Augustine: CONTRA SECUNDAM IULIANI RESPONSIONEM

Adversus haereticos Pelagianos, qui dicunt Adam, etiamsi non peccasset, fuisse corpore moriturum, nec in illo humanum genus esse vitiatum (unde sequitur eos, ut mortes, et mortiferos morbos, et omnia mala quae videmus et parvulos perpeti, etiam in paradiso futura fuisse contendant, etiamsi nemo peccasset), scripsi librum ad comitem Valerium, cuius libri titulus est: De nuptiis et concupiscentia; eo quod ad illum pervenisse cognoveram dicere Pelagianos damnatores nos esse nuptiarum. Denique in illo opere, nuptiarum bonum a concupiscentiae carnalis malo, quo bene utitur pudicitia coniugalis, quali potui disputatione, discrevi. Quo libro accepto, memoratus vir illustris misit mihi in cartula nonnullas sententias decerptas ex opere Iuliani haeretici Pelagiani (in quo opere libris quattuor respondisse sibi visus est illi uni meo, quem De nuptiis et concupiscentia me scripsisse memoravi), missas sibi a nescio quo, qui eas, ut voluit, ex primo Iuliani libro decerpendas curavit; quibus ut quantocius responderem, idem Valerius poposcit.

Against the Pelagian heretics, who say that Adam, even if he had not sinned, would have been going to die in body, and that in him the human race was not vitiated (whence it follows that they contend deaths and mortiferous diseases, and all the evils which we see, and even little ones to suffer, would have been in paradise, even if no one had sinned), I wrote a book to Count Valerius, whose book’s title is: On Nuptials and Concupiscence; because I had learned that it had come to him that the Pelagians were saying that we are condemners of nuptials. Finally, in that work, the good of nuptials from the evil of carnal concupiscence, which conjugal chastity uses well, by such disputation as I could, I distinguished. When that book was received, the aforesaid illustrious man sent me on a little slip several sentences excerpted from the work of Julian, a Pelagian heretic (in which work, in four books, he seemed to himself to have answered that single one of mine, which I have recalled that I wrote, On Nuptials and Concupiscence), sent to him by I know not whom, who took care, as he wished, that they be excerpted from Julian’s first book; to which, that I might respond as quickly as possible, the same Valerius demanded.

Et factum est ut sub eodem titulo etiam secundum librum scriberem, contra quem Iulianus alios octo nimia loquacitate conscripsit. His nunc respondeo, eius verba proponens, eisdemque subiungens responsionem meam ad loca singula, sicut refutatio eorum visa est esse reddenda; cum iam priores quattuor eius libros, posteaquam in manus meas venerunt, sex libris satis aperteque refellerim.

And it came to pass that under the same title I also wrote a second book, against which Julian compiled eight others with excessive loquacity. To these I now respond, proposing his words and subjoining to the same my reply at each several place, as their refutation seemed to need to be rendered; since I have already, after they came into my hands, refuted his prior four books with six books, sufficiently and clearly.

Solvo promissionem meam.

I fulfill my promise.

1. IULIANUS. Magnis licet impeditus angoribus, quos intuenti mihi hac tempestate Ecclesiarum statum, partim indignatio ingerit, partim miseratio; non abieceram tamen promissionis meae fidem, videlicet ut qui fueram factus debitor promittendo, solvendo quoque esse curarem. Nam in libris quos ad fratrem nostrum Turbantium episcopum, virum magno virtutum fulgore conspicuum, contra Augustini scripta dictavi, pollicitus sum, si nihil quod studiis obsisteret, eveniret incommodi, occursurum me protinus eorum argumentis omnibus, qui ex sententia Manichaeorum traducem peccati, id est malum naturale defenderent; a quo sum hactenus munere varia et indissimulabili necessitate suspensus.

1. IULIANUS. Although hampered by great anguishes, which, as I look upon the state of the Churches at this season, partly indignation, partly compassion, brings upon me; yet I had not cast away the faith of my promise—namely, that I who had been made a debtor by promising should also take care to be so by paying. For in the books which I dictated to our brother Turbantius the bishop, a man conspicuous for a great splendor of virtues, against the writings of Augustine, I promised that, if nothing should occur of inconvenience to obstruct my studies, I would straightway confront all the arguments of those who, according to the opinion of the Manichaeans, defend the stock of sin, that is, natural evil; from which task I have hitherto been kept suspended by various and undisguisable necessity.

AUGUSTINUS. Utinam imiteris Turbantium post illa tua scripta, et post has tuas laudes, quibus eum dicis virum magno virtutum fulgore conspicuum, a vestro errore liberatum! Responsum est autem illis tuis libris, et demonstratum tibi, quae catholica lumina in sanctarum Scripturarum tractatione clarissima hoc opprobrio, id est Manichaeorum appellatione, offuscare coneris.

AUGUSTINE. Would that you might imitate Turbantius after those your writings, and after these your praises, by which you call him a man conspicuous with a great splendor of virtues, as one freed from your error! But an answer has been given to those your books, and it has been demonstrated to you which Catholic luminaries, most clarion in the tractation of the holy Scriptures, you try to obfuscate with this opprobrium, that is, with the appellation of the Manichaeans.

Opus dedicatur Floro.

The work is dedicated to Florus.

2. IUL. Verum, ut primum respirare licuit, consilium erat, quantum maxime tulisset ipsius rei natura, breviter promissa complere, nisi me actuosiorem denuo ingredi provinciam, beatissime pater Flore, voluisses; qui, quoniam tantum vales reverentia sanctitatis, ut praeceptis tuis segniter oboedire irreligiosum iudicem, obtinuisti facile ut in longiores vias compendium illius, quam elegeram, brevitatis extenderem. Favebis itaque operi tua auctoritate suscepto, cuius ob hoc potissimum nomen inserui, ut stilus securior et hilarior graderetur sub tantae patrocinio iussionis.

2. JUL. But, as soon as it was permitted to breathe again, the plan was, so far as the nature of the matter itself would most allow, briefly to fulfill the promises—unless you had wished me, most blessed father Florus, to enter anew upon a more active province; you who, since you prevail so much by the reverence of sanctity that I should judge it irreligious to obey your precepts sluggishly, easily obtained that I should extend into longer ways the compendium of that brevity which I had chosen. You will therefore favor the work undertaken by your authority, whose name I inserted for this reason above all, that the style might advance more secure and more cheerful under the patronage of so great a command.

Fuit igitur concepta animo non importuna ratio brevitatis; quia in illis quattuor libris cuncta fere, quae inventa a Manichaeis Augustini contra nos fuerant ore prolata, catholicae fidei veritas, pro qua et cum qua labentis mundi odia promeremur, tam disputationibus invictis, quam sacrae Legis testimoniis armata, protriverat, nec quidquam pene reliquum erat, si aequis iudicibus uteremur.

It was therefore a not inopportune plan of brevity conceived in mind; because in those four books the verity of the Catholic faith—for which and with which we merit the hatreds of the slipping world—armed as much with unconquerable disputations as with the testimonies of the sacred Law, had trampled down almost all the contrivances which, devised by the Manichaeans, had been brought forth by Augustine’s mouth against us; and scarcely anything was left, if we were to employ equitable judges.

AUG. Contra tuos illos quattuor libros sex libri a me scripti sunt. Post commemorationem quippe doctorum catholicorum (quos Manichaeos facis, mihi sub hoc crimine obiciendo quod illi in catholica Ecclesia didicerunt atque docuerunt), quam duobus prioribus voluminibus explicavi, sequentes quattuor singulos tuis singulis reddidi; redarguens tenebras haeresis vestrae luce catholicae veritatis, quam deserendo caecatus insanis, et rei, de qua nulla umquam in Ecclesia Christi controversia fuit, sicut novus haereticus, aequos iudices quaeris; quasi tibi videri aequi iudices possint, nisi quos vestro errore deceperis.

AUG. Against those four books of yours, six books have been written by me. For after the commemoration of catholic doctors (whom you make Manichaeans, by objecting this charge against me that they learned and taught these things in the catholic Church), which I unfolded in the two prior volumes, I rendered the following four severally to your several ones; refuting the darkness of your heresy by the light of catholic truth, from which, by deserting it, blinded, you rave; and on a matter about which there has never at any time been controversy in the Church of Christ, like a new heretic, you seek equitable judges; as though judges could seem equitable to you, except those whom you have deceived by your error.

Quem vero iudicem poteris Ambrosio reperire meliorem? De quo magister tuus Pelagius ait, quod eius fidem et purissimum in Scripturis sensum ne inimicus quidem ausus est reprehendere? Numquid ergo iste sensu in Scripturis purissimo impurissimi Manichaei dogma retineret, dicens: Omnes sub peccato nascimur, quorum ipse ortus in vitio est ¹? Tu ergo iam iudica quam non puro sensu hoc catholicum dogma reprehendas, teque corrigere Ambrosio iudicante ne differas.

But what judge could you find better than Ambrose? About whom your teacher Pelagius says that not even an enemy dared to reprehend his faith and most pure sense in the Scriptures? Would then this man, with a most pure sense in the Scriptures, retain the dogma of the most impure Manichaean, saying: All are born under sin, whose very origin is in vice¹? You therefore now judge how, with a not pure sense, you reprehend this catholic dogma, and do not delay to correct yourself with Ambrose judging.

Scripturae ratione firmantur.

They are confirmed by the reason of Scripture.

3. IUL. Testimonia tamen Scripturarum, quibus contra nos agi aliquid posse existimant, nonnulla praeterieram, quae me explanatum ire pollicitus eram, ut docerem ambigua quaeque Legis verba, quae ab inimicis nostris assumi solent, nec veritati praeiudicare perspicuae, et secundum hoc esse intellegenda, quod absolutissimis Scripturae sanctae auctoritatibus et insuperabili ratione firmatur. Siquidem hoc ipso, quam sit divinae Legis imperitus interpres et profanus apparet, quisquis putat eius sanctione defendi, quod iustitia non potest vindicari.

3. IUL. Nevertheless, the testimonies of the Scriptures, by which they suppose that something can be acted against us, I had passed over some, which I had promised to go through explained, so that I might show that the ambiguous words of the Law, which are wont to be assumed by our enemies, do not prejudice the perspicuous truth, and are to be understood according to that which is established by the most absolute authorities of holy Scripture and by insuperable reason. For by this very fact it appears how unskilled an interpreter and how profane of the divine Law he is, whoever thinks that by its sanction there is defended that which cannot be vindicated by justice.

AUG. Vos quod dicitis, potius non potest ulla iustitiae ratione defendi. Quia miseria generis humani, a qua nullum hominum ab exortu usque ad obitum videmus alienum, non pertinet ad Omnipotentis iustum iudicium, si non est originale peccatum.

AUG. What you say, rather, cannot be defended by any rationale of justice. Because the misery of the human race, from which we see no human being alien from birth to death, does not pertain to the just judgment of the Omnipotent, if there is no original sin.

Aequitas divina non potest impugnari testimoniis biblicis.

Divine equity cannot be impugned by biblical testimonies.

4. IUL. Nam si Lex Dei fons est ac magistra iustitiae, auxiliis quoque eius, Dei aequitas adiuvari potest, impugnari non potest. Nullum ergo adminiculum iniquitati de illius Scripturae viribus comparari natura rerum sinit, quae hanc unam promulgationis causam habuit, ut eius testimoniis, remediis, minis, ultionibus iniquitas deleretur.

4. IUL. For if the Law of God is the fount and teacher of justice, then even by its aids the equity of God can be assisted; it cannot be impugned. Therefore the nature of things does not allow any support for iniquity to be procured from the powers of that Scripture, which had this sole cause of promulgation: that by its testimonies, remedies, menaces, and vengeances iniquity might be blotted out.

AUG. Eius testimoniis declaratur, quod: Homo vanitati similis factus est, dies eius velut umbra praetereunt ². Cum qua eum vanitate nasci, non solum veridica Scriptura qua plangitur, verum etiam laboriosa et aerumnosa cura qua eruditur, ostendit. In eius remediis legitur, etiam cum parvulus natus fuerit, offerendum esse sacrificium pro peccato ³. In eius minis legitur, interituram fuisse animam parvuli, si die non circumcideretur octavo ⁴. In eius ultionibus legitur, iussos interimi etiam parvulos, quorum parentes ad iracundiam provocaverunt Deum, ut internitione bellica delerentur ⁵.

AUG. By its testimonies it is declared, that: Man has been made like to vanity; his days pass by like a shadow ². That he is born with that vanity is shown not only by the truth-speaking Scripture, by which it is lamented, but also by the laborious and troublesomely-burdensome discipline by which he is schooled. In its remedies it is read that, even when a little child has been born, a sacrifice for sin is to be offered ³. In its threats it is read that the soul of the little one was to perish, if on the eighth day he were not circumcised ⁴. In its vengeances it is read that even little children were ordered to be slain, whose parents provoked God to wrath, so that they might be destroyed by military extermination ⁵.

Explicanda sunt testimonia biblica quae ambigua videntur.

Biblical testimonies which seem ambiguous must be explicated.

5. IUL. Nihil ergo per Legem Dei agi potest contra Deum Legis auctorem. Quo uno compendio excluditur quidem quidquid ab errantibus consuevit obici; sed nos ad docendum quam sit veritas locuples cui credimus, illis quoque Scripturarum locis, quae intellectum sententiae elocutionum perplexitate velarunt, expositionis lucem solemus afferre; ut originis suae dignitatem reserata possideant, nec ab stemmate sacro velut notha aut degenerantia separentur.

5. IUL. Therefore nothing can be done through the Law of God against God, the author of the Law. By this one compendium, indeed, whatever is wont to be objected by those who err is excluded; but we, in order to teach how opulent the truth is to which we give credence, are accustomed to bring the light of exposition even to those places of the Scriptures which have veiled the understanding of the meaning by the perplexity of their elocutions; so that, once unsealed, they may possess the dignity of their origin, and not be separated from the sacred lineage as if spurious or degenerate.

AUG. Immo vero Scripturarum sanctarum lumina certa veritate fulgentia vos pravarum disputationum perplexitate obscurare conamini. Quid enim lucidius, quam id quod modo dixi: Homo vanitati similis factus est, dies eius velut umbra praetereunt ⁶? Quod utique non fieret, si ad Dei similitudinem in qua est conditus permaneret.

AUG. Nay rather, you strive to obscure the lights of the holy Scriptures, shining with sure truth, by the perplexity of perverse disputations. For what is more lucid than that which I have just said: Man has been made like vanity; his days pass by like a shadow ⁶? Which assuredly would not happen, if he remained in the likeness of God in which he was created.

Quid lucidius, quam id quod dictum est: Sicut in Adam omnes moriuntur, sic et in Christo omnes vivificabuntur ⁷? Quid lucidius, quam id quod dictum est: Quis enim est mundus a sorde? Nec infans, cuius est unius diei vita super terram ⁸; et alia plurima, quae vestris tenebris involvere, et in vestrum perversum sensum molimini vana loquacitate convertere?

What is more lucid than that which has been said: As in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be vivified ⁷? What is more lucid than that which has been said: For who is clean from sordidness? Not even an infant, whose life is of one day upon the earth ⁸; and very many other things, which you endeavor to involve in your darkness, and to convert by vain loquacity into your perverse sense?

Textus biblici sunt iusti, quia divini.

Biblical texts are just, because divine.

6. IUL. Hoc ergo ex nostro more adhuc solum exsequi cogitabam, id est ut a Traducianorum interpretationibus membra divinae Legis, quae subiacebant contumeliae, liberarem; quae erant scilicet divina, quod essent iusta monstrando.

6. IUL. Therefore I was thinking to carry out only this thus far according to our custom, that is, to free the members of the divine Law from the interpretations of the Traducianists, which lay under contumely; which were, of course, divine, by demonstrating that they are just.

AUG. Contumelioso ore Traducianos vocas, Cyprianum, Ambrosium, Gregorium, ceterosque socios eorum confitentes originale peccatum. Sed non est mirum quod novi haeretici Catholicis, a quibus exeunt, novum nomen imponunt; hoc et alii fecerunt, quando similiter exierunt.

AUG. With an insulting mouth you call “Traducians” Cyprian, Ambrose, Gregory, and the rest, their associates, who confess original sin. But it is not a wonder that new heretics impose a new name upon the Catholics from whom they go out; this also others have done, when in like manner they went out.

Mihi longior facta est responsio.

A longer response has been made for me.

7. IUL. Verum quia id impendio poposcisti, immo indixisti auctoritate patria, ut libro tractatoris Poeni, quem ad Valerium comitem vernula peccatorum eius Alypius nuper detulit, obviarem, hinc mihi est longior facta responsio.

7. IUL. But since you demanded this with great urgency, nay rather proclaimed it by paternal authority, that I should confront the book of the Punic treatise-writer, which Alypius, the home-born slave of his sins, recently delivered to Count Valerius, hence my reply has been made longer.

AUG. Magna tibi poena est disputator hic Poenus; et longe antequam nasceremini, magna poena haeresis vestrae Poenus praeparatus est Cyprianus.

AUG. A great penalty to you is this Punic disputant; and long before you were born, the Punic Cyprian was prepared as a great penalty for your heresy.

Contumeliae contra Aug.

Insults against Aug.

8. IUL. Dedit enim ingenii sui denuo fideique monumenta, quae intellegantur aegerrime, exponantur difficillime, vix sine horrore audiantur; convincantur autem facillime, confodiantur acerrime, et propter honestatis reverentiam oblivioni exterminata mandentur.

8. IUL. For he has given anew monuments of his genius and of his faith, which are understood with the utmost difficulty, are expounded with the greatest difficulty, are scarcely heard without horror; but are refuted very easily, are run through most keenly, and, for the reverence of decency, are committed to oblivion, banished.

