Differentiarum Sive De Proprietate Sermonum Libri Duo

Between vivum and viventem. We call vivum of one who is going to live; viventem, of one who is going to die.

Between ve and que. Ve separates, que joins.

Between vœ and ve. Ve without a is a conjunctive conjunction. Vac with a is an interjection of one who grieves.

Between vocem and sonum. Vox is of a man, sonus of a crepido.

Between uvidum and humidum. Humidum is that which has something of moisture on the outside; uvidum, truly, that which has it within; whence also grapes (uvae) are so called.

Between valles and convalles. Valles are the low-lying places of the plains; convalles, the spaces between mountains.

Between undam and aquam. Unda is always in motion; aqua, truly, is standing still. Further, imbres are of the clouds, latices of the springs. For latex is properly the liquid of a spring, and is so called because it lies hidden in the veins of the earth.

Between vicum, and viam, and plateam. Vici are called the dwellings themselves in cities; viae, however, are the narrow spaces which are between the vici, of which we call the continuous and broader ones plateae. For plata, according to the propriety of the Greek tongue, takes its name from breadth.

Between viridia and virentia. Viridia are trees; virentia are fields or meadows.

Between visus and visos. Visos is said as a participle; visus as an appellative noun.

Between virum and virus. Virum means a man; virus means poison.

Between vivit and bibit. Vivit is from life, bibit from drink.

Between vinctum and victum. Vinctus means bound; victus means conquered.

Between vis and bis. Vis pertains to will; bis means twice.

Between ullam and ollam. Ullam means any; ollam means a vessel.

Between vallum and murum. Not that a wall is also a rampart. For indeed a rampart is a wall.

Between vagire, mugire, and the rest. An infant wails, an ox bellows, a horse neighs, a donkey brays or roars, a lion roars, an elephant trumpets, a pig grunts, a sheep bleats, a serpent hisses, a frog croaks, a crow caws, a crane honks, a kite screeches, a dog barks or bays, a fox yelps.

Between vesperescit and vesperascit. Vesperescit means it becomes late; vesperascit means the sun declines toward its setting.

Between Viperinus and vipereus. Viperinus means a young viper; vipereus means in the likeness of a serpent.

On the letter Z.

Between zelus and invidia. Zelus can sometimes be taken even in a good sense, when someone strives to emulate the things that are better; but invidia, as has been said, is tormented by another's happiness, and is split into a twofold passion, when either one does not wish another to be what one is oneself, or, seeing another to be better, one grieves that one is not like him. Elegantly indeed a certain man, rendering a Greek verse into elegiac meter, jested about Invidia, saying: Nothing is more just than invidia, which straightway gnaws the very Author and tortures the mind. But the name of invidia is said to come from gazing too much upon the felicity of another, as in that line: Who indeed has envied my flower?

BOOK TWO

ON THE DIFFERENCES OF THINGS.

FIRST DIFFERENCE.

Between Deus and Dominus, certain men have so defined it that in the appellation Deus they understood the Father, in Dominus the Son. But sacred Scripture affirms both Deus and Dominus.

But nevertheless these terms are distinguished from each other. For the first is a name of nature, pertaining to love; the second is of power, suited to fear. Finally, from the word "God," observe what you should love; from the title "Lord," recognize what you should fear.

II.

Between Trinity and unity there is this distinction: that "unity" is used because of the inseparable substance of the Godhead, while "Trinity" is used because of the diversity of persons. For in the persons there is distinction, but in the Godhead there is no distinction. For there is one who begets, one who is begotten, and one who proceeds. There are indeed three names, but one substance. For just as fire, brightness, and color are indeed three words, but one thing.

For in the relation of persons there is Trinity, but in the substance of nature there is one God: namely, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. That God is of the Father the Apostle testifies, saying, One God the Father, from whom are all things; so too concerning the Son, that he is God, he himself says elsewhere: Whose are the fathers, and from whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is over all things, God blessed forever.

Concerning the Holy Spirit, because he is God, the same writer says as above: There are divisions of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are divisions of workings, but the same God. Behold, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are God, but in this Trinity a threefold number of gods is not to be believed.

For it is written: I am God, and there is no other God besides me. And that: Hear, Israel, the Lord your God is one. To believe in three gods, therefore, is profane; not to distinguish the Trinity in persons is impious.

III.

Between the person of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, the distinction is as follows. That the Father was neither made nor born. The Son was born, not made; the Holy Spirit was neither made nor born, but proceeds from the Father and the Son. Accordingly the Father has eternity without birth, the Son has birth with eternity; but the Holy Spirit has procession without birth, with eternity.

The Father takes his beginning from no one; the Son takes his origin from the Father; the Holy Spirit truly proceeds from the Father and the Son. Yet these things are said by us concerning the Trinity insofar as human nature can grasp them. For who is sufficient to consider the inner mysteries of the Trinity itself? How the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three persons, one nature?

How the Father is unbegotten, the Son begotten, the Holy Spirit neither unbegotten nor begotten? How the Son is born from the Father, the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son? How the Son proceeds by being born, while the Holy Spirit does not be born by proceeding? How the Father is never without the Son, and yet the Father begot the Son without the Son?

How the Son is never without the Holy Spirit, and yet he says: Unless I go away, the Paraclete will not come to you? How the Son is not from himself but from the Father, and yet he is not later than the one from whom he is? How the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, and yet is not preceded by those from whom he proceeds?

How are the three one, and the one three? How are they three in relation to one another, and one in essence? Who can consider these things? Who can comprehend them? For if we do not grasp the secrets of Christ's human birth, how shall we grasp the mysteries of the divine nature?

IV.

Between substance and essence in God, some have defined this distinction: that substance is that which is not from another but always exists from itself, that is, subsists by its own power within itself; whereas essence is said to be in God for this reason, that he always is, neither beginning at some time nor ceasing to be, but it is proper to him always to be.

Between the fact that the Son is now equal and now lesser than the Father, this is the difference. The former belongs to the eternal substance, the latter to the human nature. For in the form of a servant, because he was made of a woman, the Father is greater than he; but in the form of God, in which he was before the assumption of the flesh, he is coequal with the Father. On account of the former it was said, The Father is greater than I; on account of the latter, I and the Father are one. He is therefore equal to the Father insofar as he is God, but subject insofar as he is man.

VI.

What is the difference between Christ being proclaimed now only-begotten and now firstborn? The first of these pertains to the Father, the second to us. For according to the excellence of his divinity he is the Only-begotten from the Father, according to the Gospel which says: And we saw his glory, glory as of the Only-begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.

But according to his brotherly fellowship, he is the firstborn of all creation, according to what the Apostle says: that he himself might be the firstborn among many brothers. He is therefore only-begotten in the substance of his deity, firstborn in the assumption of humanity: firstborn in grace, only-begotten in nature; firstborn, according to the Apostle, among many brothers; only-begotten, as the only one from God. Hence it is that he is called both Brother and Lord: Brother, because firstborn; Lord, because only-begotten.

VII.

On the distinction of the various names which are attributed to the Son of God.

Now the differences or meanings of the names that are distinguished in the Son of God are very many. But of these, some are natural, pertaining to the excellence of his divinity; others, however, are accidental. The natural ones are: God, Almighty, Perfect, Son of God, Word, Beginning, Power, Wisdom, Image, Splendor or Figure, Arm.

The accidental ones are these: Lamb, Priest, Rock, Stone, Man, Lion, Calf, Eagle, and the like. He is called God because he was begotten of God; Almighty from the Almighty; Perfect from the Perfect. He is the Son of God because, while he is that very thing which the Father is, he is nevertheless not the one who is the Father.

The Son of God is the Word, because he proceeded properly from the divine mouth, or because there is nothing visible or corporeal in the substance of his nature, or because the Father created or commanded all things through him, or because through him he became known. The Father is the Beginning from the fact that he is the origin and cause of all things. The Right Hand, on account of the effecting of the whole creation, which was formed through him.

