through death, and was about to ascend to the heavens, he immediately added, saying: He ascended to the heavens, and he descended to the abysses.

XXVII. And yet, although this must be believed as spoken by the divine Spirit, nevertheless, like the rest, let us also confirm this with a few physical reasons. Freed from death by the Lord's passion, He led us again to the state of immortality; and He, who previously had made us unequal to the heavens, now joined us to the heavenly beings. Yet to some this seems unjust; not because God cannot do it, but because it appears not to accord with His justice, since He had granted to the first-formed man, still free from fault and innocent of crime, only the lordship of paradise, judging this to be a fitting gift of God; but now, after sin and offense, He has recalled him, and, as if it were not enough that he had returned to what he was, has granted him the heavenly kingdoms. Yet this is shown to be most just. For if earlier, by His grace, with no services of devotion to merit it, He had granted to man the abode of paradise, then certainly now, against the impatience of the flesh and the desires of iniquity already stirred, against the prince of the world and his powers, with the world trodden underfoot, it was fitting to bestow a heavenly reward; so that he who, by imitating God, had a divine life on earth while placed in a body, might, with that same body now made immortal, dwell in the heavens, the earthly things having been removed.

Then, to the reason for this gift, there is added this: that it is fitting to bring the flesh of man into the heavens, whose dwelling-place God deigned to be; nor can it seem that man was made an inhabitant of heaven contrary to his merit, whose sheath the Spirit, God Himself, did not disdain; and it was just that the body, in which God, by dwelling, deigned to visit the earth, through which He, as a sharer in our lot, led our race to immortality, should also be placed in the heavens. For where ought the dwelling of God to be, if not in the kingdom of God? And where is His kingdom, if not in the heavens?