AUG. Non quomodo vis iudicant qui legunt.

AUG. Not as you wish do those who read judge.

Novos nos haereticos esse criminantur.

They accuse us of being new heretics.

9. IUL. Primus igitur eius liber, qui ante hunc solus est editus, novos nos esse haereticos criminatur ⁹; quia repugnemus opinioni, quae dealbati instar sepulcri, quod secundum Evangelii sententiam, mundo extrinsecus colore vestitum, spurcitia est et iniquitate confertum ¹⁰, sub laude Baptismatis eructat Manichaeorum sordes ac naturale peccatum, ut Ecclesiae catholicae pura hactenus Sacramenta contaminet.

9. IUL. Therefore his first book, which alone was published before this one, accuses us of being new heretics ⁹; because we oppose an opinion which, like a whitewashed sepulchre—which, according to the sentence of the Gospel, being vested outwardly in a clean color, is crammed with filth and iniquity ¹⁰—under the praise of Baptism belches forth the filth of the Manichaeans and “natural sin,” so that it may contaminate the hitherto pure Sacraments of the Catholic Church.

AUG. Novos haereticos vos antiqua catholica fides, quam modo oppugnare coepistis, a praeclarissimis, qui fuerunt ante nos, doctoribus praedicata demonstrat. Non autem omnibus respondendum est conviciis potius quam accusationibus tuis, quae non in me, sed etiam in Ambrosium, Hilarium, Gregorium, Cyprianum, aliosque praedicatissimos Ecclesiae doctores, fronte impudentissima et lingua procacissima iacularis.

AUG. The ancient catholic faith, which you have only now begun to assail, as proclaimed by the most illustrious doctors who were before us, shows you to be new heretics. Nor, however, should one answer everything with insults rather than address your accusations, which you hurl, with the most shameless brow and a most impudent tongue, not only against me but also against Ambrose, Hilary, Gregory, Cyprian, and other most renowned doctors of the Church.

Suspiciones contra Valerium.

Suspicions against Valerius.

10. IUL. Laudat etiam potentem hominem, quod nostris petitionibus, qui nihil aliud quam dari tanto negotio iudices vociferabamur, ut ea quae subreptionibus acta constabat, emendarentur potius, quam punirentur examine, mole suae dignitatis obstiterit, nec disceptationi tempus aut locum permiserit impetrare. Quod utrum ille ad quem scribitur, tam nequiter fecerit, quam testatur ista laudatio, ipse viderit.

10. IUL. He also praises a potent man, because, to our petitions—we who were vociferating nothing else than that judges be given to so great a business—that the things which were established to have been done by subreptions should be emended rather than punished by an examination, he has, by the mass of his dignity, stood in the way, nor has he permitted time or place to be obtained for disceptation. As to whether he, to whom it is written, has done so wickedly as this laudation attests, let him himself see.

Nos tamen in quantum de eo melius aestimaverimus, nominis illius commemoratio opusculo meo honorifice inserta patefecit. Verum liber ille de patrono suo falsa fortasse contineat. Porro fideliter quid scriptor eius cupiat ostendit; videlicet, ut contra rationem, contra fidem, contra omnem morum et dogmatum sanctitatem, vi fera et caeca impotentia dimicetur.

We, however, insofar as we have judged more favorably of him, have made this plain by the honorable commemoration of that name inserted into my little work. But that book about his patron perhaps contains falsehoods. Further, it faithfully shows what its writer desires; namely, that the contest be waged—against reason, against faith, against every sanctity of morals and dogmas—by savage force and blind violence.

AUG. Absit a christianis potestatibus terrenae reipublicae, ut de antiqua catholica fide dubitent, et ob hoc oppugnatoribus eius locum et tempus examinis praebeant; ac non potius in ea certi atque fundati, talibus, quales vos estis, inimicis eius disciplinam coercitionis imponant. Quod enim propter Donatistas factum est, eorum violentissimae turbae fieri coegerunt, ignorantes quid ante sit gestum, quod eis fuerat ostendendum; quales vos turbas Deus avertat ut habeatis; Deo tamen propitio non habetis.

AUG. Far be it from the Christian authorities of the earthly republic to doubt the ancient catholic faith, and on account of this to afford to its assailants a place and a time for examination; and not rather, being certain and founded in it, to impose upon such as you are, its enemies, the discipline of coercion. For what was done on account of the Donatists, their most violent crowds forced to be done, being ignorant of what had previously been transacted, which had to be shown to them; may God avert that you have such crowds; yet, with God propitious, you do not have them.

Foeda conscientia Aug.

Foul conscience of Aug.

11. IUL. Quibus gestis inter voluminis primas partes, progressus est ad distinctionem nuptiarum et concupiscentiae, sicut fuerat tituli inscriptione pollicitus; deditque toto deinceps opere documentum artis et virtutis suae. Inter negationem enim confessorum et negatorum confessionem ultima necessitate vexatus, quid aerumnarum pateretur foeda conscientia publicavit.

11. JUL. With these things transacted among the first parts of the volume, he proceeded to the distinction of marriages and concupiscence, just as he had promised by the inscription of the title; and thereafter in the whole work he gave proof of his art and his virtue. For, between the denial of the confessors and the confession of the deniers, harassed by utmost necessity, he made public what hardships a foul conscience suffered.

AUG. Conviciare quantum potes; quis enim conviciosus hoc non potest?

AUG. Hurl invective as much as you can; for what abusive man cannot do this?

Poteram tacere.

I could have kept silent.

12. IUL. Priori ergo operi quattuor libellis ea, quam suppeditavit veritas, facultate respondi; praefatus sane praeteriturum me, quae et pro dogmate illius nihil habere ponderis apparebat, et me possent arguere multiloquii, si fuissem imbecilla quaeque et inania persecutus. Quamquam, si hanc regulam, ut decuit, servare licuisset, id est ut nec oppugnationem ex professione inepta mererentur, pene omnia eius inventa publico fuerant spernenda silentio.

12. IUL. To the prior work, then, in four little books I responded with that faculty which truth supplied; having indeed prefaced that I would pass over those things which both appeared to have no weight for his dogma, and could accuse me of multiloquy, if I had pursued each feeble and empty thing. Although, if it had been permitted to observe this rule, as was fitting, that is, that they should not even deserve an attack by reason of their inept profession, almost all his inventions ought to have been spurned by public silence.

Sed quoniam, rebus in peiorem partem properantibus (quod mundi fini suo incumbentis indicium est), in Ecclesia quoque Dei adepta est stultitia et turpitudo dominatum; pro Christo legatione fungimur ¹¹, et pro virili portione quantum valemus opis, ad defensionem catholicae religionis afferimus; nec piget mandare litteris remedia, quae contra errorum venena conficimus. aug. Stultitia et turpitudo vos peperit; sed si in Ecclesia dominatum adepta esset, ibi vos utique tenuisset.

But since, as things are hastening into a worse condition (which is an indication of the world leaning upon its own end), folly and disgrace have obtained dominion even in the Church of God; we perform a legation for Christ ¹¹, and, to the extent of our strength, we bring as much aid as we can to the defense of the catholic religion; nor are we loath to commit to letters the remedies which we compound against the poisons of errors. aug. Folly and disgrace begot you; but if it had obtained dominion in the Church, it would certainly have held you there.

Provocatio ad lectores.

Appeal to the readers.

13. IUL. Testatus utique, ut dixi, fueram, nec contra omnes me species defendendae traducis in primo disserturum opere, nec cuncta, quae ille liber tenebat, replicaturum; sed cum his conflicturum, in quibus summam et vim sui dogmatis collocasset. Hoc autem me spopondisse fideliter, quicumque vel obliquus sit, tantum diligens utriusque operis lector, agnoscet.

13. JUL. I had indeed, as I said, attested that I would neither in my first work discourse against all the species of traducing that called for defense, nor rehearse all the things which that book contained; but that I would contend with those in which he had collocated the sum and force of his dogma. That I have faithfully promised this, whoever he be, even if biased, so far as he is a diligent reader of both works, will acknowledge.

Ego autem conscientiae honestate securus inimicum nostrum et adhortor, et stimulo, ut si aliquod a se prolatum, a me praetermissum aestimat argumentum, quod cuiuspiam momenti vel ipse iudicet, in medium proferat, et me timoris dolique convincat.

But I, secure in the honesty of my conscience, both exhort and spur our enemy, that if he thinks any argument produced by himself has been omitted by me, which he himself judges to be of some moment, let him bring it forth into the open, and convict me of fear and of guile.

AUG. Non credo quod ea quae praetermisisti, nullius momenti esse putaveris; quamvis et si hoc te putasse concedam; non tamen ita esse, catholicus et intellegens, si et unum illum meum et tuos quattuor habuerit, diligentiamque adhibuerit, lector inveniet.

AUG. I do not believe that those things which you have passed over you judged to be of no moment; although even if I concede that you thought this, nevertheless that it is not so, a catholic and intelligent reader will find, if he has both that single one of mine and your four, and has applied diligence.

Nihil a me impletum est aliter quam promissum.

Nothing has been fulfilled by me otherwise than as promised.

14. IUL. Scripturarum sane testimonia quaedam latius exposui, quaedam brevius; quia me plene id secuturo opere facturum spopondi. Nihil itaque ibi de omnibus Augustini argumentis et propositionibus non explosum remansit, nihil a me impletum est aliter quam promissum; multa in inventis eius falsa, multa stolida, sacrilega multa convici.

14. IUL. I have indeed set forth certain testimonies of the Scriptures more broadly, others more briefly; because I pledged that I would do this fully in a work to follow. Therefore there, of all Augustine’s arguments and propositions, nothing remained not exploded (refuted), nothing by me has been carried out otherwise than promised; I found many things in his inventions false, many foolish, and I inveighed against many sacrilegious ones.

AUG. Hoc quidem dicis, sed tu dicis; qui autem legit et intellegit, si non Pelagianus est, non hoc dicit.

AUG. This indeed you say, but you say it; but whoever reads and understands, if he is not a Pelagian, does not say this.

Nulla arrogantia.

No arrogance.

15. IUL. Qua professione non est nobis arrogantiae fama metuenda; quia non ingenio meo veritatem defensam, sed imbecillitatem nostri ingenii veritatis viribus confitemur adiutam.

15. IUL. By which profession no repute of arrogance is to be feared for us; because we confess that truth was not defended by my ingenuity, but that the imbecility of our ingenuity was aided by the powers of truth.

AUG. Elisam dixisses, si verum dicere voluisses.

AUG. You would have said Elissa, if you had wished to speak the truth.

Fatetur Aug. et me falsum dixisse et se non legisse quid dixerim.

Aug. confesses both that I have spoken falsely and that he has not read what I said.

16. IUL. Cum haec itaque haud aliter quam dixi, constet impleta; mirari satis nequeo hominis impudentiam, qui in hoc recenti opere suo libros meos falsitatis accusat, quos tamen necdum in manus suas venisse testatur ¹². Durum quidem, quod consuetudo peccandi amorem delicti facit; sed nihil durius, quam quod exstinguit pudorem; quod licet ex improbitatis usu esse constaret, tamen amplius praesentia pericula docuerunt, quam quisquam nostrum poterat autumare. Quando enim crederem eo usque Numidae induruisse frontem, ut in uno opere et uno versu utrumque fateretur, et me falsa dixisse, et se non legisse quid dixerim.

16. IUL. Since therefore it stands established that these things have been fulfilled not otherwise than I said, I cannot sufficiently marvel at the man’s impudence, who in this recent work of his accuses my books of falsity, which nevertheless he attests have not yet come into his hands ¹². Hard indeed, that the habit of sinning makes a love of the offense; but nothing harder than that which extinguishes shame; which, although it was evident to be from the practice of improbity, yet present dangers have taught more than any one of us could have surmised. For when would I have believed that the Numidian had hardened his brow to such a degree, that in one work and in one verse he would confess both that I had spoken falsely, and that he had not read what I had said.

AUG. Si hoc non fecisti, ille fecit qui de libris tuis ea, quae comiti Valerio putavit mittenda esse, decerpsit. Quod eum non credens ego fecisse mendaciter, auctori tribui quod decerptori debui.

AUG. If you did not do this, then he did who excerpted from your books those things which he thought ought to be sent to Count Valerius. Since I, not believing that he had done this mendaciously, I attributed to the author what I ought to have attributed to the excerptor.

Tuos quippe libros nondum legeram, sed quae ille ex eis decerpserat, legeram. Si te hominem cogitares, hoc fieri potuisse cum cerneres, nequaquam tam invidiosam quaereres homini hac occasione calumniam.

Indeed, I had not yet read your books, but I had read what he had excerpted from them. If you had considered yourself a human being, when you perceived that this could have happened, you would by no means have sought so invidious a calumny against a man on this occasion.

Aug. legit tantum excerpta.

Aug. read only the excerpts.

17. IUL. Nam scribens ad eum, quem miratur studiosum esse librorum suorum, cum sit militiae sudoribus occupatus, indicat ab Alypio chartulas ad se fuisse delatas, quae ita superscriptae essent: Capitula de libro Augustini quem scripsit, contra quae de libris pauca decerpsi. Hic video eum, qui tuae Praestantiae ista scripta direxit, de nescio quibus libris ea, causa, quantum existimo, celerioris responsionis, ne tuam differret instantiam, voluisse decerpere.

17. JUL. For, writing to him whom he marvels to be studious of his books, though he is occupied with the sweats of military service, he indicates that little papers had been brought to him by Alypius, which were superscribed thus: Chapters from a book of Augustine which he wrote, against which I have excerpted a few things from the books. Here I see that he who directed those writings to Your Excellency wished to cull these from I know not what books, for the sake, so far as I suppose, of a swifter response, lest he should defer your insistence.

Qui autem sint isti libri cum cogitarem, eos esse arbitratus sum, quorum mentionem Iulianus facit in epistola quam Romam misit, cuius exemplum simul ad me usque pervenit. Ibi quippe ait: Dicunt etiam istas, quae modo aguntur, nuptias a Deo institutas non fuisse, quod in libro Augustini legitur, contra quem ego modo quattuor libellis respondi . Et post haec verba infert iterum suis sermonibus: Credo ex his libellis ista decerpta sunt; unde melius fortasse fuerat, ut universo ipsi operi eius, quod quattuor voluminibus explicavit, refellendo et redarguendo nostra elaboraret intentio; nisi et ego responsionem differre noluissem; sicut nec tu transmissionem scriptorum, quibus respondendum est, distulisti ¹³. Ostendit ergo hic apertissime excerpta illa suspicari se de opere meo tumultuarie fuisse collecta; integros autem ignorare libros, quibus tamen audet se dicere respondere potuisse.

But as I was considering which books these are, I judged them to be those of which Julian makes mention in the letter that he sent to Rome, a copy of which likewise came all the way to me. For there he says: They also say that these marriages, which are now being transacted, were not instituted by God, which is read in the book of Augustine, against which I have just now replied with four little books . And after these words he again inserts in his own discourse: I believe from these little books these things have been excerpted; whence perhaps it would have been better that our endeavor had labored at refuting and reproving the whole work itself of his, which he unfolded in four volumes, unless I too had been unwilling to defer a response; just as neither did you defer the transmission of the writings, to which an answer must be given ¹³. He shows therefore here most openly that he suspects those excerpts to have been tumultuarily collected from my work; but that he is ignorant of the entire books, to which nevertheless he dares to say he could have responded.

AUG. Cur non auderem, qui te in eis vana dixisse dubitare utique non deberem? Non enim contra vera posses loqui nisi vana.

AUG. Why should I not dare, since I certainly ought not to doubt that you have said vanities in them? For you could not speak against truths except by vanities.

Neque meus animus me fefellit; eos namque libros tuos tales inveni, cum legerem, quales praesumpseram esse, antequam legerem.

Nor did my mind deceive me; for I found those your books to be such, when I read, as I had presumed them to be before I read.

Epistola directa Romam.

Epistle directed to Rome.

18. IUL. Facit quoque epistolae mentionem, quam a me ait Romam fuisse directam; sed per verba quae posuit, nequivimus quo de scripto loqueretur, agnoscere ¹⁴. Nam ad Zosimum quondam illius civitatis episcopum super his quaestionibus duas epistolas destinavi; verum eo tempore, quo adhuc libros exorsus non eram.

18. JUL. He also makes mention of an epistle, which he says was directed by me to Rome; but from the words which he set forth, we were not able to recognize what writing he was speaking about ¹⁴. For to Zosimus, once bishop of that city, I dispatched two epistles on these questions; but at that time, when I had not yet begun the books.

AUG. Haec epistola non est ad Zosimum; sed ad eos seducendos qui Romae possent tali suasione seduci. Sed si eam non agnoscis, ecce, non sit tua.

AUG. This epistle is not to Zosimus; but for the seducing of those who at Rome could be seduced by such suasion. But if you do not recognize it, behold, let it not be yours.

Utinam et illi libri non essent tui, sed alieni; ne per eos tu longe a veritate fieres alienus.

Would that those books were not yours, but another’s; lest through them you become far alienated from the truth.

Quanta levitas et imbecillitas.

How great levity and imbecility.

19. IUL. Porro utatur indicio epistolae, qua aut accepit, aut finxit me responsionem contra novos Manichaeos (quia vetus dedignatur videri) quattuor voluminibus explicasse; cur non curavit ea quae obiecissemus addiscere? Cur non studuit, qui cum esset congressurus, agnoscere; sed levitate turpissima concitatus in certamen maximum luminibus involutis, Andabatarum more, processit?

19. IUL. Let him further make use of the evidence of the letter, by which he either received, or fabricated, that I had unfolded a response against the new Manichaeans (because he disdains to seem old) in four volumes; why did he not take care to learn the things which we had objected? Why did he not strive, since he was about to engage, to recognize them? But, roused by most shameful levity, did he advance into a very great contest with his eyes wrapped up, after the fashion of the Andabatae?