Arm, because all things are held together by him. Power, because he has in himself all the power of the Father, and governs, contains, and rules every creature of heaven and earth. Wisdom, because he reveals all the mysteries of knowledge and the hidden things of wisdom. Image, because of the truth of his likeness.

For he is the undifferentiated likeness of the Father, having in himself an undivided nature, that is, essence. He is called Splendor, because while the Father himself is light, the Son proceeds from him inseparably, as splendor from light. Figure, because, taking the form of a servant, by the likeness of his works and powers he designated in himself the image and immeasurable greatness of the Father.

Mediator, because he is between man and God, having in himself the substance of both natures, that is, the form of human lowliness and the excellence of divinity. Further, he is called Lamb because of his innocence and the suffering of the flesh. Priest, because he offered himself to the Father as a victim for us. Rock, because he is the firmness of believers, the offense and ruin of unbelievers. Cornerstone, because he joined to himself the Old and New Testaments, like two walls coming from opposite sides, as a corner, and united them in the unity of faith.

Man, because according to the flesh he was born of the Virgin, passible and mortal. Lion, on account of his kingship and power, by which in death he conquered the devil. Calf, because for the salvation of the nations he was sacrificed. Eagle, because rising again he returned to the stars of heaven, and to the paternal throne whence he had come he returned again.

VIII.

Between the nativity of Christ and ours there is this difference: that every man is found to have been conceived under the law of sin, but he was born not of the concupiscence of the flesh, nor of virile intercourse, but of the Holy Spirit. For he drew nature from his origin, not the guilt of transgression. He took a body from the Virgin, yet did not take away the virginity of his mother's flesh. Likewise, we subsist from one generation; but he from two, of divinity and of humanity.

From the first he took nativity, from the other creation. For he was born by divine generation, made by human generation. The first was without time, the second in the fullness of time. We subsist from two substances, namely of body and of soul; but he from three: of the Word, of the body, and of the soul. Hence it is that he is proclaimed perfect God and man, having in himself a twofold substance, both of his divinity and of our humanity.

IX.

Likewise, this differs between the death of Christ and ours. For we fall into death by the merit of transgression, but he took up death willingly for our salvation, according to what he himself testifies, saying: I have power to lay down my life, and no one takes it from me, but I lay it down.

Between the resurrection of Christ and ours the difference is this: that for us the time of resurrection is deferred even to the end of the world, but his is celebrated on the third day; he needed no one's help to rise again, but we rise again by his mercy.

XI.

Between the creation of the world and its formation this is the difference: that originally, according to the substance of matter, all things were created at once, according to that which is said: He who lives forever created all things at once.

But according to the distinction of species, they were formed through the alternation of six days. For the origin of all creation existed at once, yet the species and form proceeded through increments of time.

For first the matter of heaven and earth was made confused and formless, which the Greeks call chaos. From it afterwards, one by one, various species and their own proper forms came forth. Concerning this matter Scripture says: You who made the world from formless matter. It is formless for this reason, because it was still confused and obscure, and not yet distinguished into visible species and various forms.

But the matter was made from nothing. The species of the world, however, came from formless matter. Accordingly, before every day and time, God almighty created two things: namely, the angelic creature and formless matter; and although this was made from nothing, it nevertheless preceded the things made from it not by eternity, but only by origin, as sound precedes song.

For he who lives forever created all things at once. And so God did not create all things from nothing, but some from something, and some from nothing. From nothing, the world, the angel, and souls; from something, man and the other creatures of the world.

XII.

Concerning the twofold paradise.

One is earthly, where the first human beings lived in the body; the other is heavenly, where the souls of the blessed are carried as soon as they leave the body, and, rejoicing in a felicity worthy of them, await the reception of their bodies. Concerning this paradise the Lord said to the thief: Today you will be with me in paradise. But originally the guilt of the first man drove us out of paradise and cast us down into this pilgrimage of exile.

Hence it is that we are bound by the charge of his transgression. Hence by the deserved sentence of the law we pay the penalty of our father's transgression. For the first man was so created that, through the increase of his years, without the intervention of death, he would be changed from the life of the bodily paradise to the life of the heavenly paradise.

But because he was unwilling to be content with this good, he straightway lost the reward of his condition, and found a twofold death, of soul and of body. He obtained ignorance of the truth and old age, and he transmitted the transgression of his sin to his whole offspring, not only to those who sin by their own free choice, but also to those who cannot yet be entangled in actual sin.

Hence it is that the grace of baptism is granted to little children. For even if they have no sin of their own doing, there is nonetheless in them by origin the guilt of their father's transgression. Whence also the prophet David, lamenting the human race from his own case, complains, saying: Behold, I was conceived in iniquities, and in sins my mother bore me.

XIII.

Concerning the grades of things.

The grades or differences of things are six. That is, non-living, living, irrational, rational, mortal, immortal; the last is GOD, who is blessed above all things forever. The first grade is of those things which do not grow and lack life and motion, such as is found in stones.

The second grade is in those things which grow and have life and motion without sensation, such as is found in herbs or in trees; if life without sensation and motion were wholly absent from them, they could certainly neither sprout nor grow; and these things which have life without sensation are placed before stones and the earth.

The third grade is in those things which not only grow and live, but also feel, yet do not understand, such as is in cattle. The fourth grade is in those things which grow, live, feel, and understand, but are nevertheless mortal, as animals are, such as is in humans.

The fifth is in those things which feel, and understand, and are immortal, such as is in the angels. The sixth is that which is immutable and infinite, and simple, from which all this nature is inspired, moved, governed, and ruled, which is God.

But all these things, just as they advance by grades, so they surpass one another by the quality of their nature. For the tree is preferred to the stone, and the cattle to the tree, and man to the cattle, the angel to man, and God is placed before the angels.

XIV.

Among angels, demons, and humans the ancients wrote this difference, that angels are a spiritual substance, created before every creature, mutable by nature when created, but made immutable by the contemplation of God, impassible in soul, rational in mind, eternal in time, perpetual in blessedness, secure in felicity, foreknowing the future, when commanded they rule the world, when sent they take bodies from the excellent air, and they dwell in the heavenly places.

Demons are unclean spirits, subtle and wandering, passible in soul, rational in mind, aerial in body, eternal in time, enemies of humanity, eager to harm, swollen with pride, cunning in deceit, always new in fraud. They stir the senses, lick at desires, disturb life, trouble sleep, bring on diseases, terrify minds, twist limbs, govern lots, feign oracles by tricks, entice the desire of love, pour in the ardor of lust, lurk in consecrated images; when invoked they are present, they measure out things like the truth, they are changed into various shapes, and sometimes they are transformed into the likenesses of angels. These once fell from the heavenly seat because of pride, and now dwell in the air.

Human beings are capable of reason, wise in understanding, talkative in speech, strong by nature rather than by learning, rigid in posture, upright in face, alike in figure to all, and individually unlike one another, immortal in spirit, weak in sense, fragile in body, light in mind, diverse in morals, unequal in errors, sluggish toward studies, prone to pleasures, empty in labor, falling away in riches, anxious with worry, mortal one by one, changeable through offspring, complaining in life, swift in time, slow to wisdom, quick to death, naked concerning past things, slight concerning present things, uncertain concerning future things; they are conceived in iniquity, born in sin, live in labor, die in grief; rising again from the ashes, some to glory, others to punishment, they pay the debt.

XV.

Between angelic and human transgression.

What is the distinction between the transgression of angelic and of human nature, why is the one redeemed, the other damned without end? For the angels who transgressed therefore have no pardon, because they are weighed down by no infirmity of carnal frailty. But humans after sin can therefore return to pardon, because they have drawn the weight of infirmity from earthly matter.

The Psalmist proves that because of the condition of the flesh a return to salvation lies open to them; for thus he says: He himself knows our frame. Remember, Lord, that we are earth. And again: Remember what my substance is. But the devil, or the malignant spirits, can neither have pardon nor deserve it, as it is written of the same apostate, whose heart, like a stone, shall be hardened, namely, that it may not be softened by the compunction of penitence.

XVI.

Between man and beast this is the distinction. Man is a living being composed of body and living soul, and formed by a spiritual compacting, subsisting by reason, and by the will of free choice, capable of vices and of virtues; but on the other hand a beast is an irrational, mortal living being, animated by the motion of flesh and blood; whence also their soul after death is dissolved together with the flesh. (Add also another point, by which it is distinguished from them.

Those things are prone and inclined toward the earth; for us the face is by nature raised up to the heavens; to them were granted leisure and wealth; to us reason and speech, through which we may understand and confess God.

XVII.

Between the members of the human body.

Now Lactantius, and indeed most of the authors, defined the reason of the human body and the distinction of each of its members in this way, saying: Man (homo) is so called from the soil (humus). He subsists from different substances, from the mortal and the immortal. His body consists of bones and flesh, and is divided into the four elements.

For it has in itself something of fire, air, water, and earth. The nature of earth is in the flesh; of moisture, in the blood; of air, in the breath; of fire, in the vital heat. Indeed the fourfold nature of the human body designates the likeness of the four elements. For the head is referred to the heavens, in which are two eyes, as it were the two lights of the sun and the moon.

The breast is joined to the air, because the breath of the spirit is emitted from it just as the spirit of the winds is from the air. But the belly is likened to the sea, on account of the collection of all the humors, as it were a gathering of waters. Finally, the feet are compared to the earth, in that they are the lowest of the members, dry or parched, just as the earth is. Moreover, in the citadel of the head the mind is placed, as God in heaven, so that from on high it may look out upon all things and rule them.

But man was made for the contemplation of heaven, upright and erect, not like the cattle, prone and inclined toward the ground; on the summit of which body the head is placed, and this name was given to it, because from here the senses and nerves take their beginning. But the hairs of the head are either for the appearance of beauty, or for warding off the injury of cold or of heat.

In the head, moreover, as Saint Augustine says, there are established, as it were, three chambers of the brain: one anterior toward the face, from which is every sensation; another posterior toward the back of the head, from which is every motion; the third between the two, in which memory is shown to flourish, lest, when motion follows sensation, a man fail to connect what must be done, if he has forgotten what he has done.

The face is so called because it makes a person known. But between the face and the countenance there is this difference: the face is the natural and fixed appearance of the mouth, whereas the countenance is varied and, according to the affection of the mind, now glad, now sad. Hence those are called countenanced who often change their countenance.

Now, how much decency of appearance does the nature of the beard confer? The beard is a sign of dignity, a mark of manliness, which both signifies youth and distinguishes the nature of the sex. But the eyes are enclosed in the face within hollow openings, from which opening the brow is named. These same eyes, having a likeness to gems, are covered by translucent membranes. Through these membranes, as through glass or a mirror, shining forth, the mind looks out upon the things that are outside.

But in the middle of these orbs, sparks of light are held enclosed, which we call pupils, in which the grace of seeing is contained; and so that the eyes might be more protected from injury, the supreme Maker concealed them with coverings. Hence they are also said to be eyes, as if hidden (that is, protected on every side), to which eyelids are applied, called from blinking. Because meeting one another in turn they refresh the gaze of the eyes, with the hairs standing in order for their protection.

The eyebrows also are adorned with short hairs, providing a kind of rampart for the eyes, lest anything fall upon them from above. The name of the ears is derived from "drawing in voices" (auriendo voces). For by a change of letter, "aures" is as it were "audes." For through them sound and voice descend as through a spiral. Because the air, when struck, is moved in a circular orb.

The cheeks (genae) are named from the knees (genibus). Because they say that a human being is conceived and formed folded in the womb, such that the knees are upward, by which the eyes are formed, so that they become hollow and recessed. And for this reason also those who wish to draw forth someone's tears touch the knees, and entreat by them, because in the womb they formed and nourished the eyes. The very swelling of the cheeks, rising gently like hills, on every side against impending blows, keeps the eyes safe.

The nostrils (nares) are so called because through them air or breath does not cease to "flow" (nare). For in them there are three functions: one of drawing in breath, the second of taking in odor, the third of draining away the impurities of the brain. The mouth (os) is so called as though it were the door (ostium) of the body. Its appearance consists in two functions: taking in food, and speaking with the tongue.

The lips are named from licking. What is above we call the upper lip; what is below, the lower lip. The name of the tongue is given from binding food. This, the interpreter of the soul, distinguishes the voice into words by its movements, either by striking against the palate and teeth, or by compression of the lips.

The teeth are so called, as it were dividing foods. Indeed they cut and crush the food, and hand it on more conveniently to the throat and stomach. The front ones of these, which cut off the food, are called the front teeth; the inner ones, the molars, which grind the food; the canines, which appear in the twentieth year of life.

The gums are named from giving birth to the teeth, which confer great beauty on the mouth, since they cover the nakedness of the teeth. The fauces are narrow passages, like throats, through which the vocal breath, leaping forth from the depths of the breast, emits the sound of the voice.

The jaws are parts of the maxillae with which we chew. But maxilla is said by way of diminution, as paxillus from palus. The neck is called after the likeness of a column. For it is rigid and round. There are two passages in it: one for foods, the other for air. Of these the upper is called the gullet, through which food and drink are swallowed; whence beasts that recall and chew their food again are said to ruminate: the lower is called the throat, compacted of bones both joined together and flexible; this, open from the nostrils to the lung, serves for the breath passing through.

Its little cover is called the sublingual, as it were a little tongue, which uncloses and opens its opening, so that the breath coming with force through the joined pipe may not violently corrupt the inner parts.

The hands are so called because they are a gift to the whole body, and because we chew with them. The palm of the hand is with the fingers spread out, just as a tree is with branches spread out. Likewise, with the fingers contracted, it is a fist.

The number of the fingers is also perfect, and their order most becoming. Of these the first, the ruler and moderator of all, is called the thumb, because it prevails most among the others, that is, it has the most power. The second is called the index and the greeting finger, because with it we generally point and greet. The third is the middle or shameless finger, the fourth the medical finger, because with it the physicians gather the powdered eye-salve. The fifth is the ear finger, because with it we scratch the ear.

Furthermore, the breast of man is named from its appearance. For in dumb animals it is pressed down toward the ground and removed from sight; but man's is open to view and upright. For it was not fitting that what is full of reason should be hidden and lowly.

The papillae are the tips of the breasts. Breasts, however, are swellings of the chest rising up gently; these were given to women for nourishing offspring, to men only for comeliness, lest the chest appear unshapely. For it was not fitting that in women they be anywhere else than where the intelligent being might draw nourishment from the heart.

Furthermore, the navel is an impressed mark that designates the middle of the belly. It was made for this purpose, that through it the fetus may be nourished while it is in the womb. But the inner organs of the spleen and liver seem to be formed, as it were, from disturbed blood. According to those who dispute concerning natural philosophy, they say that the pleasure of venereal desire resides in the liver, the affection of anger in the gall, of fear in the heart, of joy in the spleen. In the lungs, however, air is contained, which is diffused from the heart through the veins they call arteries, so that by the gradual drawing in and breathing out it may animate the whole body.

In the liver fire has its seat, which is shown to fly up, as it were, to the lofty place of the brain, as if to the heaven of our body. Whence also the rays of the eyes flash forth, and from its middle, as from a kind of center, certain fine tubes are drawn not only to the eyes but to the other senses. Indeed they hold that in it is the office of pleasure, and of the digestion of foods by its embrace, and by its warming of things to be changed into blood.