Quod factum eiusmodi allegatione defendit, ut dicat se patroni sui festinationem, quam ille in transmittendis schedis habuit, imitari praecipiti responsione voluisse; quasi non honestissime potuerit intimare tempus sibi aliquod debere concedi, quo ad lectionem editi operis perveniret; flagitium esse inter eruditos in scribendi gravitate delinquere, et impatientia deliberandi impugnare, quod nescias. Huc accedit, quod nobis calliditatis moliturus invidiam, quae dictorum eius seriem curtaverit, his excerptis fidem accommodavit, quae verisimilius falsitate eius et malignitate, quam cuiusquam nostrum imperita simplicitate videntur esse composita. Verum id quovis animo, quovis auctore contigerit; nobis tamen duobus suffragatur modis; quia simul patuit et quanta sit levitas, et quanta imbecillitas in veritatis inimico, qui se approbavit, et cum loqui non debeat, tacere non posse, et paucis semiplenis discerptisque magis quam aggregatis sententiis, de primo tamen solum libro meo ita cessisse fractum, ut vulgi in nos femineis admodum vocibus pectora commoveret; quod disputationis nostrae processibus apparebit.

He defends this deed with an allegation of such a sort, as to say that he wished to imitate, with a headlong response, the haste of his patron which that man had in transmitting the sheets; as though he could not most honorably have intimated that some time ought to be conceded to him, to the end that he might arrive at a reading of the published work; that it is a scandal among the learned to delinque against the gravity of writing, and, through impatience of deliberating, to impugn what you do not know. To this is added that, contriving to fasten odium upon us for supposed craftiness, he accommodated faith to those excerpts which curtailed the sequence of his words—excerpts which seem more plausibly to have been composed by his falsity and malice than by any unskilled simplicity of ours. But however that befell, with whatever mind, by whatever author; nevertheless it supports us in two ways: because at once it became evident both how great is the levity and how great the imbecility in the enemy of truth—who has shown himself, and, when he ought not to speak, cannot keep silent—and, with a few half-full and torn sentences rather than aggregated ones, yet from my first book alone he withdrew thus shattered, so as to stir the hearts of the crowd against us with very womanish cries; which will appear from the processes of our disputation.

AUG. Quid mihi irasceris, quod ad me libri tui pervenire tardius potuerunt; vel quod eos quaerens non potui celeriter invenire? Tamen potui et omnino debui, ea quae mihi missa chartula continebat, cuiuscumque et qualiacumque essent, ne putarentur invicta, plane apertis, non involutis oculis inspicere, et sine dilatione refellere; quia etsi numquam libros tuos reperire possem, oportuit ut ea, quae alicuius momenti esse credidit, qui tanto viro arbitratus est esse mittenda, quantum valerem, ne quisquam legens eis deciperetur, arguerem.

AUG. Why are you angry with me, because your books could reach me only more slowly; or because, seeking them, I could not quickly find them? Yet I could, and indeed altogether I ought, to inspect with eyes plainly open, not veiled, the things which the little note sent to me contained, whatever they were and of whatever sort, lest they be thought unrefuted, and to refute them without delay; because even if I could never discover your books, it was proper that I, so far as my strength availed, should argue against those things which he who judged them fit to be sent to so great a man believed to be of some moment, lest anyone reading be deceived by them.

Non ergo mihi quod obiecisti obiceres, nisi tu potius ista, ut non dicam exstinctis, certe clausis oculis loquereris. Nullo modo autem diceres, vulgi a nobis in vos pectora commoveri, nisi scires multitudinem christianam in utroque sexu fidem catholicam non latere, quam conaris evertere.

Therefore you would not be objecting to me what you have alleged, unless rather you yourself were speaking these things, not to say with eyes extinguished, at least with eyes closed. And in no way would you be saying that the hearts of the common crowd are moved by us against you, unless you knew that, to the Christian multitude of both sexes, the Catholic faith does not lie hidden, which you are striving to overturn.

Naturalis mali opinio.

The natural opinion of evil.

20. IUL. Admoneo tamen hic quoque, sicut priore a nobis opere factum est, non me omnia examussim eius verba positurum; sed ea capita, quibus destructis, naturalis mali opinio conteratur.

20. JUL. I admonish, however, here too, just as in the prior work done by us, that I will not set forth all his words to the exact rule; but the heads, by the destruction of which the opinion of natural evil may be crushed.

AUG. Ea quae praetermittis, colligentur fortasse vel a nobis vel ab aliis, ut appareat cur praetermiseris.

AUG. The things which you omit will perhaps be collected either by us or by others, so that it may appear why you have omitted them.

Textuum truncatio.

Truncation of texts.

21. IUL. Quod licet plene primo opere constet effectum; tamen quoniam nunc nonnulla de uno dumtaxat libro meo sibi refellenda proposuit, meque, ut praelocutus sum, arguit, quod capita dictorum eius quae inserui, magna ex parte truncaverim; ostendam primo, id quod reprehendit, nec a me esse factum, et ab illo impudentissime in hoc eodem opere frequentatum. Tunc probabo, illis ipsis concisis brevibusque sententiis, quas de scriptis meis, quibus fuerat impugnatus, interserit, ita nullis eum solidis responsionibus obstitisse, ut et illa invexata permaneant, et hic planius detestanda fateatur, quam nostra operatio laboraverat explicare.

21. JUL. Although this has been fully achieved in the first work; nevertheless, since now he has proposed for himself that certain points to be refuted are from only one of my books, and accuses me, as I pre-spoke, of having for the most part truncated the heads of his sayings which I inserted, I will show first that what he blames was not done by me, and that by him it has been most impudently practiced repeatedly in this same work. Then I will prove, by those very concise and brief sentences which he inserts from my writings, by which he had been impugned, that he has opposed them with no solid responses, so that those things, though assailed, remain, and that here he confesses more plainly matters to be detested than our operation had labored to explain.

AUG. Iam superius ad ista respondi.

AUG. I have already answered these things above.

Omissiones.

Omissions.

22. IUL. Attoniti ergo, quid contra me scripserit, audiamus. Verba - inquit - de libro meo tibi a me misso tibique notissimo ista posuit, quae refutare conatus est: "mnatores nos esse nuptiarum, operisque divini, quo ex maribus et feminis Deus homines creat, invidiosissime clamitant; quoniam dicimus, eos qui de tali commixtione nascuntur, trahere originale peccatum; eosque, de qualibuscumque parentibus nascantur, non negamus adhuc esse sub diabolo, nisi renascantur in Christo " ¹⁵. In his verbis meis testimonium Apostoli, quod interposui praetermisit, cuius se premi magna mole sentiebat.

22. IUL. Therefore, astonished, let us hear what he wrote against me. “The words”—he says—“from my book, sent by me to you and most well known to you, he set down these, which he tried to refute: ‘they cry out most invidiously that we are denouncers of marriages, and of the divine work by which from males and females God creates human beings; since we say that those who are born from such a commixture draw original sin; and those, from whatever parents they may be born, we do not deny are still under the devil, unless they be reborn in Christ.’” ¹⁵. In these my words he omitted the testimony of the Apostle, which I interposed, under the great weight of which he felt himself to be pressed.

Ego enim cum dixissem, homines trahere originale peccatum, mox adiunxi: De quo Apostolus ait: "r unum hominem peccatum intravit in mundum, et per peccatum mors; et ita in omnes homines pertransiit, in quo omnes peccaverunt " ¹⁶; quo testimonio, ut diximus, praetermisso, cetera illa contexuit quae supra commemorata sunt. Novit enim quemadmodum soleant haec verba apostolica, quae praetermisit, accipere catholicorum corda fidelium; quae verba tam recta et tanta luce fulgentia, tenebrosis et tortuosis interpretationibus novi haeretici obscurare et depravare moliuntur. Deinde alia mea verba subtexuit, ubi dixi: "c advertunt, quod ita nuptiarum bonum malo originali quod inde trahitur non potest accusari, sicut adulteriorum et fornicationum malum bono naturali, quod inde nascitur, non potest excusari.

For when I had said that humans draw original sin, I immediately added: Concerning which the Apostle says: "through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin death; and so it passed through unto all humans, in whom all sinned" ¹⁶; with which testimony, as we said, omitted, he wove together the rest of those things which have been recounted above. For he knows how the hearts of the faithful among the Catholics are wont to receive these apostolic words, which he omitted; which words, so straight and shining with so great light, the new heretics strive to obscure and deprave with dark and tortuous interpretations. Then he subjoined other my words, where I said: "they notice, that thus the good of marriages cannot be accused by the original evil which is drawn from thence, just as the evil of adulteries and fornications cannot be excused by the natural good which is born from thence.

Nam, sicut peccatum, sive hinc sive inde a parvulis trahatur, opus est diaboli, sic homo, sive hinc sive inde nascatur, opus est Dei ". Etiam hic ea praetermisit, in quibus aures catholicas timuit. Nam ut ad haec verba veniretur, supra dictum erat a nobis: "c ergo quia dicimus, quod antiquissima atque firmissima catholicae fidei regula continetur, isti novelli et perversi dogmatis assertores, qui nihil peccati esse in parvulis dicunt quod lavacro regenerationis abluatur, tamquam damnemus nuptias, et tamquam opus Dei, hoc est hominem qui ex illis nascitur, opus diaboli esse dicamus, infideliter vel imperite calumniantur " ¹⁷. His ergo nostris praetermissis sequuntur illa nostra quae posuit, sicut supra scriptum est ¹⁸. Quousque simplicitati, qui haec loqueris, religiosorum pectorum et imperitis auribus perstabis illudere? Quem ad finem sese impudentia effrenata iactabit?

For, just as sin, whether from this side or that it be drawn by little ones, is a work of the devil, so the human being, whether from this side or that he be born, is a work of God." Even here he omitted those things, at which he feared catholic ears. For, in order that one might come to these words, it had been said by us above: "And so, because we say what is contained in the most ancient and most firm rule of the catholic faith, these asserters of a novel and perverse dogma, who say that there is no sin in little ones which is washed away by the laver of regeneration, calumniate us, as though we condemn nuptials, and as though the work of God, that is, the human being who is born of them, we say to be the work of the devil—faithlessly or unskilfully they slander " ¹⁷. Therefore, our statements being omitted, there follow those other things of ours which he set down, as has been written above ¹⁸. How long, you who speak these things, will you persist in mocking the simplicity of religious hearts and the unskilled ears? To what end will unbridled impudence vaunt itself?

Nihil te, cum haec scriberes, censura doctorum virorum, nihil reverentia futuri iudicii, nihil ipsa litterarum monumenta moverunt? Patere iam fallaciam tuam, et deprehensam teneri non vides? Quid in primo, quid in secundo opere conscripseris, quem nostrum ignorare arbitraris?

Did nothing move you, when you were writing these things—neither the censure of learned men, nor reverence for the future judgment, nor the very monuments of literature themselves? Let your fallacy now be laid open; do you not see that, once detected, it is held fast? What you have written in the first work, what in the second—which of us do you suppose is ignorant of it?

Libuit enim prorsus, et decuit, his te compellare modis, quibus in parricidam publicum eloquens consul infremuit ¹⁹.

For indeed it altogether pleased, and it was fitting, to address you by those methods with which the eloquent consul thundered against the public parricide ¹⁹.

AUG. Bene facis, indicare nobis, ne forte non agnosceremus, de invectivis Ciceronis te ista sumpsisse atque vertisse, sed non timemus Iulianum, cum videmus factum esse Tullianum; immo potius dolemus insanum, cum videmus sensum perdidisse christianum. Quid enim insanius, quam prohibere a parvulis medicum Christum, dicendo non esse in eis quod venit ille sanare?

AUG. You do well to indicate to us—lest perhaps we should not recognize it—that you have taken and turned those things from the invectives of Cicero; but we do not fear Julian, since we see he has become a Tullian; nay rather we grieve over a madman, when we see that he has lost the Christian sense. For what is more insane than to prohibit the Physician Christ from little ones, by saying that there is not in them that which He came to heal?

Cicero invectus in patriae parricidam, eam defendebat civitatem quam rex eius Romulus, congregatis undecumque peccatoribus condidit; tu autem tot parvulos, qui sine sacro Baptismate moriuntur, et clamas peccatum nullum habere, et ad civitatem Regis, ad cuius imaginem facti sunt, non permittis accedere.

Cicero, having launched an invective against the parricide of the fatherland, was defending that city which its king Romulus, with sinners congregated from everywhere, founded; but you—so many little ones who die without the sacred Baptism—you both cry that they have no sin, and you do not permit them to approach the city of the King, after whose image they were made.

Me pronuntia vera dicere.

Pronounce me to speak true things.

23. IUL. Apostoli me testimonium praetermisisse confingis, quod nec tibi opitulari potest, et a me praetermissum non est; sed eo insertum ordine, quo a te fuerat collocatum; utque in primo fideliter commemoratum, ita enim in quarto operis mei libro, licet cursim et breviter, explanatum est ²⁰. Commemorationem quoque catholicae Ecclesiae, quam tu ad hoc feceras, ut catholicam fidem desererent a te decepti, et catholica miserabiles appellatione gauderent, non praetermisi. Et quamvis nulla argumentorum vis in eiusmodi verbis esset, tamen a me haud aliter dictorum tuorum caput propositum est, quam a te fuerat ordinatum.

23. IUL. You fabricate that I have pretermitted the testimony of the Apostle, which can in no way succor you, and was not omitted by me; but it was inserted in that order in which it had been placed by you; and as in the first it was faithfully commemorated, so indeed in the fourth book of my work, albeit cursorily and briefly, it has been explained ²⁰. The commemoration also of the Catholic Church, which you had made for this purpose, that those deceived by you might desert the Catholic faith, and that the wretched might rejoice in the Catholic appellation, I did not omit. And although there was no force of arguments in words of this sort, nevertheless by me the chapter of your sayings was set forth in no other way than it had been ordered by you.

Lege editos libros meos responsionisque fidem, quam tu arguis fraudis, aspiciens, me interim pronuntia vera dicere; tu vero, si consuetudo tua permiserit, erubesce. Sed iam ostensa inexcusabili falsitate, quae semper quidem turpis, fit tamen turpior cum locum censoris invadit, et deformitatem suam decori exprobrat alieno; responde, quid Manichaeis sensibus aut nomen Ecclesiae aut Apostoli verba conducant, ut ea cum tam magna invidia praetermissa causeris?

Read my published books, and, regarding the trustworthiness of my response, which you charge with fraud, pronounce me in the meantime to be speaking truths; but you, if your custom will permit, blush. But now that inexcusable falsity has been exposed—which is always indeed base, yet becomes baser when it invades the place of a censor and upbraids another’s comeliness with its own deformity—answer: how do either the name of the Church or the Apostle’s words conduce to Manichaean senses, that you complain they were passed over with so great an invidiousness?

AUG. Iam superius respondi huic calumniae tuae, qua mihi verborum tuorum minus integre positorum obicis falsitatem. Sed quod fecit ille decerptor, tu mihi tam libenter non tribueres, si eorum qui haec legunt, nolles esse deceptor.

AUG. I have already above responded to this your calumny, whereby you charge me with falsehood on account of your words having been set down less integrally. But what that excerptor did, you would not so readily attribute to me, if you were unwilling to be a deceiver of those who read these things.

Omne peccatum conscribunt malae naturae.

Evil natures record every sin.

24. IUL. Hoc semper fuit maximum inter Manichaeos Catholicosque discrimen, et limes quidam latissimus, quo a se mutuo piorum et impiorum dogmata separantur, immo magna moles sententias nostras quasi coeli a terra profunditate disiungens, quod nos omne peccatum voluntati malae, illi vero malae conscribunt naturae; qui cum diversos sequuntur errores, sed velut de capite fontis istius effluentes consequenter ad sacrilegia flagitiaque perveniunt; sicut Catholici e regione, a bono inchoantes exordio, bonis aucti processibus, ad religionis summam, quam ratio munit et pietas, pervehuntur. Tu igitur malum naturale conatus asserere profano quidem voto, sed inefficaci intentione usurpasti Apostoli testimonium, quem hac eadem perscriptione ostendo nihil tale sensisse, quale tu persuadere conaris, quod repugnantibus modis et illum catholicum confiteris, et dicta eius Manichaeo aestimas suffragari.

24. IUL. This has always been the greatest distinction between Manichaeans and Catholics, and a certain very broad boundary, by which the dogmas of the pious and of the impious are separated from one another—indeed a great mass, sundering our opinions from theirs by a depth as of heaven from earth—namely, that we ascribe every sin to an evil will, whereas they ascribe it to an evil nature; who, although they follow diverse errors, yet, as if flowing out from the headspring of that fount, consequently arrive at sacrileges and flagitious crimes; just as the Catholics, on the opposite side, beginning from a good beginning and increased by good advances, are borne to the summit of religion, which reason and piety fortify. You, therefore, in an attempt to assert a natural evil—with a profane vow indeed, but an ineffectual intention—have usurped the testimony of the Apostle; whom, by this same writing, I show to have thought nothing of the sort that you are trying to persuade, since, in mutually repugnant ways, you both confess him to be Catholic and judge his sayings to support the Manichaean.

AUG. Quos doctores catholicos Manichaeo asseras suffragari, qui in verbis apostolicis intellexerunt trahere parvulos originale peccatum, nec vestro more insano velut sanam laudare naturam, sed ei sanandae adhibuerunt medicinam potius christianam, si christiano corde cogitares, erubesceres, contremisceres, obmutesceres.