The arrangement of the intestines: for this reason they are disposed in long windings, ordered in the manner of circles, so that they may gradually discharge the food they have received, and from it may little by little take up the moisture that is within. The belly is so called because into it, as into a trough, all the moisture mixed with food flows down and back, and in an indescribable manner, by irrigating the whole body as if from a flank into the neighboring valleys, it fills it with the juice of the food.

Furthermore, the belly, the stomach, and the womb differ. For the stomach is what appears on the outside, and it extends from the breast to the groin. The belly is the inner part, in which food is customarily received and purged. Only women have a womb, in which they conceive. Yet authors confuse these things, and they put the womb for the stomach of either sex.

The genitals, however, as the name itself teaches, are so called from begetting. The flesh of the buttocks, gathered into a ball, was made for the office of sitting, lest, with the body's mass pressing down, it yield to the bones. The femina are the parts of the thighs, by which, in riding, we cling to the backs of horses. Hence also those who ride before others are said to have mounted horses with their thighs.

The knees are called genua from the cheeks (genae), because in the womb they cling together and are akin to the eyes. Hence Ennius says, "the close-pressed cheek touches the knee." The tibiae (shinbones) are so called as if tubae (trumpets). The soles (plantae) are named from their flatness (planities), because they are not round as in quadrupeds—otherwise man could not stand—but are formed flat and longer, so as to make the body stable. The heels (calces) are so named from the callus (callum) of the feet.

The toes of the feet provide both beauty and use. For we could not run unless, with our toes pressed to the ground and pushing off the soil, we took our impulse and leap. The remaining bones of the body are inserted like so many columns by which the flesh is supported, and bound together by the ties of sinews, so that they may bend with the most fitting motion. Lactantius and others have written these things concerning the constitution of the body.

XVIII.

Some have distinguished between "man" (vir) and "human being" (homo) as follows: that "man" (vir), endowed with both kinds of knowledge, holds eloquence together with wisdom; whereas "human being" (homo) surpasses the beasts of nature by speech alone. But they called him "man" (vir), that is, from virtue (virtus). Virtus, moreover, among the ancients is the name for the knowledge of all things. We, however, now call one and the same person both vir and homo. In accordance with which it is also read of Christ, who is called both vir in the holy Scriptures and also homo.

XIX.

Between infancy and boyhood and the remaining ages, the wise have defined as follows. The first age of a human being is infancy, the second boyhood, the third adolescence, the fourth youth, the fifth old age, the sixth senility. The first two ages are bounded by single weeks of years, on account of their simple life. For infancy is ended in the seventh year, boyhood in the fourteenth, then the following adolescence consists of two weeks on account of understanding and action. These two were not yet in boys, and this age extends from the fifteenth year all the way to the twenty-eighth.

After these, the youth that succeeds remains for three weeks, on account of those three things, understanding and action, and bodily strength. This age arises from the twenty-eighth year and is completed in the forty-ninth, when even in women childbearing fails.

Further, old age is completed in four weeks on account of the weight of mind and body added to those three. For this age begins from the fiftieth year and is terminated in the seventy-seventh. But the last, senility, is defined by no certain measure of years, but is concluded only by the end of nature.

XX.

Between senectulem and senium this is the difference: senectus is the age verging from youth into senium, not yet decrepit; but senium is the weary and final age, and gasping for its last life.

XXI

Between infans and puer certain of the wise have distinguished. Infans, they say, is one called who cannot yet speak. Puer, however, is named from purity, as it were purus, or because they do not yet bring forth the down and bloom of the cheeks.

Puella, however, is named from smallness, as it were pulla. Whence we call pupilli and pupillae not by condition but by boyish age. Puer was once used for both male and female, just as infans. Hence common custom calls the puerpera. Properly, however, those are called puerperae who have given birth to pueri for the first time, because puellae give birth very young.

Males who have passed beyond boyhood are called puberes, because they now assume the power of begetting; females, however, are called virgines or viragines. Virago is so called either because she is taken from a vir, or because she is of masculine vigor. Likewise, those who have passed beyond puberty are called adolescentes. Adolescentes, however, are so called from adolescendo and growing. Whence also a certain one, speaking of agriculture, called the ripening fruit adolescentem.

After adolescence, moreover, they become juvenes. But juvenes are so called because they begin to be able to help (juvare), as a bullock (juvencus) is so called when it departs from the calf.

Now truly, the middle age is properly called man (vir) and woman (mulier). For vir is named, as Lactantius says, because there is greater strength (vis) in him than in women, and from this virtus takes its name. Likewise mulier is said from mollities (softness), with a letter changed and removed, as it were mollier.

But for this reason more strength was given to men, that women might more easily be brought to conjugal endurance. But a woman is called mulier not by reason of the corruption of her integrity, but by reason of maturity of age alone; just as a man is called vir by reason of virility alone, even if he is kept free from the work of feminine intercourse.

At the extreme of age, they are called old men (senes) and old women (anus). But some think that senes are so called because they do not know themselves (se nesciunt), and through excessive age they rave and dote. Whence also Plato: In boys sense grows, in youths it flourishes, in old men it is diminished. But anus is said from many years, as it were annosa (full of years).

XXII.

A certain wise man said that this is the difference between rational and reasonable: that which is rational uses the intellect of reason, as a human being does; but that which is reasonable is what has been said or done with reason.

XXIII.

Between mind and reason there is this difference. The mind is the more excellent part of the soul, from which understanding proceeds. Reason, however, is a certain movement of the soul that sharpens the vision of the mind and distinguishes true things from false.

XXIV.

Between memory, mind, and thought there is this distinction: that memory retains past things, the mind foresees future things, and thought embraces present things.

XXV.

Between sense and memory there is this difference. Sense is the discovery of each thing; memory is the recollection of a thing discovered: the former thinks out and finds, the latter guards what has been found.

XXVI.

The ancients distinguished intelligible and sensible things in this way: that intelligible things are those which are perceived by the mind and soul; but sensible things are those which are felt by bodily sight and touch.

But there are five bodily senses: sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch. To sight belong appearance and color, or the magnitude of measure. To hearing belong voices and sound, to smell the fragrance of odors, or whatever else is of that sort, to taste a flavor bitter or sweet, to touch hot or cold, rough or soft, or smooth.

These five senses, moreover, come from the parts of the elements, but not from all four elements; rather they are produced from air and earth. For from air come sight, smell, and hearing; from earth touch and taste are born.

XXVII.

Between the soul and the body the distinction is this: the soul is an incorporeal substance, intellectual, rational, invisible, and mobile, and immortal, having an unknown origin, yet nothing in its nature mixed, compounded, or earthly, nothing moist, nothing fleeting, or fiery; but on the contrary the body is a visible substance, and mobile, mortal, having its seed from vice, and its material from earthly dregs. But the soul, because it is a spiritual creature, knows its beginning, but does not know that it has an end. For just as the angels, so also the soul: they exist. For they have a beginning, no end. The body, however, because it consists of the four elements, fire, air, water, and earth, when the soul has departed and it has been dissolved, returns again whence it had arisen. Hence we are partly mortal, partly immortal. For we have a nature in common with the angels as regards the soul, but with the beasts as regards the flesh.

XXVIII.

A certain wise man distinguished between flesh and body, saying: Flesh is that which is properly distinguished by blood, sinews, and bones; but body, although it is also called flesh, is sometimes nonetheless called ethereal, because it is not subject to touch and sight, and for the most part it is visible and tangible. A wall is a body, but not flesh; a stone is a body, but not flesh. So too the Apostle calls some things heavenly bodies and some earthly bodies. The heavenly body is that of the sun, the moon, and the stars; the earthly body is that of fire, air, water, earth, and the rest, which are reckoned among those elements without a soul.

XXIX.

Lactantius thinks that certain philosophers distinguish between the animus and the anima thus: Some, he says, claim that the anima is one thing, by which we live, and the animus another, by which we sense and are wise, because, while the anima is strong in the body, the animus sometimes perishes, as is wont to happen to the demented.