AUG. The Catholic doctors whom you assert to be giving support to the Manichaean—who, in the apostolic words, understood that little ones draw along original sin, and did not, in your insane custom, praise nature as though sound, but rather applied Christian medicine to it for its being healed—if you were thinking with a Christian heart, you would blush, you would tremble, you would be struck dumb.

Omnes haereses, inventa sua Scripturis communiunt.

All heresies fortify their inventions with the Scriptures.

25. IUL. Numquid non idem, Adimantus et Faustus (quem in libris Confessionis tuae preaceptorem tuum loqueris ²¹), haeresiarchae sui traditione fecerunt, obscuriores quasque vel de Evangelio, vel de Apostolorum Epistolis sententias rapientes et corro ntes, ut profanum dogma nominum auctoritate tuerentur? Quamquam quid dico de Manichaeis?

25. IUL. Did not Adimantus and Faustus (whom in the books of your Confession you speak of as your teacher ²¹), by the tradition of their heresiarch, do the same—snatching and mangling the more obscure statements either from the Gospel or from the Epistles of the Apostles—in order to defend a profane dogma by the authority of names? Although, what am I saying about the Manichaeans?

Omnes prorsus haereses inventa sua, quibus a pietate et fide exorbitaverunt, Scripturarum elocutionibus sententiisque communiunt.

All heresies without exception buttress their own inventions—by which they have deviated from piety and faith—with the expressions and sentences of the Scriptures.

AUG. Illi obscuras sententias in suum dogma convertere; vos apertas ipso vestro dogmate obscurare conamini. Quid enim apertius quam quod ait Apostolus: Peccatum in hunc mundum per unum hominem intrasse, et per peccatum mortem, et ita in omnes homines pertransisse ²²? Quod si probare idem cogeretur Apostolus, ipsam generis humani miseriam testem daret, quae incipit a vagitibus parvulorum, et usque ad decrepitorum gemitus pervenit.

AUG. They convert obscure sentences into their dogma; you try to obscure the open ones by your very dogma. For what is more open than what the Apostle says: that sin entered into this world through one man, and through sin death, and thus passed through into all men ²²? But if the Apostle were compelled to prove the same, he would offer as witness the very misery of the human race, which begins from the wailings of infants and reaches even to the groans of the decrepit.

Nullo enim modo sub cura omnipotentis et iusti eadem tam magna miseria naturae irrogaretur humanae, nisi in duobus hominibus tota de paradisi felicitate in hanc infelicitatem peccati merito pelleretur.

For in no way, under the care of the omnipotent and just, would this same so great misery be inflicted upon human nature, unless the whole, in two human beings, were driven from the felicity of paradise into this infelicity by the desert of sin.

Scripturae non probant errores.

The Scriptures do not approve errors.

26. IUL. Num igitur ideo aut Libri sacri auctores probabuntur errorum, aut crimina pereuntium, Scripturarum dignitas expiabit?

26. IUL. Will, then, for that reason, either the authors of the Sacred Book be proved authors of errors, or will the dignity of the Scriptures expiate the crimes of those perishing?

AUG. Hoc vobis dicite.

AUG. Say this to yourselves.

Deus iustus est.

God is just.

27. IUL. Exstinguatur itaque indisciplinatarum expositionum libido; nihil agere contra manifestam Dei iustitiam verba credantur; quae si eius personae sunt, quam venerari necesse est, defendantur explanationibus divinae congruentibus aequitati; sin autem non metuendo sunt auctore prolata, etiam ineliquata pellantur. Igitur nunc Dei iudicio disputatur, de quo scribitur : Deus fidelis, in quo non est iniquitas; iustus et sanctus Dominus Deus ²³. Et iterum: Iustus Dominus, et iustitiam dilexit, aequitatem vidit vultus eius ²⁴. Et iterum: Omnia iudicia tua aequitas ²⁵. Innumera sunt testimonia, quibus aequitas divina in sacris Voluminibus praedicatur; de qua nemo tamen vel Gentilium, vel haereticorum, praeter Manichaeos Traducianosque dubitavit.

27. IUL. Therefore let the lust of undisciplined expositions be extinguished; let words be believed to accomplish nothing against the manifest justice of God; which, if they are of that person whom it is necessary to venerate, let them be defended by explanations congruent with divine equity; but if they have been put forth by an author not to be feared, let them, being unclarified, be driven out as well. Therefore now the judgment of God is under discussion, about which it is written : God is faithful, in whom there is no iniquity; just and holy is the Lord God ²³. And again: The Lord is just, and he loved justice; equity has his face beheld ²⁴. And again: All your judgments are equity ²⁵. Innumerable are the testimonies by which divine equity is proclaimed in the sacred Volumes; concerning which, however, no one either of the Gentiles or of the heretics, except the Manichaeans and the Traducians, has doubted.

AUG. Ex hac aequitate grave iugum est super filios Adam a die exitus de ventre matris eorum ²⁶; quod omnino esse asserit iniquum, qui negat originale peccatum.

AUG. From this equity, a heavy yoke is upon the sons of Adam from the day of their going forth from their mother’s womb ²⁶; which he who denies original sin asserts to be altogether iniquitous.

Deus esse nisi iustus non potest.

God cannot exist unless he is just.

28. IUL. Ita enim omnibus generaliter, edocente natura, inculcatum est, Deum iustum esse, ut manifestum sit, Deum non esse quem constiterit iustum non esse. Potest igitur et homo iustus esse; Deus vero esse nisi iustus non potest.

28. IUL. For thus to all generally, with nature teaching, it has been inculcated that God is just, so that it is manifest that he is not God whom it shall have been established not to be just. Therefore a man too can be just; but God, indeed, cannot be unless he is just.

AUG. Tibi dic.

AUG. Say it to yourself.

Deus iustissime iudicat.

God judges most justly.

29. IUL. Qui cum est hic unus verus cui credimus, et quem in Trinitate veneramur, dubio procul in omnes iudicii est ratione iustissimus.

29. IUL. Since he is this one true God in whom we believe, and whom we venerate in the Trinity, beyond doubt he is, toward all, by the reason of judgment, most just.

AUG. Tibi dic: et ostende iustum esse, ut cum tam manifesta miseria, vel ad tam manifestam miseriam nascatur, a quo peccatum originale non trahitur.

AUG. Say to yourself: and show that it is just, that with so manifest a misery, or to so manifest a misery, one is born, from whom original sin is not derived.

Sine aequitate Divinitas tota vilesceret.

Without equity, the whole Divinity would be entirely cheapened.

30. IUL. De huius itaque legibus ita probari et vindicari non potest, quod esse constat iniustum, ut si hoc fieri posset, illius divinitas tota vilesceret. Ab eo igitur probabitur de Scripturis sanctis iniustitiae dogma firmari, a quo approbari quiverit Trinitatem, cui credimus, divinitatis gloria posse privari.

30. IUL. Therefore, by this man’s laws it cannot be so proved and vindicated that which is agreed to be unjust, that, if this could be done, his divinity would wholly be cheapened. Therefore, it will be proved by him that the dogma of injustice is made firm from the holy Scriptures, by whom it could be approved that the Trinity, in which we believe, can be deprived of the glory of divinity.

AUG. Verum dicis: sed vobis dicite, qui gloriam Christo, qua parvulos sanat, molimini auferre.

AUG. You speak true: but say it to yourselves, you who strive to take away from Christ the glory by which he heals the little ones.

Non conciliantur Deus et peccatum naturale.

God and natural sin are not conciliated.

31. IUL. Quod quoniam nec ratio sustinet ulla, nec pietas; aut doce, vel posse esse, vel iustum esse, imputari cuiquam naturale peccatum; aut a Scripturarum sanctarum contaminatione discedito, quarum sententiis sanciri aestimas quod iniquum cogeris confiteri.

31. IUL. Since neither any reason nor piety sustains this; either teach that a natural sin can exist, or that it is just that a natural sin be imputed to anyone; or else desist from the contamination of the holy Scriptures, by whose judgments you reckon to be sanctioned that which you are compelled to confess is unjust.

AUG. Erratis: vos potius iniquum cogimini confiteri grave super parvulos iugum; si quemadmodum nullum habent proprium, ita nullum trahunt originale peccatum.

AUG. You are mistaken: you, rather, are compelled to confess an iniquitous yoke, heavy upon little ones; if, just as they have no proper (personal) sin, so they draw/contract no original sin.

Novus Manichaeus antiquo peior.

New Manichaean worse than the old.

32. IUL. Quod si neutrum horum quae diximus, facies; et huic Deo te asseris credere, cuius institutis iniustitiam communiri aestimas; cognosce, multo te novum antiquo Manichaeo esse peiorem, qui talem Deum habeas, qualem Manichaeus Dei sui est commentus inimicum.

32. IUL. But if you do neither of the things we have said, and you assert that you believe in this God, by whose institutes you esteem injustice to be fortified, recognize that you, a new one, are by much worse than the ancient Manichaean, in that you have such a God as the Manichaean contrived as the enemy of his own God.

AUG. Vos peius quam Manichaei saevitis in parvulos. Illi quippe animam saltem, quam partem Dei putant, sanari per Christum in parvulo volunt; vos autem, quem nec in anima, nec in carne ullum malum habere dicitis, per Christum sanari nulla ex parte permittitis.

AUG. You are more savage than the Manichees against little ones. For they at least want the soul, which they suppose to be a part of God, to be healed by Christ in the little one; but you, the little one whom you say has no evil either in the soul or in the flesh, you do not permit to be healed by Christ in any part.

Et praeclari praedicatores sic praedicatis Iesum, ut eum negetis parvulorum esse Iesum. Unde namque hoc nomen acceperit, in Evangelio legite ²⁷, et nolite Salvatorem non salvis parvulis denegare.

And you illustrious preachers so preach Jesus that you deny him to be the Jesus of infants. Read in the Gospel whence he received this name ²⁷, and do not deny the Savior to infants who are not saved.

Plebeculae detestantur errorem pelagianum.

The plebeian folk detest the Pelagian error.

33. IUL. Quas mihi ergo tu hic ambages, quae cervicalia, mendaciorum et ineptiarum, quae Hierusalem fornicanti Ezechiel propheta imputat ²⁸; admovebis, in quibus muliebres animae cubent, nomina mysteriorum tenentes, cum in ipsam divinitatem retecta profanitate commiserint. Remotis omnibus praestigiis et advocatarum saepe a te plebicularum catervis, doce iustum esse quod per Scripturas sanctas affirmare conaris.

33. IUL. What circumlocutions, then, are you going to ply on me here, what “pillows” of lies and ineptitudes, which the prophet Ezekiel imputes to fornicating Jerusalem ²⁸; will you apply—on which female souls recline, holding the names of “mysteries,” when with uncovered profanation they have committed against divinity itself. With all tricks removed and with the crowds of plebeian female advocates so often called in by you dismissed, prove that what you are trying to affirm through the Holy Scriptures is just.

AUG. Plebicularum, quas irrides, catervae, noverunt catholicam fidem, quae a Salvatore salvari confitentur infantes; et ideo Pelagianorum, qui hoc negant, detestantur errorem.

AUG. The cohorts of plebeian women, whom you ridicule, know the catholic faith; they confess that infants are saved by the Savior; and therefore they detest the error of the Pelagians, who deny this.

Ne in infinita volumina extendatur oratio.

Lest the discourse be extended into infinite volumes.

34. IUL. Ne ergo in infinita volumina exten tur oratio, hic, hic harum de quibus agimus, rerum genus, species, differentia, modus, qualitasque cernatur; immo sollicitius utrum sint, unde sint, ubi sint, quid etiam mereantur, et a quo. Hoc enim modo nec diu per disputationum anfractus errabitur, et certum quod teneri debeat, apparebit.

34. IUL. Lest therefore the oration be extended into infinite volumes, here, here let the genus, species, difference, mode, and quality of these matters of which we are dealing be discerned; nay, more carefully, whether they are, whence they are, where they are, what also they merit, and from whom. For in this way one will not wander long through the windings of disputations, and what ought to be held as certain will appear.

AUG. Ideo contra unum librum meum libros octo scripsisti, quia per tua compendia dialectica diu disputare noluisti.

AUG. Therefore you wrote eight books against one of my books, because by your dialectical compendia you did not wish to dispute for a long time.

Definitio iustitiae.

Definition of justice.

35. IUL. Creatoris his igitur et creaturae ratio vertitur, id est Dei et hominis; iudicat ille, iudicatur iste; itaque iustitiae et culpae quae sit natura, videatur. Iustitia est, et ut ab eruditis definiri solet, et ut nos intellegere possumus, virtus (si per Stoicos liceat alteri alteram praeferre) virtutum omnium maxima, fungens diligenter officio ad restituendum sua unicuique sine fraude, sine gratia.

35. JUL. Therefore the rationale of the Creator and the creature is at stake in these matters, that is, of God and man; he judges, this one is judged; and so let it be seen what the nature of justice and of fault is. Justice is, both as it is wont to be defined by the erudite and as we are able to understand, a virtue (if among the Stoics it be permitted to prefer one to another), the greatest of all virtues, diligently discharging its office to restore to each his own, without fraud, without favor.

AUG. Dic ergo qua iustitia retributum sit parvulis grave iugum tam magnae manifestaeque miseriae; dic qua iustitia ille parvulus adoptetur in Baptismo, ille sine hac adoptione moriatur; cur non sit ambobus honor iste communis, aut ab isto honore alienatio, cum sit ambobus seu bona seu mala causa communis. Non dicis, quia nec Dei gratiam, nec Dei iustitiam homo magis Pelagianus quam Christianus sapis.

AUG. So tell, then, by what justice the heavy yoke of so great and manifest misery has been meted out to little ones; tell by what justice that little one is adopted in Baptism, that one, without this adoption, dies; why this honor is not common to both, or else the alienation from this honor, since the cause, whether good or bad, is common to both. You do not say, because you savor neither the grace of God nor the justice of God, being a man more Pelagian than Christian.

Vera virtus est quae quadrua iugalitate perficitur.

True virtue is that which is perfected by fourfold yoking.

36. IUL. Quod si eam maximam dici Zeno non siverit, qui tantam virtutum copulam unitatemque confirmat, ut ubi fuerit una, omnes dicat adesse virtutes et, ubi una non fuerit, omnes deesse; atque illam veram esse virtutem, quae hac quadrua iugalitate perficitur; tunc quoque nobis plurimum praebebit auxilii, cum docuerit, nec prudentiam, nec fortitudinem, nec temperantiam posse sine iustitia contineri; secundum quam veritatem et Ecclesiastes pronuntiat: Qui in uno peccaverit, multa bona perdet ²⁹.

36. IUL. But if Zeno should not allow it to be called the greatest, he who affirms so great a coupling and unity of the virtues that, where one has been, he says all the virtues are present, and where one has not been, all are absent; and that that is true virtue which is perfected by this fourfold yoking; then he will also furnish us very great assistance, when he has taught that neither prudence, nor fortitude, nor temperance can be contained without justice; according to which truth Ecclesiastes also pronounces: He who has sinned in one will lose many goods ²⁹.

AUG. Audi eumdem Ecclesiasten dicentem: Vanitas vanitatum, et omnia vanitas; quae abundantia hominis in omni labore suo, quem ipse laborat sub sole ³⁰ etc.? Et dic mihi, quare homo etiam vanitati similis factus est ³¹, qui factus fuerat similis veritati. An hinc excipis parvulos, quos videmus crescendo et, si bene erudiantur, proficiendo, tam magnam minuere, cum qua nati sunt, vanitatem; nec ea tota carere, nisi omnes dies vanitatis velut umbra transierint ³²?

AUG. Hear the same Ecclesiastes saying: Vanity of vanities, and all is vanity; what profit has man in all his labor which he labors under the sun ³⁰ etc.? And tell me, why has man also been made like unto vanity ³¹, who had been made like unto truth. Or do you except from this the little ones, whom we see by growing and, if they are well educated, by making progress, to diminish so great a vanity with which they were born; nor wholly to be without it, unless all the days of vanity have passed away like a shadow ³²?

Deus est origo iustitiae.

God is the origin of justice.

37. IUL. Haec igitur augusta virtus, expunctrix uniuscuiusque meritorum, in operibus quidem imaginis Dei, id est humanae animae, pro creaturae ipsius modo et viribus intermicat; in ipso vero Deo, omnium quae sunt ex nihilo conditore, immenso et claro per aeternum orbe resplendet. Origo eius divinitas est, aetas eius aeternitas, et aeternitas ultro citro nescia vel desinere vel coepisse.

37. IUL. This, then, august virtue, the exactress of each one’s merits, in the works indeed of the image of God, that is, of the human soul, glints according to the mode and powers of that creature; but in God himself, the creator of all things that are from nothing, it resplends through the eternal orb, immense and bright. Its origin is divinity, its age is eternity, and eternity, to and fro knowing neither to cease nor to have begun.

Ut ergo genus eius (quo nomine nihil aliud quam originem intellegi volo) Deus est; ita species eius in legum promulgatione iudiciorumque apparet effectibus.

As, then, its genus (by which name I wish nothing other than origin to be understood) is God, so its species appears in the promulgation of laws and in the effects of judgments.

AUG. Si origo iustitiae Deus est, ut fateris, cur homini ab ipso dari iustitiam non fateris, et potius humanae voluntatis arbitrium, quam Dei donum, vis esse iustitiam; ut sis in eis de quibus dictum est: Ignorantes Dei iustitiam, et suam volentes constituere, iustitiae Dei non sunt subiecti ³³? Erubescite tandem, obsecro, et ab illo iustitiam poscite, qui est, ut fateri compulsi estis, origo iustitiae.

AUG. If the origin of justice is God, as you confess, why do you not confess that justice is given by Him to man, and rather wish justice to be the arbitrament of human will than the gift of God; so that you may be among those of whom it was said: Ignorant of the justice of God, and wishing to establish their own, they are not subject to the justice of God ³³? Blush at last, I beseech you, and ask for justice from Him who is, as you have been compelled to confess, the origin of justice.