They add further that the anima is lulled in death, the animus in sleep. For this reason they think the two are divided, in that they are separated by the office of action. But those who take both indiscriminately argue more truly: that we can neither live without sensation nor sense without life.

For this reason it cannot possibly be divided, since it is in no way separated from itself. But the same one has both the vigor of living and of sensing, and enjoys reason; and while both are one, they have taken various names according to the diversity of their operations. For just as the spirit is a part of the soul through which the images of corporeal things are impressed, so the animus is a part of the same soul by which one senses and understands; just as the mind is a portion of it, through which all reason and intelligence is perceived.

As the will, by which things understood are consented to; as the memory, by which things meditated upon are recalled. And these indeed, while they consist in a manifold appellation, are nonetheless not so divided in substance as in name, because it is one and the same soul. Which, while it contemplates, is spirit; while it senses, is sense; while it understands, is animus; while it comprehends, is mind; while it discerns, is reason; while it consents, is will; while it remembers, is memory; and while it invigorates the members, it is soul; and now it understands, now it is foolish, now with cares set aside for a little while, lulled by the body's sleep it rests, and again stirred and roused at once it returns to contemplate the images of things.

XXX.

The teachers have said that soul and spirit differ in this: that the soul is the life of man itself, furnishing sensation and motion to the body; the spirit, however, is a certain force and rational power of the soul itself, through which by the law of nature it is seen to excel the other beasts. Accordingly the soul is the breath of life, making man animal; the spirit, however, is the force that tramples on carnal desires and summons mortal man to the immutability of life.

Most certainly, however, the evangelist testifies that the spirit is the soul, because the soul that Christ took on in the flesh he called spirit. For when the Lord had said, I have power to lay down my soul, he laid it down without doubt at that time when on the cross, having bowed his head, he gave up the spirit. Every soul, moreover, can be a spirit, yet not every spirit is a soul. For God himself is spirit, and yet is not a soul; the angels also and the winds are spirits, and yet are not souls.

What the soul itself is, of what sort it is, where it is, what form or what power it has, the wise men of this world have in no way defined with certainty. For some have said that the soul is fire, others that it is blood, others that it is incorporeal and has no shape at all. Some too, with impious rashness, have believed that it is a part of the divine nature.

We, however, say that it is not fire or blood, but incorporeal, passible, and mutable, lacking weight, shape, or color. Nor do we say that the soul is a part, but a creature of God, and that it was not made from the substance of God or from any underlying matter of the elements, but was created out of nothing.

For, as someone has said, if God had made it from himself, it would by no means be defective, or mutable, or wretched. Likewise, if it had been made from the visible elements, it would surely have solidity from earth, or moisture from water, or breath from air, or heat from fire; but because it lacks all these, it is evident that it is not from them, since it is proved to have nothing in common with them.

Hence it is also wrongly believed by some that the soul is corporeal, which for this reason was made in the image of God, that if it were not immutable as God is, it might nevertheless exist in a corporeal manner as God does. For if we believe the soul to be corporeal, then we also believe God to have the form of a body, since he created it in his own image.

Now some of the ancients said that there are three parts of this soul: the rational, the irascible, and the concupiscible. The rational, by which it beholds invisible things; the irascible, by which it restrains and corrects the impulses of its anger; the concupiscible, by which it checks the concupiscence of the flesh by spiritual virtue. Some wished its dwelling-place to be in the breast, while others said that it dwells in the citadel of the head, as a ruler in heaven, so that from the highest point it may contemplate all things. Others have defined no certain place for it, but say that it is poured through all the limbs and runs about through them.

Concerning its origin, various opinions are held; yet, without the presumption of affirming, let us report what the disputation of the Fathers has thought about it. Among whom the most holy Fulgentius thus sets forth an uncertain opinion on this question, whose words must be briefly set down: "Whether," he says, "as the flesh of those being born, so all souls are believed to come from Adam, or whether new ones are breathed forth and are not propagated from parents at all? This question is difficult to define, because it is destroyed by contrary objections.

For those who contend that new souls are given to each individual body, when it begins to be objected to them: why is the soul of a little child, which is not propagated like the flesh, held together with the flesh in the fellowship of original sin? Is God unjust, that He should send into eternal fire with the flesh a soul that has no sin in common with the flesh? When this is objected to them, they fail entirely. But on the other hand, those who assert that souls are propagated together with the bodies themselves can indeed establish the just judgment of God in little children, so that they have original sin in common, just as they claim the propagation of both is common. But in the consideration of seeds that perish without being conceived, they too fall completely silent.

For it is certain that the human soul received its existence at the very gift of its creation. And it is necessary that it receive in the resurrection the body in which it lived here for however brief a time. Who, then, could say that animated seeds have flowed forth, whether those that are not conceived, or those that are discharged in nocturnal illusion? Every wise man sees how absurd this is and in every way alien to reason. In these propositions, therefore, concerning the origin of the soul, the parties defeat one another, because each of them destroys the other's proposition, and itself cannot establish what it proposes.

On this account this question must be investigated with greater caution, especially since nothing has been defined with sufficient certainty by holy men, nor is anything proclaimed more plainly by the authority of the Holy Scriptures. Nevertheless this must be held: that the souls of little children are bound by the chain of original sin, and unless they receive the sacrament of baptism, they cannot be partakers of the heavenly kingdom; but they will have sin in common with the flesh, and by an equal judgment they will be condemned into eternal fire.

XXXI.

Between the concupiscence of the flesh and of the spirit there is this difference: the concupiscence of the flesh is a shameful motion of the soul toward the effect of filthy delight; but the concupiscence of the spirit is the ardent intent of the mind toward the desires of holy virtue. The one, when they consent to it, sends them to the kingdom; the other to everlasting punishment. That one is the law of sin, descending from the condemnation of the first man; this one is the law of the mind, proceeding from the gift of our Redeemer. But these, in accordance with the inclination of virtues and vices, are mortally opposed to one another in daily struggle.

For the concupiscence of the flesh first breeds the enticements of vices in our thoughts, whereas the concupiscence of the spirit, by contrast, ceaselessly sets holy thoughts against them. The former takes delight in idle tales and words, the latter in the meditations and precepts of the Scriptures; the former rejoices in spectacles of earthly things, the latter in the contemplation of heavenly joys. The former seeks earthly joys, the latter draws forth groans and sighs; the former relaxes the body in the torpor of sleep and in sloth, the latter labors in vigils and fitting prayers.

The former, through gluttony, burns with the enticements of the belly and the desires of the throat; the latter afflicts itself with fastings and the torments of abstinence. The former, subject to luxury, strives to fulfill by the consummation of pleasure the affections of shameful deeds which it stirs up by the intent of thought; the latter loves the beauty of chastity and modesty. The former, set ablaze by the flame of avarice, seeks gain and flees the losses of temporal things; the latter, despising the world, claims Christ alone for itself. The former, through envy, permits no one to be superior or equal to itself, but with an inward wound of spite wastes away at the progress of all; the latter rejoices in the virtues of all, and through charity sets those lesser than itself before itself.

That one, seething with anger, bears nothing with equanimity, but raises a disturbed mind even to the tumult of the voice; this one is moved by no exasperation, but through tranquility and meekness patiently endures all things. That one is infected by sadness when it perceives any adversities; this one is broken by no grief, but even bearing evils from neighbors, it is not moved from inner joy. That one is infected by ambition for honors, by human praises, or is softened by the enticements of vainglory; this one loves humility, and delights to please its God alone, who is the inspector of the mind. That one, puffed up by the pride of arrogance, lifts up the wretched heart; this one, lest it fall from its own height, humbles itself even to the lowest things.

But what more? The concupiscence of the flesh plunges those consenting to it into a multitude of all vices, whereas the concupiscence of the spirit strengthens a fallen mind with the hope of future glory, lest it fail. Therefore, concerning that one, however much it prevails, one must in no way despair, because, once the contest is renewed, we can triumph over it even more gloriously. This one, however much it conquers, is not secure about victory, because the cunning enemy, even if sometimes defeated, nevertheless in the end conquers the victors. And those whom he does not strike in the first engagement, he strives to deceive in the end.

Hence it is also that the concupiscence of the flesh itself does not cease to struggle until the end of this life. But if the concupiscence of the spirit prevails even to the end, it reigns forever in the secure peace of victory with its victors. When the sting of concupiscence has been consumed, neither will the spirit strive against the flesh, nor the flesh against the spirit. But both, joined together in the concord of eternal peace, will cling to their Redeemer forever without assault.

XXXII.

Between the infusion of divine grace and the will of human free choice there is this difference: free choice is the will of free power, which of itself, spontaneously, can desire either good or evil; grace, however, is the free gift of divine mercy, through which we merit both the beginning of good will and the effect of the work. No one, moreover, can prevail in anything by the strength of free choice unless he is sustained by the help of supernal grace. For man is preceded by divine grace so that he may be good, nor does human free choice precede the grace of God; but that grace of God itself precedes the willing man so that he may also will well.

For by the weight of the flesh man is so driven that he is quick to sin and slow to repent. He has in himself that by which he may fall, and he does not have that by which he may rise, unless, by the grace of the Creator, He extends His hand to the fallen so that he may be lifted up. Finally, free will, which the first man had lost, is restored to man through God's grace. For he had free will to begin good, which was nevertheless to be perfected by God's help. But we receive both the beginning of free will and its perfection from God's grace. For we have both to begin and to perfect good from Him from whom both the gift of grace was given and free will has been restored in us.

It is God's, therefore, that good which we do, on account of prevenient and subsequent grace; but it is ours on account of the obedient will of free choice. For if it were not God's, why do we give thanks to Him? And if it were not ours, why do we expect the recompense of good works? Accordingly, then, in that we are preceded by grace, it is God's; but in that by doing good we follow the prevenient grace, it is ours. No one, however, precedes God by merits, so as to be able to hold Him as a debtor. But in a wondrous way the Creator, equal to all, by predestining forechooses some, and by a just judgment abandons others in their depraved habits. Whence it is most true that the gift of grace does not come from human virtue or from the merit of free will, but is bestowed by the goodness of the only divine loving-kindness.

For some are saved by the gift of his most gracious prevenient mercy, having been made vessels of mercy; but others, accounted reprobate and predestined to punishment, are damned, having been made vessels of wrath. This example is gathered from Esau and Jacob before they were born. For though they were brought forth from one conception and one birth, and were bound by the equal chain of original sin, yet the free goodness of divine prevenient mercy drew one of them to itself, while the other, held in hatred by a certain severity of justice, it left in the mass of perdition and damned. As the same God speaks through the prophet, saying: Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.

Hence it follows that grace is conferred by no preceding merits, but by divine calling alone. Nor is anyone saved or damned, chosen or reprobated, except by the purpose of the predestining God, who is just in the reprobate and merciful in the elect. For all the ways of the Lord are mercy and truth.

For before the gift of grace, free will is indeed present in man, but it is not good, because without the help of grace it remains weak. For just as the eye cannot see if it lacks the service of light, so the free will of the human will is worth nothing if it lacks the grace of light—that light, namely, which enlightens every man coming into this world. But free will is of itself ready for every evil, yet in no way ready for good except through the gift of grace; and the same grace grants to man both to will and to do good things, to weep over past evils, and to guard against present sins both in thought and in deed, as the Apostle also writes more plainly, saying: We are not sufficient to think anything of ourselves, as if of ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, etc. And so the benefit of grace is not extended to every kind of man, but only to those who are enlightened by faith; for the hearing of faith has not reached all nations.

Hence also the Apostle says: How, he says, will they call upon him in whom they have not believed? Or how will they believe him whom they have not heard? Even the gift of grace itself, to whomever it is given, is not granted equally, but is distributed by measure according to the merit of those receiving it, just as it is written: who will render to each one according to his works.

But every gift of grace is not given whole to all, but individual gifts are distributed to individuals, so that, as it were, the individual members of the body may have their individual functions, and one may need from another what the other does not have; and thus all things become common, while they become members mutually necessary to one another.

XXXIII.

Between the Law and the Gospel there is this difference: in the Law there is the letter, in the Gospel grace; the former had a shadow, the latter the image; the former was given because of transgression, the latter because of justification; the former demonstrates the sin of ignorance, the latter helps when it is recognized, so that it may be avoided; the former rebukes those given over to shameful acts, the latter frees sinners by its own goodness; the former decreed that retaliation be rendered, the latter commanded even to pray for enemies; the former, with the reins of marriages loosened, commanded to increase and be fruitful, the latter urged continence.

There circumcision of the flesh alone is preached; here, the washing in the cleansing of heart and body. There the kingdom of Canaan and promises of temporal things are contained; here eternal life and the kingdom of heaven are promised. There the leisure and rest of the sabbath is celebrated; here the very rest of the sabbath is had in Christ, who said: Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will refresh you, and you will find rest for your souls. There the eating of unclean animals is forbidden; here, in the body of Christ, that is, in his saints, whatever was prefigured by those unclean animals in the customs of men is not admitted.

There, with beasts sacrificed, offerings of flesh and blood were made; here the sacrifice of the flesh and blood of Christ is offered, which was prefigured by those animals. There the Passover is celebrated from the flesh of the Lamb; here Christ our Passover has been sacrificed, who is the true Lamb without blemish. There the Neomeniae, that is, the beginnings of the new moon, are celebrated; here the new creature is received in Christ, as the apostle Paul says: If anyone is a new creature in Christ, the old things have passed away; behold, they have been made new.

What more need be said? In the law, events were announced through figures for the signifying of future things; in grace, however, those things which were foretold there are fulfilled by the truth of the Gospel. Again, in the law both commandments and promises were written, but the commandments bade one fulfill or keep the law, while the promises, veiled in the figures of the sacraments, proclaimed the future grace of the Gospel. In the law, then, the commandments are held; but the promises are consummated in the fullness of the Gospel. For the Gospels fulfill the law, and the fullness of the Testaments fulfills the signifying of the precept.

Again, the law accomplished nothing else but that it only showed sins, did not take them away, and made all who were brought under its terror slaves, and from this the Apostle taught that the former people had the spirit of slavery. But the Gospel, when it came, removed the cruelty of the law; the sins which the law punished through the spirit of slavery it released through the spirit of adoption, it turned slaves into sons, it bestowed on all the love of fulfilling the law, and, if thereafter they committed things that should be punished, it pardons through the same spirit of adoption: it provided a pattern of acting well, and, so that the things it taught might be done, it poured in the Spirit as helper.

For the legal precepts that were given to that people are called, by comparison with better things, even not good, because they do not perfect what they command; but the grace of the Gospel helps inwardly that what it commands outwardly may be fulfilled. It is also said by the testimony of Ezekiel: I gave them precepts that were not good. Namely, because among them certain unprofitable things were permitted to be done by weaker senses, as in that place where God permitted the desire of the Israelites to be satisfied with the spoils of the Egyptians.

For in that a carnal people went beyond the measure of vengeance, the law permits carnal men to return the turn of evil, which the Gospels forbid to the stronger. Accordingly, then, they are called not good, since compared with the Gospel the precepts of the law are known to be inferior. For before the advent of our Redeemer, the gentile people did not obey the law for this reason, that it was not yet understood in a spiritual sense. For the law commanded heavy and hard things according to the letter, and therefore it was despised. But the grace of the Gospel came, it tempered the harshness of the law, and joined the gentile people to itself.

XXXIV.

Between the active and the contemplative life, this is the distinction: the active life is the one that is engaged in works of righteousness and in usefulness to one's neighbor; the contemplative, which, free from every business, is directed toward the love of God alone. Of these, one consists in the work of good conduct, the other in the contemplation of unchanging truth; one, which lives by faith in this pilgrimage, the other, which leads those who live well all the way to the kingdom.