Iustitiae differentia, modus, qualitas.

The difference, mode, quality of Justice.

38. IUL. Differentiam vero eius non absurde intellegere possumus, variam pro opportunitate temporum dispensationem. Verbi gratia, hostiae de pecoribus in Vetere Testamento fuerant imperatae.

38. IUL. But we can, not absurdly, understand its difference as a varied dispensation according to the opportunity of the times. For example, sacrifices from livestock had been commanded in the Old Testament.

Id tunc implere pertinebat ad reverentiam iussionis; nunc vero indicta eorum dissimulatio ita servit iustitiae praecipienti, ut tunc oblatio serviebat. Modus vero eius est vel status, quod nec cuiquam amplius quam vires patiuntur indicit, vel quod misericordiam non retundit. Qualitas autem eius intellegitur, per quam piis mentibus sapit dulciter.

To fulfill that then pertained to reverence for the command; now indeed the prescribed omission of them thus serves the commanding justice as the oblation then served. Its mode, or status, is this: that it enjoins upon no one more than their strengths allow, or that it does not blunt mercy. And its quality is understood, by which it savors sweetly to pious minds.

Est igitur procul dubio iustitia, sine qua deitas non est; quae si non esset, Deus non esset; est autem Deus, est itaque sine ambiguitate iustitia. Non est autem aliud quam virtus omnia continens, et restituens suum unicuique, sine fraude, sine gratia. Consistit autem maxime in divinitatis profundo.

There is therefore, beyond doubt, justice, without which deity is not; which, if it were not, God would not be; but God is, therefore without ambiguity there is justice. It is, moreover, nothing other than a virtue containing all things, and restoring to each his own, without fraud, without favor. Moreover, it consists most of all in the profundity of divinity.

AUG. Definisti esse iustitiam virtutem omnia continentem, et restituentem suum unicuique, sine fraude, sine gratia. Proinde videmus eam sine fraude restituisse denarium eis, qui per totum diem in opere vineae laboraverant; hoc enim placuerat, hoc convenerat, ad hanc mercedem se fuisse conductos negare non poterant ³⁴. Sed dic mihi, quaeso te, quomodo eis sine gratia tantumdem dedit, qui una hora in illo opere fuerunt?

AUG. You have defined justice to be a virtue containing all things, and restoring to each his own, without fraud, without favor. Accordingly, we see that it, without fraud, restored a denarius to those who had labored through the whole day in the work of the vineyard; for this had been pleasing, this had been covenanted; they could not deny that they had been hired for this wage ³⁴. But tell me, I beg you, how did it, without favor, give just as much to those who were in that work for one hour?

An amiserat fortasse iustitiam? Cohibe itaque te potius. Neminem quippe fraudat divina iustitia, sed multa donat non merentibus gratia.

Had he perhaps lost justice? Restrain yourself, therefore, rather. For divine justice defrauds no one, but grace bestows many things on those not meriting.

Cur autem huic sic, illi autem sic, aspice quod secutus adiungis. Verissime quippe dicis, eam consistere maxime in divinitatis profundo. In hoc profundo est, quod neque volentis, neque currentis, sed miserentis est Dei ³⁵. In hoc profundo est, quod ille parvulus in honorem adoptatur per regenerationis lavacrum, ille in contumelia relinquitur, non admittendus ad Regnum; cum amborum in neutram partem sit meritum per voluntatis arbitrium.

But why to this one thus, and to that one thus? Look at what you go on to add. For you say most truly that it chiefly consists in the profundity of divinity. In this deep is that it is not of the one willing, nor of the one running, but of God who shows mercy ³⁵. In this deep is that this little one is adopted into honor through the laver of regeneration, while that one is left in contumely, not to be admitted to the Kingdom; since the merit of both, by the arbitrium of the will, is to neither side.

Clementia pars magna est iustitiae.

Clemency is a great part of justice.

39. IUL. Testimonium vero, ut ab auctore suo, ita etiam vel a probis, vel a improbis meretur, quod et illos iure provexerit, et istos iure damnaverit. Cum vero per se nec boni quidquam nec mali merentibus misericordiam liberalem esse permittit, nihil sentit iniuriae; quia et hoc ipsum, ut sit clemens operi suo Deus, cum in severitatem non cogitur, pars magna iustitiae est.

39. IUL. The testimony, indeed, obtains its due both from its own author and also from either the upright or the depraved, in that it has by right advanced the former and by right condemned the latter. But when He allows mercy to be liberal toward those who by themselves merit nothing either of good or of evil, He suffers no injustice; for this very thing also—that God be clement to His work, when He is not compelled into severity—is a great part of justice.

AUG. Saltem misericordiae nomen attende, et unde dicta sit, respice. Quid igitur opus est misericordia, ubi nulla est miseria?

AUG. At least attend to the name of mercy, and consider whence it is so called. What need, then, is there of mercy, where there is no misery?

Miseriam porro in parvulis si nullam esse dicitis, eis misericordiam praebendam negatis; si ullam esse dicitis, malum meritum ostenditis. Neque enim sub Deo iusto miser esse quisquam, nisi mereatur, potest. Ecce duo parvuli iacent: unus eorum baptizatus, alter non baptizatus exspirat; cui eorum dicis Deum fuisse clementem?

Moreover, if you say that there is no misery in little ones, you deny that mercy is to be afforded to them; if you say there is any, you exhibit an evil desert. For under a just God no one can be miserable unless he deserves it. Behold, two little ones lie: one of them baptized, the other unbaptized expires; to which of them do you say God has been clement?

Si uni, ostende alterius malum meritum, qui negas esse originale peccatum; si ambobus, ostende baptizati ullum bonum meritum, qui negas gratiam, ubi nulla est acceptio personarum; et dic, si potes, cur ambos adoptare noluerit, qui certe ambos ad imaginem suam condidit. An ita iustus est, ut non sit omnipotens, si voluit et non potuit? Ubi certe illorum nullus noluit, ne impedimentum potestatis divinae referatis ad meritum voluntatis humanae; hic certe nulli eorum dicere potest Deus: Volui, et noluisti.

If to the one, show the evil merit of the other, you who deny that there is original sin; if to both, show any good merit of the baptized one, you who deny grace, where there is no respect of persons; and say, if you can, why he who certainly created both to his own image was unwilling to adopt both. Or is he so just that he is not omnipotent, if he willed and could not? Where surely none of them was unwilling, lest you refer the impediment of divine power to the merit of human will; here surely God can say to none of them: I willed, and you were unwilling.

Aut si propterea non vult infans, quia plorat cum baptizatur, ambo ergo relinquantur, ambo enim nolunt; et tamen unus assumitur et alter relinquitur, quia magna est gratia Dei, et verax iustitia Dei. Sed quare ille potius quam ille: Inscrutabilia sunt iudicia Dei ³⁶.

Or if for that reason the infant does not will, because he cries when he is baptized, then let both be left, for both indeed are unwilling; and yet one is assumed and the other is left, because great is the grace of God, and the veracious justice of God. But why this one rather than that one: The judgments of God are inscrutable ³⁶.

Iustitia et gratia.

Justice and grace.

40. IUL. Quos enim fecit quia voluit, nec condemnat nisi spretus; si cum non spernitur, faciat consecratione meliores; nec detrimentum iustitiae patitur, et munificentia miserationis ornatur.

40. IUL. For those whom he made because he willed, he does not condemn unless spurned; if, when he is not spurned, let him make them better by consecration; nor does he suffer a detriment of justice, and he is adorned with the munificence of commiseration.

AUG. Qui non condemnat nisi spretus, dic, utrum spernat suam imaginem nisi spretus. Quod si non audes, dic unde spernat eos quos parvulos non adoptat, a quibus eum spretum non invenies, nisi eos invenias in Adam.

AUG. He who does not condemn unless spurned, say whether he spurns his own image unless spurned. But if you do not dare, say whence he spurns those whom, as little ones, he does not adopt—by whom you will not find him spurned, unless you find them in Adam.

Ubi simul invenies, ut spernantur, deberi omnibus per iustitiam, nec tamen sperni omnes propter ineffabilem et inscrutabilem gratiam.

Where at the same time you will find that, in order that they be spurned, it is owed to all by justice, and yet that not all are spurned on account of ineffable and inscrutable grace.

Infirma eligit Deus.

God elects the weak.

41. IUL. His igitur iustitiae, quas praemisimus, divisionibus explicatis, discutiamus quae sit definitio peccati. Equidem affatim mihi tam philosophantium quam eorum qui catholici fuerunt, quod quaerimus, scripta suppeditant; sed vereor ne refrageris et, si philosophorum ego senatum advocavero, tu continuo sellularios opifices omneque in nos vulgus accendas.

41. IUL. Therefore, with the divisions of justice which we have set forth explained, let us examine what the definition of sin is. For my part, the writings both of philosophers and of those who have been Catholics supply me abundantly with what we seek; but I fear lest you gainsay, and if I convene a senate of philosophers, you will forthwith inflame against us the stool-sitting craftsmen and the whole common crowd.

AUG. Contumeliosus es in infirma mundi, quae Deus elegit ut confunderet fortia ³⁷. Denique ipsi confundunt eos qui confidunt in virtute sua ³⁸. Ubi quid dicam: Vos estis? Prorsus me tacente apparetis, cum vos non tacetis.

AUG. You are contumelious toward the weak things of the world, which God chose to confound the strong ³⁷. Finally, they themselves confound those who trust in their own strength ³⁸. At what point am I to say: It is you? Plainly, with me silent, you appear, since you do not keep silent.

Aut mendax aut temerarius.

Either mendacious or temerarious.

42. IUL. Vociferans cum feminis, cunctisque ca nibus et tribunis, quibus octoginta aut amplius equos tota Africa saginatos collega tuus nuper adduxit Alypius.

42. IUL. Shouting with the women, and with all the dogs and tribunes, for whom Alypius, your colleague, recently brought eighty or more horses, fattened throughout all Africa.

AUG. Aut calumniaris, aut nescis quid loquaris; et ideo, aut mendax, aut temerarius, ista loqueris. Quid te autem nequius, si haec ipse finxisti?

AUG. Either you calumniate, or you do not know what you are saying; and therefore, either mendacious or temerarious, you speak these things. But what could be more wicked in you, if you yourself have feigned these things?

Quid stolidius, si fingentibus credidisti? Iam vero quod etiam scribere ausus es, neque veritus ne ad ea loca libri pervenirent tui, quae terra marique transeuntem seu venientem collegam meum Alypium susceperunt, ubi legi apertissime tua falsiloquia sine tua irrisione vel potius detestatione non possunt; cui, non dico impudentiae, sed dementiae comparatur?

What more doltish, if you have believed fabricators? Now indeed, that you even dared to write, and did not fear lest your books would reach those places which received my colleague Alypius as he was passing by land and sea, or arriving, where your false-utterances cannot be read most openly without your ridicule, or rather detestation—what is this to be compared to, not to say impudence, but madness?

Docentes originale peccatum tu despicis.

You despise those teaching original sin.

43. IUL. Nequaquam te acquiescere eruditorum sententiis, ut addas, secundum quod intellectui tuo congruit dixisse Apostolum, quia stultam fecit Deus sapientiam mundi ³⁹; disputatores vero nostros sine metu a te posse despici, quod nulla auctoritate talium premaris.

43. JUL. By no means do you acquiesce in the opinions of the learned, so that you even add that, as suits your understanding, the Apostle said that God has made foolish the wisdom of the world ³⁹; but that our disputants can be despised by you without fear, since you are pressed by the authority of no such persons.

AUG. Tu eos despicis, qui eis docentibus originale peccatum ita resistis, ut tamquam Manichaeos insuper crimineris, me nominans, illos significans.

AUG. You despise them, and, while they are teaching original sin, you so resist them that you even criminate them as Manichaeans, naming me, signifying them.

Definitio peccati quod tantummodum peccatum est.

Definition of sin which is merely sin.

44. IUL. Quid ergo? Acquiescam prorsus tibi, faciamque in hoc loco iacturam omnium, quorum adminiculo uti possem, contentusque ero definitione, quae ad indicium bonae naturae post Manichaeorum secretum de ore tuae honestatis effugit.

44. IUL. What then? I will altogether acquiesce to you, and in this place I will throw overboard all those things, whose assistance I could use, and I will be content with the definition which, as an indication of good nature, after the Manichaeans’ secret, escaped from the mouth of your honesty.

In eo igitur libro cui titulus est, vel De duabus animabus, vel Contra duas animas, ita loqueris: Exspecta, sine prius peccatum definiamus. Peccatum est voluntas admittendi vel retinendi quod iustitia vetat, et unde liberum est abstinere. Quamquam si liberum non est, nec voluntas dici potest; sed malui grossius, quam scrupulosius definire ⁴⁰.

Therefore, in that book whose title is either On the two souls or Against the two souls, you speak thus: Wait; allow us first to define sin. Sin is the will of admitting or retaining what justice forbids, and from which it is free to abstain. Although if it is not free, it cannot even be called a will; but I preferred to define more grossly than more scrupulously ⁴⁰.

AUG. Hic peccatum definitum est quod tantummodo peccatum est, non quod etiam poena peccati. De hoc quippe agendum fuit, quando mali origo quaerebatur, quale commissum est a primo homine ante omne hominis malum.

AUG. Here sin was defined as that which is only sin, not that which is also the punishment of sin. For this, indeed, had to be dealt with, when the origin of evil was being sought, of the kind that was committed by the first man before any human evil.

Sed tu aut non potes intellegere, aut non vis.

But you either cannot understand, or you do not wish to.

Aurum est definitio Aug.

Gold is the definition of Aug.

45. IUL. O lucens aurum in stercore! Quid verius, quid plenius dici a quoquam vel orthodoxo potuisset?

45. IUL. O shining gold in dung! What truer, what fuller could have been said by anyone, even an orthodox man?

Peccatum est, inquis, voluntas admittendi vel retinendi quod iustitia vetat, et unde liberum est abstinere ⁴¹. Ostendit hoc Ecclesiasticus : Deus, inquit, fecit hominem, et dimisit eum in manibus consilii sui; posuit ante eum vitam et mortem, aquam et ignem; quod placuerit ei, dabitur illi ⁴². Et per Isaiam Deus: Si volueritis , inquit, et audieritis me, quae bona sunt terrae edetis. Si nolueritis, nec audieritis, gladius vos comedet ⁴³. Et Apo olus: Resipiscite iuste, et nolite peccare ⁴⁴; atque iterum: Nolite errare; Deus non irridetur; quae enim seminaverit homo, illa et metet ⁴⁵.

Sin is, you say, the will of admitting or retaining what justice forbids, and from which it is free to abstain ⁴¹. It is shown by Ecclesiasticus : God, he says, made man, and left him in the hands of his own counsel; he set before him life and death, water and fire; what shall have pleased him will be given to him ⁴². And through Isaiah God: If you are willing, he says, and will hear me, you shall eat the good things of the land. If you are unwilling, and will not hear, the sword will devour you ⁴³. And the Apostle: Come to your senses rightly, and do not sin ⁴⁴; and again: Do not err; God is not mocked; for whatever a man shall have sown, that also shall he reap ⁴⁵.

AUG. Haec testimonia propter illam voluntatem dicta sunt, in qua quisque id quod vult agit; ut si non habetur, ab eo poscatur qui in nobis operatur et velle ⁴⁶; si autem habetur, fiant opera iustitiae, et ei, qui illam operatus est, agantur gratiae.

AUG. These testimonies were spoken on account of that will, in which each person does what he wills; so that, if it is not possessed, it may be asked from him who in us operates even the willing ⁴⁶; but if it is possessed, let works of justice be done, and to him who has wrought it, let thanks be rendered.

Dextera et sinistra.

Right and left.

46. IUL. Voluntas itaque motus est animi, in iure suo habentis utrum sinisterior ad prava decurrat, an dexterior ad celsa contendat.

46. IUL. Will, therefore, is a motion of the mind, having in its own jurisdiction whether the more leftward runs down to depraved things, or the more rightward contends toward the heights.

AUG. Quid est ergo: Ne declines in dexteram, neque in sinistram ⁴⁷?

AUG. What then is: Do not turn aside to the right, nor to the left ⁴⁷?

Peccati origo, species, differentia, modus, qualitas.

The origin, species, difference, mode, quality of sin.

47. IUL. Motus autem animi eius, qui iam per aetatem iudicio rationis uti potest; cui cum poena monstratur et gloria, aut contra commodum vel voluptas, adiutorium et velut occasio offertur, non necessitas imponitur partis alterutrae. Haec igitur voluntas, quae alternatur, originem possibilitatis in libero accepit arbitrio; ipsius vero operis existentiam a se suscipit, nec est prorsus voluntas antequam velit, nec potest velle antequam potuerit et nolle; nec utrumque habet in parte peccati, id est, velle et nolle, antequam usum rationis adipiscitur.

47. IUL. But the movement of the mind of one who already by age can use the judgment of reason—when to him both punishment and glory are shown, or on the contrary advantage or pleasure—receives help and, as it were, an occasion is offered; a necessity to either side is not imposed. Therefore this will, which is alternated, received the origin of possibility in free arbitrium; but it assumes from itself the existence of the work itself, and there is not at all a will before it wills, nor can it will before it has been able also to not will; nor does it have both on the side of sin, that is, to will and to not will, before it attains the use of reason.

Quibus collectis, apparet te verissime definisse: Peccatum est voluntas retinendi vel admittendi quod iustitia vetat, et unde liberum est abstinere ⁴⁸. Hoc ergo peccatum, quod claruit nihil esse praeter voluntatem, constat genus, id est ipsam originem, ab appetitu proprio suscepisse. Huius species iam in unoquoque, qui dicuntur atomi, reperitur. Differentia vero et in varietate culparum, et in rationibus temporum.