For the rewards of the active life are great, but those of the contemplative are greater. The active life begins from good works, the contemplative arrives at what it intends. The works of the active life end together with the body, but the joys of the contemplative grow greater at the end. That one, however, although useful and good, is nonetheless to pass away when rest has come; this one is the reward of good work that is to pass away, and the rest that is to remain.

The contemplative life is shown through Rachel, who was beautiful and barren, because through the leisure of contemplation fewer children of works are generated. But the active life was shown by Leah without eyes, but fruitful. Because action is indeed laborious, and considers fewer things. But in that it shows itself more toward the usefulness of neighbor, it is more fruitful in works, and grows as it were in children. So too Martha and Mary, of whom the one exercised her mind in virtues in work, the other rested, fixed in contemplation.

But those who strive to come to the leisure of contemplation ought first to exercise themselves in the stadium of the active life, so that, while by works of righteousness they drain off the dregs of sins, they may present a clean heart for seeing God. For the mind that still seeks temporal glory, or yields to the temptations of carnal concupiscence, is beyond doubt barred from contemplation. Hence also the people, when they were receiving the law from the mountain, that is, from sublime contemplation, are kept back as it were by the curiosity of carnal things. And in the Gospel, the man cured of the legion wishes to follow the Lord through contemplation; but he is commanded to return home and to be engaged in the work of the active life.

In the very practice of contemplation and action, however, there is sometimes a great difference among souls. For to some contemplation alone is profitable, while to others the active life alone is a consolation. To these, a middle course composed of both is more useful for refreshing the anxieties of the mind, which are wont to be nourished by the intentness of one alone, so that they may be better tempered from the parts of both. For that the Savior flashed with signs and miracles in the cities by day commended to us the active life. But that he spent the night on the mountain in the pursuit of prayer signified the life of contemplation.

Therefore the servant of God, following the imitation of Christ, neither lets go of the active life nor fails to practice the contemplative life. For by walking otherwise he offends. For just as God is to be loved through contemplation, so through the active life the neighbor is to be loved. And by this means we cannot be without both lives, just as we can by no means be in love without both.

XXXV.

Between faith and works there is this difference: through faith the possibility of good work is begun, and by the work faith itself is perfected. For work is preceded by faith, and faith is brought to completion by works. But works before faith are of no profit at all, because it avails nothing to turn away from evil and to do what pertains to salvation for one who either denies or does not know the very author of salvation. Likewise faith without works is of no profit at all, because he cannot please God by faith who despises God in his work.

For this reason also faith without works is dead, according to James; and a work apart from faith is empty, according to Paul. For of these, the one commends the zeal of faith, the other the work. Paul proclaims that before faith there is in no way a good work; James declares that faith is worth nothing without a good work. And by this means, according to the first, works preceding faith profit nothing; according to the other, works following it profit much.

James says: Abraham our father was justified by works. Paul says: Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness. What then? Do the two destroy each other? Far be it. Rather, both instruct us. For according to Paul, Abraham merited to be justified by faith when he believed God; according to James, he was pleasing by works when, having been tested, he did not refuse to sacrifice his son.

XXXVI.

Among faith, hope, and charity there is this difference: faith is the confession of the Godhead and the solid foundation of religion; hope is the expectation of future goods; charity is perfect love toward God and neighbor. The first of these fosters present belief, the second awaits what has been promised for the future, the third embraces eternal love. Indeed these three are so joined together in the time of this life that one cannot stand without another.

Finally, we cannot truly believe unless we hope for the things that have been promised; nor shall we be able to endure the promises unless the belief of faith is firm; nor will the fruit of hope, or the stability of faith, be present unless the perfect charity of Christ is there, which both helps faith to believe and strengthens hope in its expectation. To this, specifically according to the Apostle, the primacy among these virtues is assigned, and its worship remains eternal.

For faith too will cease when the future things that are believed have come; and hope will have an end when each good person receives the blessedness he awaits. Charity alone will endure forever, she alone leading both to Christ, she alone enjoying eternal joy.

XXXVII.

Between love (amor) and affection (dilectio), or charity (charitas), there is this difference: that love and affection are intermediate, and are ready for either, being turned now to good, now to evil. Charity, however, is only toward good; whose very name is extolled to such a degree that God himself is called Charity. For that is perfect charity which both patiently endures enemies and kindly cherishes them. But whoever does not do these things departs far from charity. For these alone are the highest goods. For those by whom they are possessed, they are assuredly truly possessed. The other virtues, however, are intermediate goods, and can be held by some for benefit and for destruction, if people have grown arrogant and puffed up about them.

But four things are to be loved: namely, God, and our neighbor, our flesh, and our soul. The love of God is first, and the love of neighbor follows. But just as through the love of God love for neighbor is produced, so through the love of neighbor the love of God is shown. Love toward God is the origin of love toward neighbor; and love toward neighbor is the knowledge of love toward God. Further, the love of God begins from fear, but does not remain under fear. For love that comes from fear is servile, not free, because it does not consist in the love of God, but in fear of punishment.

But in these three things the love of God is expressed, so that nothing remains in a person that is not made subject to divine love. For when it is said, You shall love God with your whole heart, it commands that all thoughts be referred to God; when indeed it is said, with your whole soul, it ordered that all affections of the soul be referred to God; but when it adds, with your whole mind, it indicates that all human reason, by which we understand and discern, is to be occupied with divine things.

Likewise, two things are to be observed in love of neighbor: that he himself do for others what he wishes to be done for him by others, and that he not do to others what he fears would be done to him. From this twofold virtue of love toward neighbor arise virtues by which we either usefully desire the things that are to be sought, or guard against the things that are to be avoided.

For what the Lord says: All things whatsoever you wish that men should do to you, do you also to them, pertains to the bestowal of good upon neighbor. Likewise what is read in the Old Testament: What you do not wish for yourself, do not do to another, pertains to taking care that no one inflict evil on his neighbor. From these two articles, then, neighbor is rightly loved, when he is both cherished by the bestowal of benefit and harmed by no malice.

XXXVIII.

Between knowledge and wisdom there is this difference: knowledge pertains to recognition, wisdom to contemplation. Knowledge makes good use of temporal things, and is occupied in avoiding evils or in understanding or desiring goods; wisdom, however, contemplates only eternal things. Likewise some men have wished it understood between wisdom and prudence, that they place wisdom in divine matters, but prudence or knowledge in human affairs. Perfect knowledge, however, is to do many good things, and not to seek earthly praise for those things which God has commanded to be done, and to consider oneself an unprofitable servant before the eyes of God.

XXXIX.

They distinguish between wisdom and eloquence as follows: eloquence consists of words. There is no doubt that wisdom is of no profit without eloquence. Eloquence without wisdom cannot avail. For undiscriminating prudence is better than foolish talkativeness. For the study of things profits, not the ornaments of words. For eloquence, as we have said, is the knowledge of words; wisdom, however, is the cognition of things and the understanding of causes.

Furthermore, the ancients called wisdom philosophy, that is, the knowledge of all things human and divine. They said that there are three parts of this philosophy, namely, physics, logic, and ethics. Physics is natural; ethics, moral; logic, rational. Of these, the first is assigned to nature and the contemplation of things, the second is engaged in action and the knowledge of right living, the third is placed in discerning the true from the false.

This threefold kind of philosophy, according to the wise men of the world, is distinguished in its parts as follows. They say that seven disciplines belong to physics, of which the first is arithmetic, the second geometry, the third music, the fourth astronomy, the fifth astrology, the sixth mechanics, the seventh medicine. The account, moreover, of these same disciplines is briefly as follows.