With these things gathered, it appears that you have most truly defined: Sin is the will of retaining or admitting what justice forbids, and from which it is free to abstain ⁴⁸. Therefore this sin, which has become clear to be nothing other than will, is agreed to have taken its genus, that is, its very origin, from one’s own appetite. Its species is now found in each individual, who are called atoms. But the differentia is both in the variety of faults and in the considerations of times.

Modus est ipsa immoderatio; nam si modus est servire cui debeas, qui hoc praetermittit, veri modi transgressione delinquit. Hic tamen dici subtiliter potest, modum esse peccati, quia nemo plus quam potest delinquit; nam si supra vires, inefficaci voluntate peccatur; hoc ipsum fieri vel sola potuit voluntate. Qualitas autem ascribatur vitio, per quam ostenditur quid amaritudinis, vel dedecore convehat vel dolore.

There is a measure even of immoderation; for if measure consists in serving whom you ought, he who omits this commits a fault by a transgression of the true measure. Here, however, it can be said with subtlety that there is a measure of sin, because no one sins more than he is able; for if it is beyond one’s powers, one sins by an inefficacious will; this very thing could come to pass by will alone. But let quality be ascribed to the vice, through which it is shown what of bitterness it has, or what it conveys of disgrace or of pain.

Est ergo peccatum, quia si non esset, nec tu sequereris errores; nihil est autem aliud, praeter voluntatem excedentem ab eo calle, cui debet insistere, et unde liberum est non deflectere. Fit autem de appetitu inconcessorum; et nusquam est nisi in eo homine, qui et habuit voluntatem malam, et potuit non habere.

Therefore there is sin, for if it were not, neither would you follow errors; and it is nothing other than a will exceeding from that path on which it ought to stand firm, and from which it is free not to deflect. Moreover, it comes to be from the appetite for things unconceded; and it is nowhere except in that human being who both had an evil will and was able not to have it.

AUG. Ipse est Adam, quem nostra illa definitio, quae tibi placuit, intuebatur, cum dicerem: Peccatum est voluntas retinendi vel consequendi quod iustitia vetat, et unde liberum est abstinere ⁴⁹. Adam quippe omnino, quando peccavit, nihil in se habebat mali, quo nolens urgeretur ad operandum malum, et propter quod diceret: Non quod volo facio bonum, sed quod nolo malum, hoc ago ⁵⁰. Ac per hoc id egit peccando, quod iustitia vetabat, et unde liberum illi fuerat abstinere. Nam ei qui dicit: Quod nolo malum, hoc ago, abstinere inde, liberum non est.

AUG. It is Adam himself whom that definition of ours, which pleased you, had in view, when I said: Sin is the will of retaining or of consequenting what justice forbids, and from which it is free to abstain ⁴⁹. For Adam, in every respect, when he sinned, had nothing evil in himself by which, being unwilling, he was urged to work evil, and on account of which he would say: Not the good that I will do do I do, but the evil that I do not will, this I do ⁵⁰. And therefore, by sinning he did that which justice forbade, and from which it had been free for him to abstain. For to him who says: The evil that I do not will, this I do, to abstain from it is not free.

Ac per hoc, si tria ista discernas, et scias aliud esse peccatum, aliud poenam peccati, aliud utrumque, id est ita peccatum, ut ipsum sit etiam poena peccati, intellegis quid horum trium pertineat ad illam definitionem, ubi voluntas est agendi quod iustitia vetat, et unde liberum est abstinere. Peccatum namque isto modo definitum est, non peccati poena, non utrumque. Habent autem tria ista genera etiam species suas, de quibus nunc longum est disputare.

And therefore, if you discern these three, and know that sin is one thing, the penalty of sin another, and yet another is both together—that is, such a sin as to be itself also the penalty of sin—you understand which of these three pertains to that definition, where the will is of doing what justice forbids, and from which it is free to abstain. For in that way sin is defined, not the penalty of sin, nor both. Moreover, these three genera also have their own species, about which it would now be lengthy to dispute.

Horum sane trium generum si requirantur exempla, primi generis in Adam sine ullo nodo quaestionis occurrit. Multa quippe sunt quae agunt homines mala, a quibus eis liberum est abstinere; sed nulli tam liberum est, quam illi fuit, qui Deo suo, a quo erat conditus rectus, nullo prorsus vitio depravatus adstabat. Secundi autem generis, ubi tantummodo est poena peccati, exemplum in eo malo est, quod quisque ex nulla parte agit, sed tantummodo patitur; velut cum pro suo scelere, qui peccavit, occiditur, sive alia corporis poena quacumque cruciatur.

If, to be sure, examples of these three kinds are sought, for the first kind an example occurs in Adam without any knot of question. For there are many evils which human beings do, from which it is free for them to abstain; but to no one is it so free as it was to that man, who stood before his God, by whom he had been created upright, depraved by no vice at all. But for the second kind, where there is only the penalty of sin, the example is in that evil which a person in no respect does, but only suffers; as when, for his crime, the one who has sinned is killed, or is tormented by any other punishment of the body whatsoever.

Tertium vero genus, ubi peccatum ipsum est et poena peccati, potest intellegi in eo qui dicit: Quod nolo malum, hoc ago . Ad hoc pertinent etiam omnia quae per ignorantiam, cum aguntur mala, non putantur mala, vel etiam putantur bona. Caecitas enim cordis, si peccatum non esset, iniuste argueretur; arguitur autem iuste, ubi dicitur: Pharisaee caece! ⁵¹; et aliis plurimis divinorum eloquiorum locis. Eademque rursus caecitas, si peccati poena non esset, non diceretur: Excaecavit enim illos malitia illorum ⁵²; quod si de Dei iudicio non veniret, non legeremus: Obscurentur oculi eorum ne videant, et dorsum eorum semper incurva ⁵³. Quis porro volens caecus est corde, cum velit nemo caecus esse vel corpore?

But the third kind, where the sin itself is also the punishment of sin, can be understood in him who says: The evil that I do not will, this I do . To this pertain also all things which, through ignorance, when evils are done, are not thought to be evils, or even are thought to be goods. For blindness of heart, if it were not sin, would be accused unjustly; but it is accused justly, where it is said: Blind Pharisee! ⁵¹; and in very many other places of the divine oracles. And the same blindness, in turn, if it were not the punishment of sin, it would not be said: For indeed their malice has blinded them ⁵²; and if this did not come from the judgment of God, we would not read: Let their eyes be darkened lest they see, and their back always be bowed down ⁵³. Who, moreover, is willingly blind in heart, when no one wishes to be blind even in body?

Proinde originale peccatum nec ad illud pertinet quod primo loco posuimus, ubi est voluntas malum operandi, unde liberum est abstinere; alioquin non esset in parvulis, qui nondum voluntatis utuntur arbitrio; nec ad illud quod secundo commemoravimus. De peccato enim nunc agimus, non de poena, quae non est peccatum, quamvis peccati merito subsequatur; quam quidem patiuntur et parvuli, quia inest eis corpus mortuum propter peccatum ⁵⁴. Non tamen mors corporis ipsa peccatum est, vel corporales quicumque cruciatus; sed pertinet originale peccatum ad hoc genus tertium, ubi sic peccatum est, ut ipsum sit et poena peccati; quod inest quidem nascentibus, sed in eis crescentibus incipit apparere, quando est insipientibus necessaria sapientia, et mala concupi entibus continentia; origo tamen etiam huius peccati descendit a voluntate peccantis. Fuit enim Adam, et in illo fuimus omnes; periit Adam, et in illo omnes perierunt ⁵⁵.

Accordingly, original sin pertains neither to that which we put in the first place, where there is the will of doing evil, from which it is free to abstain; otherwise it would not be in little ones, who do not yet use the free choice of will; nor to that which we mentioned second. For we are now dealing with sin, not with the penalty, which is not sin, although it follows by the desert of sin; which indeed even little ones suffer, because there is in them a body dead on account of sin ⁵⁴. Yet the death of the body itself is not sin, nor any corporeal torments whatsoever; but original sin pertains to this third kind, where it is thus sin, that it is itself also the penalty of sin; which is indeed present in those being born, but in them as they grow it begins to appear, when wisdom is necessary for the unwise, and continence for those desiring evils; yet the origin even of this sin descends from the will of the sinner. For Adam existed, and in him we all existed; Adam perished, and in him all perished ⁵⁵.

Profer per quid doceas naturale peccatum.

Bring forth by what you teach natural sin.

48. IUL. Meretur autem et ab honestis exsecrationem, et ab illa iustitia, cuius hic tota causa vertitur, legitimam condemnationem. Omnibus itaque aulaeis reductis profer aliquando luce palam, per quid doceas naturale esse peccatum.

48. IUL. Moreover, it deserves both execration from honorable men and, from that justice on which the whole case here turns, a legitimate condemnation. Therefore, with all the curtains drawn back, bring forth at last openly into the light by what grounds you teach that sin is natural.

Certe nihil superius falso vel de divinae laude iustitiae, vel de culpae definitione collectum est. Ostende ergo, haec duo in parvulis posse constare: si nullum est sine voluntate peccatum, si nulla voluntas, ubi non est explicata libertas, si non est libertas, ubi non est facultas per rationem electionis; quo monstro peccatum in infantibus invenitur, qui rationis usum non habent? Igitur nec eligendi facultatem, ac per hoc nec voluntatem; atque his irrefutabiliter concessis, nec aliquod omnino peccatum.

Certainly nothing above has been collected falsely either about the divine praise of justice or about the definition of fault. Show, therefore, that these two can stand together in little ones: if no sin is without will, if there is no will where liberty has not been explicated, if there is no liberty where there is no faculty by the reason of election; by what monster is sin found in infants, who do not have the use of reason? Therefore neither the faculty of choosing, and through this not even will; and with these things irrefutably conceded, not any sin at all.

His igitur molibus pressus, videamus quo eruperis. Nullo, inquis, peccato parvuli premuntur suo, sed premuntur alieno ⁵⁶. Necdum claruit quid mali sentias. Suspicamur enim te ad invidiam cuiuspiam hominis, cuius iniquitatem ut Poenus orator exprimeres, haec in medium protulisse.

Therefore, pressed by these masses, let us see where you have burst forth. By no, you say, sin are the little ones pressed by their own, but they are pressed by another’s ⁵⁶. Not yet has it become clear what evil you mean. For we suspect that you, to stir up prejudice against a certain man, in order that, like a Punic orator, you might express his iniquity, have brought these things forward into the midst.

Apud quem igitur impollutam innocentiam scelus gravavit externum? Quis ille fuit, qui hos adiudicaret reos, tam excors, tam trux, tam oblitus Dei et aequitatis, barbarus perduellis? Laudamus prorsus ingenium tuum; apparet eruditio, non potuisti aliter, dignam generis humani odio, iudicis nescio cuius, immo tyranni allegare personam, quam iurando non solum eum non pepercisse his qui nihil peccavissent, verum etiam his qui nec peccare potuissent.

Before whom, then, did an external crime weigh down unsullied innocence? Who was that man who would adjudge these guilty—so witless, so truculent, so forgetful of God and equity—a barbarous public enemy? We altogether praise your genius; your erudition is apparent: you could not otherwise have alleged the persona, worthy of the hatred of the human race, of some judge—I know not whom—nay, of a tyrant, than by swearing that he had not only not spared those who had committed nothing, but even those who could not have sinned.

Solet quippe apud suspiciosum animum bona conscientia laborare pro defensione sui, ne forte deliquerit, quia delinquere vel potuit; absolute autem vindicatur a crimine, qui ipsa rei impossibilitate defenditur. Pande igitur quis est iste innocentium addictor. Respondens: Deus; percussisti quidem animum, sed quoniam vix tantum sacrilegium fidem meretur, quid dixeris ambigamus.

For indeed, before a suspicious mind a good conscience is wont to labor in defense of itself, lest perchance it has transgressed, because it could have transgressed; but he is absolutely vindicated from the crime who is defended by the impossibility of the thing itself. Unfold, then, who is this condemner of the innocent. Answering: God; you have indeed struck the mind, but since so great a sacrilege scarcely merits credence, let us be in doubt about what you have said.

Scimus enim homonyme usurpari nomen hoc posse: Sunt quippe dii multi et domini multi; nobis tamen unus est Deus Pater ex quo omnia, et unus est Dominus Iesus Christus per quem omnia ⁵⁷. Quem igitur Deum in crimen vocas? Hic tu, sacerdos religiosissime, rhetorque doctissime, exhalas tristius et horridius aliquid, quam vel Amsancti vallis, vel puteus Averni, immo scelestius quam ipsa in his locis idolorum cultura commiserat ⁵⁸. Deus, ais, ipse qui commendat suam caritatem in nobis ⁵⁹, qui dilexit nos, et Filio suo non pepercit, sed pro nobis illum tradidit ⁶⁰, ipse sic iudicat, ipse est nascentium persecutor, ipse pro mala voluntate aeternis ignibus parvulos tradit, quos nec bonam, nec malam voluntatem scit habere potuisse. Post hanc ergo sententiam, tam immanem, tam sacrilegam, tam funestam, si sanis iudicibus uteremur, nihil praeter exsecrationem tui referre deberem.

For we know indeed that this name can be used homonymously: For indeed there are many gods and many lords; yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things ⁵⁷. Which God, therefore, do you call into accusation? Here you, most religious priest and most learned rhetor, exhale something sadder and more horrid than either the Valley of Amsanctus or the Pit of Avernus, nay, more criminal than the very cult of idols had committed in those places ⁵⁸. God, you say, he himself who commends his charity in us ⁵⁹, who loved us, and did not spare his own Son, but handed him over for us ⁶⁰, he himself judges thus; he himself is the persecutor of those being born; he himself, on account of an evil will, delivers little ones to eternal fires, who he knows could have had neither a good nor an evil will. After this sentence, so immense, so sacrilegious, so funereal, if we were to employ sane judges, I ought to report nothing besides a execration of you.

Iusta enim, et probabili gravitate, indignum te disputatione censerem, qui eo usque a religione, ab eruditione, a communibus postremo sensibus aufugisses ut, quod vix ulla barbaries, Dominum tuum criminosum putares.

For with just and plausible gravity, I would deem you unworthy of disputation, since you had fled so far from religion, from erudition, and, finally, from common sense, that—what scarcely any barbarity would do—you considered your Lord criminous.

AUG. Non est magnum, quod vides non habere parvulos propriam voluntatem ad eligendum bonum, vel malum. Illud vellem videres, quod vidit qui scribens ad Hebraeos dixit, filium Israel Levi in lumbis Abraham patris sui fuisse, quando est ille decimatus, et ideo etiam istum in illo fuisse decimatum ⁶¹. Ad hoc si haberes oculum christianum, fide cerneres, si intellegentia non valeres, in lumbis Adam fuisse omnes, qui ex illo fuerant per concupiscentiam carnis orituri; quam, post peccatum, quo illi sua nuditas nuntiata est, sensit, aspexit, erubuit, operuit.

AUG. It is no great matter, that you see little ones not to have their own will for choosing the good or the evil. This I would that you might see, which he saw who, writing to the Hebrews, said that Levi, son of Israel, was in the loins of Abraham his father when he was tithed, and therefore that this man also was tithed in him ⁶¹. For this, if you had a Christian eye, by faith you would discern it, if by understanding you were not able: that all were in the loins of Adam who from him were to be born through the concupiscence of the flesh; which, after the sin whereby his own nakedness was announced to him, he felt, looked upon, blushed at, covered.

Unde Ambrosius doc r meus, tui quoque doctoris excellenter ore laudatus: Quod igitur gravius est, inquit, hac se Adam interpretatione succinxit, eo loci, ubi fructu magis castitatis se succingere debuisset. In lumbis enim quibus praecingimur, quaedam semina generationis esse dicuntur. Et ideo male ibi succinctus Adam foliis inutilibus, ubi futurae generationis non fructum futurum, sed quaedam peccata signaret ⁶². Merito etiam dicit, quod paulo ante memoravi: Fuit Adam, et in illo fuimus omnes; periit Adam, et in illo omnes perierunt ⁶³. Hoc tu non videns, mihi caecus oblatras; sed in me, quidquid dicis, profecto et in ipsum dicis.

Whence Ambrose, my teacher, also by the mouth of your teacher excellently praised: What therefore is more grievous, he says, with this interpretation Adam girded himself, in that place where he ought rather to have girded himself with the fruit of chastity. For in the loins with which we are girded, certain seeds of generation are said to be. And therefore Adam was ill girded there with useless leaves, where he would signify, not the fruit of the future generation, but certain sins ⁶². With good reason he also says, which a little before I recalled: Adam was, and in him we all were; Adam perished, and in him all perished ⁶³. This, since you do not see it, you bark at me blindly; but whatever you say against me, assuredly you say it against him himself.

Utinam ergo ita mihi cum illo commune sit praemium, sicut abs te audio cum illo commune convicium. Quid est quod clamas, et dicis: Si sanis iudicibus uteremur, nihil praeter exsecrationem tui referre deberem? Possumne tecum largius, beneficentius, liberalius agere, quam ut ipsum inter nos constituam iudicem, de quo tui doctoris Pelagii iudicium iam tenemus? En adest ille, qui inter latinae linguae scriptores, flos quidam speciosus enituit, cuius fidem, et purissimum in Scripturis sensum ne inimicus quidem ausus est reprehendere ⁶⁴. Hoc Pelagius de Ambrosio iudicavit.

Would that therefore the reward were common to me with him, just as I hear from you that the contumely is common with him. What is it that you shout and say: If we were using sane judges, I ought to bring back nothing except an execration of you? Can I deal with you more lavishly, more beneficently, more liberally, than to set him himself as judge between us, about whom we already hold the judgment of your teacher Pelagius? Behold, he is present, who among the writers of the Latin language shone forth as a certain beautiful flower, whose faith and most pure sense in the Scriptures not even an enemy dared to reprehend ⁶⁴. This Pelagius judged concerning Ambrose.

Quid ergo de hoc quod inter nos agitur, iudicavit Ambrosius? Dixi superius eius de peccato originali sine ulla obscuritate vel ambiguitate sententias; sed si parum est, adhuc audi: Om s, inquit, sub peccato nascimur, quorum ipse ortus in vitio est ⁶⁵. Quid ad ista respondes? Illa de Ambrosio dixit praeclara Pelagius; ista pro me contra te manifesta pronun avit Ambrosius; istum reprehende de quo dicit magister tuus, quod eum ne inimicus quidem ausus est reprehendere; et qui sanos iudices quaeris, istum nega sanum, ut te plane profitearis insanum.

What then did Ambrose judge about this which is being conducted between us? I said above his sentences concerning original sin without any obscurity or ambiguity; but if that is too little, listen still: Al l, he says, we are born under sin, whose very origin is in vice ⁶⁵. What do you answer to these things? Those illustrious things about Ambrose Pelagius said; these Ambrose manifestly pro nounced for me against you; reprehend that man about whom your master says that not even an enemy dared to reprehend him; and since you seek sane judges, deny him sane, that you may plainly profess yourself insane.

Sed indignaris homo piissimus, quod parvuli non renati, si moriantur ante propriae voluntatis arbitrium, propter aliena dicantur peccata damnari ab eo, qui commendat caritatem suam in nobis ⁶⁶, qui dilexit nos, et Filio suo non pepercit, sed pro nobis illum tradidit ⁶⁷; quasi non de illo gravius conquerantur stulti et indocti similes tui, qui dicunt: Utquid creat, quos impios futuros et damnandos esse praescivit? Utquid eos postremo, donec ad impietatem damnabilem perveniant, facit vivere, quos antequam tales fierent, ex hac vita posset auferre; si animas amat, si commendat caritatem suam in nobis, si Filio suo non pepercit; sed pro nobis omnibus tradidit eum? Quibus si dicatur: O homo, tu qui es qui respondeas Deo? ⁶⁸ Inscrutabilia sunt iudicia eius ⁶⁹; irascuntur potius, quam mitescunt. Sed novit Dominus qui sunt eius ⁷⁰. Si ergo sanis iudicibus uti cupis, audi iudicem sanum singulariter a tuo doctore laudatum.

But you, most pious man, are indignant that little ones not reborn, if they die before the judgment of their own will, are said to be damned on account of another’s sins by him who commends his charity in us ⁶⁶, who loved us, and spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us ⁶⁷; as though fools and unlearned like yourself do not complain more grievously about him, who say: Why does he create those whom he foreknew would be impious and destined to be damned? Why, finally, does he make them live until they come to damnable impiety, those whom, before they became such, he could remove from this life; if he loves souls, if he commends his charity in us, if he spared not his own Son; but for us all delivered him up? To whom if it be said: O man, who are you who answer back to God? ⁶⁸ His judgments are unsearchable ⁶⁹; they grow angry rather than grow mild. But the Lord knows those who are his ⁷⁰. If therefore you wish to use sane judges, listen to a sane judge singularly praised by your teacher.

Fuit, inquit, Adam, et in illo fuimus omnes; periit Adam, et in illo omnes perierunt ⁷¹. Sed peccatis, inquis, alienis non utique perire debuerunt. Aliena sunt, sed paterna sunt; ac per hoc iure seminationis atque germinationis et nostra sunt. Quis ab hac perditione liberat, nisi qui venit quaerere quod perierat ⁷²? In eis ergo quos liberat, amplectamur misericordiam; in eis autem quos non liberat, agnoscamus iudicium occultissimum quidem, sed sine ulla dubitatione iustissimum.

He was, he says, Adam, and in him we all were; Adam perished, and in him all perished ⁷¹. But, you say, they surely ought not to have perished by others’ sins. They are alien, but they are paternal; and through this, by the law of semination and germination, they are ours as well. Who frees from this perdition, unless he who came to seek what had perished ⁷²? In those therefore whom he frees, let us embrace mercy; but in those whom he does not free, let us recognize a judgment most hidden indeed, but without any doubt most just.

Quis vestrum peior sit aliis aestimandum relinquo.

I leave it to be judged which of you is worse than the others.

49. IUL. Pugnasse quidem cum principe tenebrarum deum lucis, Manichaeus finxit, et credidit, addiditque eius captivam teneri in hoc orbe substantiam; sed tantam infelicitatem colore pietatis nititur excusare, affirmans eum quasi bonum pro patria dimicasse civem, atque ideo obiecisse membra, ne perderet regna. Tu qui haec didiceras, quantum ea vel ad tempus deserendo profeceris intuere; dicis, Deum necessitatem non pertulisse belli, sed iniquitatem admisisse iudicii; nec tenebrosis hostibus, sed perspicuis subiacere criminibus; non impertisse postremo substantiam suam, sed aeternam violasse iustitiam.

49. JUL. The Manichaean fashioned and believed that the god of light fought indeed with the prince of darkness, and he added that his substance is held captive in this orb; but he strives to excuse so great an infelicity by the color of piety, affirming that he, as a good citizen, fought for his fatherland, and for that reason exposed his limbs lest he lose his kingdoms. You, who had learned these things, consider how much you have advanced by deserting them even for a time; you say that God did not endure a necessity of war, but admitted an iniquity of judgment; that he lies subject not to tenebrous enemies, but to perspicuous charges; that he did not, finally, impart his substance, but violated eternal justice.

Quo quis vestrum peior sit, aliis aestimandum relinquo. Illud tamen liquet, ad unum vos opinionis nefas redire. Nam et Manichaeus subscribit iniquitatem Deo suo, cum eum allegat damnaturum, in ultimo die membra quae tradidit; et tu per hoc illum asseris infelicem, per quod corrumpit gloriam qua cluebat, et persequendo innocentiam quam creavit, perdidit iustitiam qua sacerrimus fuit.

Which of you is worse, I leave to be assessed by others. This, however, is clear: you all revert to one and the same nefariousness of opinion. For even Manichaeus subscribes iniquity to his god, when he alleges that he will condemn, on the last day, the members which he handed over; and you by this assert him to be unfortunate—inasmuch as he corrupts the glory by which he was renowned, and, by persecuting the innocence which he created, has lost the justice by which he was most sacred.

Tantum igitur huic, quem tu inducis Deo ille, quem magister tuus commentus fuerat, antecellit, quantum excusabilius est praelio superatum esse quam vitio.

Therefore, that one whom your master had contrived so far excels this God whom you introduce, by as much as it is more excusable to have been overcome in battle than by vice.

AUG. Si tibi placet innocentia parvulorum, remove ab eis, si potes, grave iugum quod est super filios Adam a die exitus de ventre matris eorum ⁷³. Sed puto quod Scriptura, quae hoc dixit, melius te noverat quid esset innocentia creaturae, et quid iustitia Creatoris. Quis autem non videat, si habent parvuli, qualem praedicas, innocentiam, in gravi iugo eorum Dei non esse iustitiam?

AUG. If the innocence of little ones pleases you, remove from them, if you can, the heavy yoke which is upon the sons of Adam from the day of the exit from the womb of their mother ⁷³. But I think that the Scripture, which said this, knew better than you what the innocence of the creature was, and what the justice of the Creator. Who, moreover, does not see that, if little ones have the innocence such as you preach, in their heavy yoke there is not the justice of God?

Porro, quia in iugo gravi eorum divina iustitia est; non est in eis talis, qualem praedicas, innocentia. Nisi forte tibi in hac quaestione laboranti, Deus iustus quidem, sed infirmus quodam modo subvenire poterit, quia suis imaginibus, ne innocentes gravis iugi miseria premerentur, subvenire non potuit; ut eum dicas voluisse quidem, quia iustus est, sed non potuisse quia omnipotens non est; atque ita de his angustiis exeas, ut fidei caput perdas, qua fide primitus in Symbolo confitemur credere nos in Deum Patrem omnipotentem. Deus igitur tuus, in tot et tantis malis quae parvuli patiuntur, aut iustitiam, aut omnipotentiam, aut ipsam curam rerum humanarum est perditurus; quodlibet autem istorum dixeris, vide quid eris.

Moreover, because in their heavy yoke there is divine justice; there is not in them the innocence such as you preach. Unless perhaps, as you labor in this question, a God indeed just, but in some manner infirm, could come to your aid, since he was not able to succor his own images, lest innocents be pressed by the misery of a heavy yoke; so that you say he indeed willed it, because he is just, but could not, because he is not omnipotent; and thus you escape from these straits by losing the head of the faith, with which in the Symbol we first confess that we believe in God the Father almighty. Therefore your God, amid the so many and so great evils which little ones suffer, will be going to forfeit either justice, or omnipotence, or the very care of human affairs; but whichever of these you say, see what you will be.

Reus, non Deus.

The accused, not God.

50. IUL. Amolire te itaque cum tali Deo tuo de Ecclesiarum medio; non est ipse, cui Patriarchae, cui Prophetae, cui Apostoli crediderunt, in quo speravit et sperat Ecclesia primitivorum, quae conscripta est in caelis ⁷⁴; non est ipse quem credit iudicem rationabilis creatura; quem Spiritus Sanctus iuste iudicaturum esse denuntiat. Nemo prudentium, pro tali Domino suum umquam sanguinem fudisset; nec enim merebatur dilectionis affectum, ut suscipiendae pro se onus imponeret passionis.

50. IUL. Remove yourself, then, with such a god of yours from the midst of the Churches; he is not the one in whom the Patriarchs, the Prophets, and the Apostles believed, in whom the Church of the firstborn, which is enrolled in the heavens ⁷⁴, has hoped and hopes; he is not the one whom the rational creature believes to be judge, whom the Holy Spirit proclaims will judge justly. None of the prudent would ever have poured out his own blood for such a Lord; for he did not merit the affection of love, so as to lay upon himself the burden of suffering to be undertaken for him.

Postremo iste quem inducis, si esset uspiam, reus convinceretur esse, non deus; iudicandus a vero Deo meo, non iudicaturus pro Deo. Ut igitur prima fidei fundamenta cognoscas: noster Deus, Ecclesiae catholicae Deus, substantia nobis ignotus est, et ab aspectu similiter remotus; quem vidit nemo hominum, nec videre potest ⁷⁵; ut aeternus sine principio, ita sanctus iustusque sine vitio; omnipotentissimus, aequissimus, misericordissimus, innotescens solo splendore virtutum; factor omnium quae non erant, dispensator eorum quae sunt, examinator cunctorum qui et sunt et futuri sunt et fuerunt, in ultimo die; terram, caelum, et cuncta simul elementa moturus; excitator cinerum, et corporum restitutor; sed propter solam iustitiam, haec quae diximus, cuncta facturus.

Finally, this one whom you introduce, if he existed anywhere, would be convicted as a defendant, not a god; to be judged by my true God, not going to judge in God’s stead. Therefore, that you may know the first foundations of the faith: our God, the God of the Catholic Church, is unknown to us in substance, and likewise removed from sight; whom no man has seen, nor can see ⁷⁵; as he is eternal without beginning, so holy and just without fault; most omnipotent, most equitable, most merciful, becoming known only by the splendor of virtues; maker of all things which were not, dispenser of those things which are, examiner of all who are and will be and have been, on the last day; he will move the earth, heaven, and all the elements together; awakener of ashes, and restorer of bodies; but for the sake of justice alone, he will accomplish all these things which we have said.

AUG. Si Deum Patriarcharum colis, quare non credis circumcisionem octavi diei, quae praecepta est Abrahae, prefigurationem fuisse regenerationis in Christo? Hoc enim, si crederes, videres non potuisse iuste animam parvuli exterminari de populo suo, si die non circumcideretur octavo ⁷⁶, nisi alicui fuisset obligata peccato?

AUG. If you worship the God of the Patriarchs, why do you not believe that the circumcision of the eighth day, which was commanded to Abraham, was a prefiguration of regeneration in Christ? For if you believed this, you would see that the soul of an infant could not justly be cut off from his people, if he were not circumcised on the eighth day ⁷⁶, unless it had been bound to some sin?

Si Deum Prophetarum colis, cur non credis quod per eos totiens Deus dixerit: Reddam peccata patrum in filios ⁷⁷? Si Deum Apostolorum colis, cur non credis, corpus mortuum propter peccatum ⁷⁸? Si Deum colis in quo speravit et sperat Ecclesia primitivorum, quae conscripta est in caelis ⁷⁹, cur non credis baptizandos parvulos erui de potestate tenebrarum ⁸⁰, cum eos propter hoc exsufflet atque exorcizet Ecclesia, ut ab eis potestas tenebrarum mittatur foras? Ille vero quem sperat iudicem rationalis creatura, quae in sanctis eius est et fidelibus, lege nobis, praeter regnum bonis et supplicium malis, quem tertium locum praeparaverit et promiserit non regeneratis innocentibus tuis. Quomodo autem dicis, neminem prudentum pro Domino, quem colimus, sanguinem fundere; cum eum coluerit et pro eo sanguinem fuderit gloriosissimus Cyprianus, qui vos in ista quaestione suffocat, dicens parvulum ex Adam carnaliter natum, contagium mortis antiquae prima nativitate contrahere ⁸¹? Videsne te potius reum, qui blasphemas istum sanctorum martyrum Deum?

If you worship the God of the Prophets, why do you not believe that through them God has so often said: I will repay the sins of the fathers upon the sons ⁷⁷? If you worship the God of the Apostles, why do you not believe, the body is dead because of sin ⁷⁸? If you worship the God in whom the Church of the firstborn, which is enrolled in the heavens, has hoped and hopes ⁷⁹, why do you not believe that infants-to-be-baptized are rescued from the power of darkness ⁸⁰, since for this the Church breathes upon and exorcizes them, that the power of darkness may be sent forth from them? But as for Him whom the rational creature—which is in his saints and faithful—hopes for as Judge, read out to us, besides the kingdom for the good and the punishment for the evil, what third place he has prepared and promised for your unregenerate innocents. But how do you say that no prudent men pour out blood for the Lord whom we worship; when the most glorious Cyprian has worshiped him and has poured out blood for him—who suffocates you in this question—saying that the little child born carnally from Adam contracts the contagion of ancient death by his first nativity ⁸¹? Do you see that you rather are the guilty one, you who blaspheme this God of the holy martyrs?

Dicis te colere omnipotentissimum, aequissimum, misericordissimum Deum; sed ipse est omnipotentissimus, qui iugum grave, quo premuntur filii Adam ex die nativitatis suae ⁸², procul dubio ab eis posset auferre, immo ne ullo tali iugo prorsus gravarentur efficere; sed ipse est aequissimus, qui nullo modo illud imponeret, imponive permitteret, nisi peccata in eis, cum quibus nati sunt, inveniret, quorum reatum renatis idem ipse misericordissimus solveret. Si ergo te delectaret divina iustitia, videres profecto quod ex ipsa veniat, non utique iniuste a parvulis incipiens, nota omnibus humana miseria, qua peragitur haec vita, a primis fletibus nascentium, usque ad extremos halitus morientium; sanctis tantum et fidelibus, sed in alia vita, felicitate promissa.

You say that you worship the most omnipotent, the most equitable, the most merciful God; but he is the most omnipotent, who could without doubt remove from the sons of Adam the heavy yoke with which they are pressed from the day of their birth ⁸², indeed could bring it about that they should not at all be burdened by any such yoke; yet he is the most equitable, who would in no way impose it, nor permit it to be imposed, unless he found sins in them with which they were born, the guilt of which he, the same most merciful, would release for those reborn. If therefore divine justice delighted you, you would assuredly see that from it there comes—the human misery known to all, certainly not unjustly beginning from little ones—by which this life is carried on, from the first wailings of the newborn to the last breaths of the dying; with felicity promised only to the holy and faithful, but in another life.

Pro Deo meo!

For my God!

51. IUL. Pro hoc igitur Deo meo, quem mihi qualem credo omnis creatura et sancta Scriptura denuntiat, rectius dixi facerem, si nec librorum te concertatione dignum putarem. Verum quoniam mihi potissimum hoc a sanctis viris, nostri temporis confessoribus, munus impositum est, ut dicta tua quid habeant ponderis rationisque discutiam, opportunum fuit ostendere prius, non a te credi ei Deo, qui in Catholicorum semper Ecclesia praedicatus est et us e ad finem ubi illa fuerit praedicabitur.

51. IUL. For this, then, my God, such as I believe Him to be as every creature and Holy Scripture proclaims to me, I said I would act more rightly, if I were to think you not even worthy of a concertation of books. But since this task has been laid upon me most especially by holy men, confessors of our time, that I should discuss what weight and reason your sayings have, it was opportune to show first that you do not believe in that God who has always been preached in the Church of the Catholics and will be preached even unto the end wherever that Church shall be.

AUG. Ego potius non te ostendisse, quod te ostendisse dicis, ostendi; et ei me Deo credere, qui a Catholicorum semper Ecclesia praedicatus est, si nimium caecus non sis, edocui.

AUG. I, rather, have shown that you have not shown what you say you have shown; and I have made clear that I believe in that God who has always been preached by the Church of the Catholics, if you are not too blind.

Hi omnes et alii mei sunt.

All these and others are mine.

52. IUL. Nunc vero consequenter inspiciam, quibus hoc, quod expugnat fides piorum, testimoniis affirmare coneris. Sed quoniam institui libro tuo secundo, quem Alypius detulit, obviare, ne confunderetur rescripti series, paucis adhuc, usque dum ad testimonium Apostoli, quo plurimum tibi videris muniri, sermo perveniat, respondendum est.