For arithmetic is the definition through which the reckoning or order of all numbers consists. Geometry is the discipline of magnitude, distinguished by the marks and proper lines of figures, or by their forms. It is called Geometry from the measuring of the earth, by which the boundaries of each property are customarily laid out. The Egyptians first discovered this out of the necessity of land boundaries, which the Nile confused at the time of its flooding. Music is an art observable in voice or gesture, having in itself a fixed measure of numbers and sound together with the knowledge of perfect modulation. This consists of three modes, that is, sound, words, and numbers.

Astronomy is the law of the stars. Astrology is the reckoning which traces the turning of the heaven and of the signs, and the powers and risings of the stars, and their settings. The mathematicians follow this. Mechanics is a certain skill, or doctrine, to which they say the workshops of all things come together with subtlety. Medicine is the science of cures, devised for the balance of the body, or for health. Of all these indeed some are suited to religion, but some are far alien to it in every way.

Having set out the kinds and differences of the art of physics, let us now take up the parts of logic. It consists of dialectic and rhetoric. Dialectic is the method or rule of disputation, sharpening the understanding of the mind and distinguishing true things from false. Rhetoric is the method of speaking, the knowledge of jurists, which orators follow. By this, as someone has said, sentence is armed with eloquence as iron is with poison.

After logic follows ethics, which pertains to the formation of morals. For this is the teacher of living well, and it is divided into four principal virtues: namely prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance. Prudence is the acknowledgment of the true faith and the knowledge of the Scriptures, in which one ought to consider that threefold kind of understanding. The first of these is that by which certain things are received historically without any figure, as are the ten commandments; the second is that by which certain things in the Scriptures are received with a mixed sense, both according to the plain account of the events and also according to the understanding of figures, as with Sarah and Hagar: first, that they truly existed, and then that tropologically they prefigure the two Testaments.

The third kind is that which is received only spiritually, as in the Song of Songs. If these things are understood according to the sound of the words or of the works that produce them, it is taken as bodily lust rather than the power of the sacraments.

Having defined the kind of prudence, let us now set out the parts of justice, of which the first is to fear God, to venerate religion, to render honor to parents, to love one's country, to benefit all, to harm no one, to embrace the bonds of brotherly charity, to undertake dangers on behalf of others, to bring aid to the wretched, to repay the kindness of a good deed received, to preserve equity in judgments.

Fortitude is greatness of mind, and the glory of warlike virtue, contempt for honors and riches. This either yields patiently to adversities or resists bravely; it is not softened by the allurements of pleasures, is not broken by adversities, is not elated by prosperity; it is unconquered in labors, brave in dangers, disregards money, flees avarice, prepares the mind against dangers in the face of the wicked, yields to no troubles, and guards against the appetite for glory.

Temperance is a measure of life in every word or deed. It is truly the companion of modesty, it keeps the rule of humility, it preserves tranquillity of mind, it embraces continence and chastity, it fosters honor and decency, it restrains desire by reason, it suppresses anger, and it does not repay an insult. But of these, prudence takes delight in the knowledge of the truth, justice preserves the love of God and neighbor, fortitude has the strength of virtue and despises the fear of death, temperance moderates the affections of the flesh and extinguishes desire. The first believes and understands, the second loves, the third curbs desire, the fourth imposes measure.

XL.

On the distinctions of the four vices.

Against these four kinds of virtues, however, the philosophers say that an equal number of vices are set in opposition: fear, and joy, desire, and grief; but we call these very things not perfect vices, but intermediate, in that on account of the diversity of customs they are prepared for either side, and are turned now to good, now to evil, according to the will of choice. For thus certain virtues, wrongly used, give birth from themselves to vices: as, for instance, if from gentleness there sometimes arises sluggishness, and from piety a loosening of discipline, or from justice the immoderate vengeance of cruelty. So these four, if used well, are virtues; but if not, they pass over from virtues into base things.

In this way, then, when each person fears to sin, or desires to be made blessed, grieves for sins, rejoices in good works, these motions, which proceed from love and zeal, are already accepted as virtues. But on the contrary, while each person is held by the fear of lacking some earthly thing, or is broken by grief for a lost thing, and while he is inflamed by desire for temporal things, or lifted up by joy for a thing obtained, then they are called not virtues but truly vices. Of these, moreover, two belong to the future time, before anything happens, fear and desire; the other two to the past, when something has happened, joy and grief.

There are, however, eight perfect or principal vices which disturb the human race, from which a copious multitude of vices arises, namely: the concupiscence of gluttony, fornication, avarice, envy, sadness, anger, vainglory, and the last leader of these and their root, pride. Of all these, two are carnal, fornication and the gluttony of the belly; the rest are spiritual.

These things are distinguished among their members in the following way. The concupiscence of gluttony is distinguished in five modes: in the first mode, if someone desires food before the proper time, as Jonathan broke his fast with a taste of honey. In the second mode, if one seeks more delicate foods, as the people of the wilderness, despising the manna, craved the flesh of Egypt. In the third mode, if someone procures common foods too diligently, as the sons of Eli, contrary to custom, took raw flesh from those offering it, so that they might prepare it for themselves more carefully. In the fourth mode, if someone takes vile foods too abundantly. Whence also the prophet accuses Sodom of fullness of bread. In the fifth mode, if someone takes whatever it may be out of desire, as Esau lost his birthright for the concupiscence of a lentil dish.

Fornication also is discerned in a threefold kind. First indeed, when through the pleasure of luxury the commingling of the flesh is fulfilled; second, when by mere touching the luxury of the flesh is provoked through uncleanness; third, when by the intention of a shameful thought one is polluted by a nocturnal illusion. There is also a fourth kind of fornication according to Scripture, namely every illicit corruption of the mind, such as idolatry and avarice, from which comes transgression of the law on account of illicit concupiscence.

Furthermore, avarice is distinguished into a twofold punishment, that is, into the desire of increasing a thing and into the fear of losing it. As someone also says: For never is the thirst of cupidity fulfilled or satisfied. Nor are they tormented only by the love of increasing what they have, but also by the fear of losing it.

Envy itself also is afflicted by a twofold flame, that is, when it either envies a better person for what it itself is not, or grieves that anyone is like and equal to itself.

There follows sadness, of which there are three kinds. The first, as Cassian says, is temperate and reasonable, coming from repentance for sins; the second is disturbed and unreasonable, arising from anxiety of mind or despair over sins; the third proceeds from anger, either over an inflicted loss or over a hindered desire.

Now vainglory has a fourfold boasting. For there are those who have gifts and do not know the giver. And there are those who say they have received gifts by their preceding merits, not by the grace of the one who bestows. Likewise there are some who, through swelling pride, think they have what they do not have. Likewise there are some who, by despising others, think they have something uniquely. But more pernicious is the elation that comes from the singularity of boasting.

Pride, the last of these, has a threefold distinction: for the first kind of pride is that of those who through the transgression of sin hold the divine commandments in contempt; the second kind is that of those who are puffed up by the observance of the commandments and by elation over virtues; the third kind is that of those who through contumacy disdain to be subject to the commands of their elders.

These same vices, by divine aid and with the help of divine grace, are cured by the contrary virtues. Vigils and compunction of heart restrain the lust of gluttony; contrition of heart extinguishes fornication, along with affliction of the body, and assiduous prayer, or the exercise of labor, the fear of hell, and the love of the heavenly fatherland; the love of brotherly affection overcomes envy. And because they do not receive the heavenly kingdom unless they are of one accord, it is fitting to cast off envy and to love one's brother.

Patience tempers anger, and the reason of equanimity. Almsgiving subdues avarice, and the hope of eternal recompense. Brotherly conversation subdues sadness, and the consolation of the Scriptures. Fear tramples down arrogance, lest vainglory, having softened the mind, exclude it from all the virtues, and lest through boasting it lose itself and perish. Now the example of Christ's humility casts down pride, and the fear of the devil's ruin. For while he wished to be what he was not, he also lost what he was, and deserved the hells of Tartarus.