52. IUL. Now, accordingly, I will examine by what testimonies you try to affirm this, which the faith of the pious batters down. But since I have undertaken to oppose your second book, which Alypius delivered, lest the sequence of the rescript be confused, it must be answered briefly for now, until the discourse comes to the testimony of the Apostle, by which you seem to be fortified most of all.

Illis ergo, quae supra posui, verbis tuis haec, quae sequuntur, adiungis: In his itaque quae praetermisit, hoc timuit, quia cuncta Ecclesiae catholicae pectora convenit, fidemque ipsam antiquitus traditam atque fundatam, clara quodam modo voce compellat, et adversus eos vehementissime permovet quod diximus, quia "nihil peccati esse in parvulis dicunt, quod lavacro regenerationis abluatur" ⁸³. Omnes enim ad Ecclesiam non propter aliud cum parvulis currunt, nisi ut in eis originale peccatum generatione primae nativitatis attractum regeneratione secundae nativitatis expietur. Deinde ad nostra superiora verba revertitur, quae nescio cur repetat: "Eos autem qui de tali commixtione nascuntur, dicimus trahere originale peccatum; eosque, de parentibus qualibuscumque nascantur, non negamus adhuc esse sub diabolo, nisi renascantur in Christo" ⁸⁴. Haec verba nostra et paulo ante dixerat. Deinde subiunxit quod de Christo diximus: "Qui de eadem sexus utriusque commixtione nasci noluit". Sed etiam hic praetermisit quod ego posui: "Ut per eius gratiam eruti de potestate tenebrarum in regnum illius, qui de eadem sexus utriusque commixtione nasci noluit, transferantur". Vide, obsecro te, quae nostra verba vitavit, tamquam inimicus omnino gratiae Dei, quae venit per Iesum Christum Dominum nostrum.

To those words of yours, therefore, which I set above, you join the following that follow: In those things, then, which he passed over, he feared this, because he meets all the hearts of the Catholic Church, and in a certain manner with a clear voice addresses the faith itself handed down from antiquity and founded, and is most vehemently stirred against those, as we said, because "they say that there is nothing of sin in little ones which is washed away by the laver of regeneration" ⁸³. For all, in fact, run to the Church with little ones for no other reason except that in them the original sin, drawn along by the generation of the first nativity, may be expiated by the regeneration of the second nativity. Then he returns to our earlier words, which I know not why he repeats: "But those who are born from such a commixture, we say draw original sin; and those who are born of parents of whatever sort, we do not deny are still under the devil, unless they be reborn in Christ" ⁸⁴. These our words he had said a little before as well. Then he subjoined what we said about Christ: "Who willed not to be born from that same commixture of both sexes." But even here he passed over what I set down: "That by his grace, rescued from the power of darkness, into the kingdom of him who willed not to be born from that same commixture of both sexes, they be transferred." See, I beseech you, what words of ours he avoided, as though altogether an enemy of the grace of God, which came through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Scit enim ab illa Apostoli sententia, qua dixit de Deo Patre: "i nos eruit de potestate tenebrarum, et transtulit in regnum Filii caritatis suae " ⁸⁵; improbissime et impiissime parvulos separari; ideo procul dubio verba ista praetermittere quam ponere maluit ⁸⁶. Egone sum inimicus gratiae Dei, homo omnium impudentissime, qui in primo libro meo, unde tu ista a contextu suo avulsa rapuisti, ut aliquid sine ratione garrires, professione pura et plena os tuum mysteriis Manichaeorum madens tuorumque damnavi?

For he knows from that sentence of the Apostle, wherein he said about God the Father: "who rescued us from the power of darkness, and transferred into the kingdom of the Son of his love" ⁸⁵; that most wickedly and most impiously little ones are separated; therefore without doubt he preferred to omit these words rather than to set them down ⁸⁶. Am I an enemy of the grace of God, you most shameless of all men, I who in my first book, whence you snatched these things torn from their context, so that you might babble something without reason, by a pure and full profession condemned your mouth dripping with the mysteries of the Manichaeans and your followers?

AUG. Numquid ut habeas causam bonam conviciando facturus es? Dic quorum meorum os, sicut meum damnasse te iactas. Dicturus es: Manichaeorum; sed ut maledicus, non ut veridicus.

AUG. Are you going to have a good case by reviling? Name which of my followers’ mouth you boast to have condemned, as you boast to have condemned my own. You will say: of the Manichaeans; but as a slanderer, not as a truth-teller.

Ego enim et Manichaeos detestor, et adiutores eorum, in quibus appetis principatum, et utrosque adiuvante ac subve ente Domino Deo nostro catholica veritate redarguo. Sed ostendam meos, quos in me tanto nequius quanto astutius criminaris. In hac enim causa, ubi originalis peccati vertitur quaestio, propter quod me nomine Manichaeorum atrocissimis dignum arbitraris opprobriis, meus est Cyprianus, qui cum peccasse nihil dixerit parvulum, non tamen tacuit, eum contraxisse peccati ex Adam prima nativitate contagium ⁸⁷. Meus est Hilarius, qui cum exponeret quod in Psalmo legitur: Vivet anima mea et laudabit te ⁸⁸. Vivere se , inquit, in hac vita non reputat; quippe qui dixerat: "ce in iniquitatibus conceptum sum, et in delictis peperit me mater mea " ⁸⁹, scit sub peccati origine, et sub peccati lege se natum ⁹⁰. Meus est a tuo doctore excellentissime laudatus Ambrosius, qui dixit: Omnes homines sub peccato nascimur, quorum ipse ortus in vitio est; sicut habes lectum, dicente David: "ce enim in iniquitatibus conceptus sum, et in delictis peperit me mater mea ". Ideo Pauli caro, corpus mortis erat ⁹¹. Meus est Gregorius, qui cum de Baptismo loqueretur: Venerare, inquit, nativitatem, per quam terrenae nativitatis vinculis liberatus es ⁹². Meus est Basilius, qui cum ageret de ieiunio: Quia non ieiunavimus, inquit, decidimus de paradiso; ieiunemus ut ad eum redeamus ⁹³. Meus est Ioannes Constantinopolitanus, dicens: Adam peccavit illud grande peccatum, et omne hominum genus in commune damnavit ⁹⁴. Hi omnes, et alii socii eorum eadem sentientes, quos commemorare longum est, mei sunt; si agnoscis, et tui sunt; sed mei doctores, improbatores tui.

For I both detest the Manichaeans, and their helpers, among whom you seek a principate, and I refute both, the Lord our God aiding and succoring, by Catholic truth. But I will show my own, whom against me you charge the more wickedly the more craftily. For in this cause, where the question of original sin is turned, on account of which you deem me worthy of the most atrocious reproaches under the name of the Manichaeans, mine is Cyprian, who, although he said that the little one had done nothing by sinning, nevertheless did not keep silence that he had contracted the contagion of sin from Adam in his first nativity ⁸⁷. Mine is Hilary, who, when he was expounding what is read in the Psalm: My soul will live and will praise you ⁸⁸. “To live,” he says, he does not reckon of himself in this life; indeed he who had said: "ce in iniquities I was conceived, and in offenses my mother bore me" ⁸⁹, knows himself to be born under the origin of sin and under the law of sin ⁹⁰. Mine is Ambrose, by your teacher most excellently praised, who said: We all men are born under sin, whose very birth is in vice; as you have read, David saying: "ce indeed in iniquities I was conceived, and in offenses my mother bore me." Therefore Paul’s flesh was the body of death ⁹¹. Mine is Gregory, who, when he was speaking about Baptism, says: Venerate the nativity, by which you have been freed from the bonds of earthly nativity ⁹². Mine is Basil, who, when he was treating of fasting, says: Because we did not fast, we fell from paradise; let us fast that we may return to it ⁹³. Mine is John of Constantinople, saying: Adam sinned that great sin, and condemned the whole race of men in common ⁹⁴. All these, and other associates of theirs thinking the same, whom it is long to recount, are mine; if you acknowledge it, they are yours too; yet mine as teachers, yours as disapprovers.

Quomodo igitur os meum meorumque damnasti; cum istorum, quos esse conspicis meos, concordissimo et veracissimo potius ore ipse damneris? Istisne tu luminibus civitatis Dei, mente tenebrosissima, fronte impudentissima, lingua procacissima audes crimen obicere Manichaei? Si autem non audes, cur mihi non ob aliud audes, nisi quia hoc dico, quod dicunt quibus non audes?

How then have you condemned my mouth and that of my own; when by the most harmonious and most truthful mouth of those whom you perceive to be mine you yourself are rather condemned? Do you, to these luminaries of the City of God, with a most dark mind, a most shameless brow, a most procacious tongue, dare to throw the charge of being a Manichaean? But if you do not dare, why do you dare against me for no other reason than that I say what those say, against whom you do not dare?

Baptismatis gratia locupletem credimus.

We believe one enriched by the grace of Baptism.

53. IUL. Ibi namque hic est a me collatus ordo verborum, cum dixissem auctorem Deum caeli et terrae, omniumque quae in eis sunt, ac per hoc et hominum propter quos cuncta facta sunt. Non autem me fugit - inquio - cum haec dicimus, illud de nobis disseminandum esse, quia gratiam Christi necessariam parvulis non putemus.

53. JUL. For there, this is the order of words set forth by me, when I had said God the author of heaven and earth, and of all things that are in them, and through this also of men, on account of whom all things have been made. It does not escape me - I say - when we say these things, that this is to be disseminated about us, namely, that we do not think the grace of Christ necessary for little ones.

Quod christianos populos laudabiliter et vehementer offendit; si tamen dicti per se nefarii non nos arbitrarentur auctores; eo enim modo nec de fratribus suis falsa credendo crimen incurrerent, et studiosos se circa amorem fidei comprobarent. Munienda igitur nobis ista pars est contra impetum vanitatis, et confessione brevi os obloquentium consuendum. Nos igitur in tantum gratiam Baptismatis omnibus utilem aetatibus confitemur, ut cunctos, qui illam non necessariam etiam parvulis putant, aeterno feriamus anathemate.

That which laudably and vehemently offends Christian peoples; if only they did not consider us the authors of the saying, nefarious in itself; for in that way they would neither incur a charge by believing false things about their brothers, and they would prove themselves zealous concerning the love of the faith. Therefore this part is to be fortified by us against the impetus of vanity, and by a brief confession the mouth of the gainsayers is to be sewn shut. We therefore confess to such an extent that the grace of Baptism is useful to all ages, that we strike with eternal anathema all who think it not necessary even for little ones.

Sed hanc gratiam locupletem spiritalibus donis credimus, quae multis opima muneribus ac reverenda virtutibus, pro infirmitatum generibus et humanorum statuum diversitatibus, una, tam remediorum collatrice quam munerum, virtute medicatur. Quae cum admovetur, non est mutanda pro causis; iam enim ipsa dona sua pro accedentium capacitate dispensat. Sicut enim artes omnes non pro diversitate materiarum, quas arripiunt excolendas, ipsae quoque aut detrimenta aut augmenta patiuntur, sed idem semper atque uno modo se habentes multiplici decorantur effectu; ita et secundum Apostolum: "a fides, unum Baptisma " ⁹⁵. Et multiplicantur et dilatantur in donis, nec tamen in mysteriorum mutantur ordinibus.

But we believe this grace to be opulent with spiritual gifts, which many rich gifts and reverend virtues, according to the kinds of infirmities and the diversities of human states, one and the same, as much a bestower of remedies as of gifts, by its power ministers healing. When it is applied, it is not to be changed on account of the cases; for already it itself dispenses its own gifts according to the capacity of those approaching. For just as all the arts, not on account of the diversity of the materials which they take up to be worked, themselves also suffer either detriments or augmentations, but, being the same always and in one way, are adorned with manifold effect; so also according to the Apostle: "one faith, one Baptism" ⁹⁵. And they are multiplied and dilated in gifts, and yet are not changed in the orders of the mysteries.

Sed haec gratia non adversatur iustitiae, quae maculas eluit iniquitatis; nec facit peccata, sed purgat; quae absolvit reos, non calumniatur innocuos. Christus enim, qui est sui operis redemptor, auget circa imaginem suam continua largitate beneficia; et quos fecerat condendo bonos, facit innovando adoptandoque meliores ⁹⁶. Hanc igitur gratiam, per quam reis venia, illuminatio spiritalis, adoptio filiorum Dei, municipatus Hierusalem caelestis, sanctificatio atque in Christi membra translatio, et possessio Regni caelorum mortalibus datur, qui aliquibus negandam putat, omnium bonorum exsecrationem meretur.

But this grace does not stand in opposition to justice, which washes away the stains of iniquity; nor does it make sins, but purges them; it absolves the guilty, it does not calumniate the innocent. For Christ, who is the redeemer of his own work, increases benefits toward his image by continual largesse; and those whom he had made good by creating, he makes better by renewing and by adopting ⁹⁶. This grace, therefore, through which to the guilty pardon, spiritual illumination, adoption of the sons of God, the citizenship of the heavenly Jerusalem, sanctification and translation into the members of Christ, and the possession of the Kingdom of the heavens is given to mortals, whoever thinks it should be denied to any persons merits the execration of all good things.

AUG. In his omnibus quae commemorasti gratiae Dei muneribus illud, quod prius posuisti, dari per illam reis veniam, non vis ad parvulos pertinere, quos ullum reatum negas ex Adam trahere. Cur ergo cetera multis negat Deus parvulis, qui sine hac gratia in illa aetate moriuntur?

AUG. Among all these gifts of the grace of God which you have commemorated, that which you first set forth—namely, that through it pardon is given to the guilty—you do not wish to pertain to little ones, whom you deny to draw any guilt from Adam. Why, then, does God deny the rest to many little ones, who without this grace die in that age?

Cur, inquam, non eis datur illuminatio spiritalis, adoptio filiorum Dei, municipatus Hierusalem caelestis, sanctificatio atque in Christi membra translatio, et possessio regni caelorum? Haeccine tot munera tam necessaria, tot imaginibus suis nullum secundum vos peccatum habentibus negaret Deus, penes quem summa potestas est, cum hoc beneficium non a se prohibeat voluntas contraria parvulorum? Tu certe ut hanc a vobis amolireris invidiam, qua dicimini parvulis Baptismi gratiam denegare, dixisti quod eam gratiam, qui aliquibus negandam putat, omnium bonorum exsecrationem meretur.

Why, I say, is spiritual illumination, the adoption of the sons of God, the citizenship of the heavenly Jerusalem, sanctification and transfer into the members of Christ, and the possession of the kingdom of heaven not given to them? Are these so many and so necessary gifts what God would deny to so many of his images, who, according to you, have no sin, he in whose power is the highest authority, since the contrary will of the little ones does not forbid this benefit from themselves? You indeed, that you might remove from yourselves this ill will, whereby you are said to deny to little ones the grace of Baptism, said that he who thinks that that grace ought to be denied to any merits the execration of all good things.

Non igitur eam Dei omnipotentis aequitas negaret innumerabilibus parvulis, qui sine hac sub eius omnipotentia moriuntur, si mali nihil in eius occulto iudicio mererentur. A quo iudicio de stirpe Adam venientibus omnibus debito, quicumque secundum gratiam, non secundum debitum liberantur, non in suis meritis, sed in Domino glorientur. Vos ergo si carere vultis opprobrio, quo Ecclesiae catholicae detestabiles facti estis, sinite Christum parvulis esse Iesum.

Therefore the equity of Almighty God would not deny it to innumerable little ones, who without this die under his omnipotence, if they were deserving nothing evil in his occult judgment. From which judgment, owed as a debt to all coming from the stock of Adam, whoever are freed according to grace, not according to debt, let them glory not in their own merits, but in the Lord. You therefore, if you wish to be without the opprobrium by which you have been made detestable to the Catholic Church, allow Christ to be Jesus to the little ones.

Quod omnino non erit, si non eis conferet propter quod hoc nomen accepit, id est, si non eos salvos faciet a peccatis eorum ⁹⁷. Hoc igitur de ista gratia dicite, ut offensione Christianorum, de qua conquerimini careatis, quod dixit catholicus doctus doctorque Gregorius: Venerare nativitatem, per quam terrenae nativitatis vinculis liberatus es ⁹⁸. Nullo itaque modo ad istam gratiam pertinere parvulos confitemini, quamdiu negatis eos nativitate caelesti a terrenae nativitatis vinculis liberari.

Which will by no means be the case, if he does not confer upon them that on account of which he received this name, that is, if he does not save them from their sins ⁹⁷. Say this, therefore, about that grace, so that you may be free from the offense of Christians about which you complain, what the catholic, learned, and Doctor Gregory said: Venerate the nativity, through which you have been freed from the bonds of earthly nativity ⁹⁸. Therefore in no way do you admit that the little ones pertain to this grace, so long as you deny that they are freed by heavenly nativity from the bonds of earthly nativity.

Mysteria non debent mutari pro causarum varietate.

Mysteries ought not to be changed on account of the variety of causes.

54. IUL. Quae quoniam, ut locus interim hic patiebatur, munivi, revertamur illo unde digressi sumus; de hoc ipso, ubicumque opportunum fuerit, plenius locuturi. Ecce quanta confessionis luce, et eos qui Baptisma parvulis denegarent, et vos qui eius praeiudicio iustitiam Dei audetis maculare, reprobavi; protestans aliud me non tenere, quam instituta mysteria iisdem, quibus tradita sunt verbis, in omni prorsus aetate esse tractanda, nec pro causarum varietate debere mutari; verum fieri peccatorem ex malo perfecte bonum; innocentem autem, qui nullum habet malum propriae voluntatis, ex bono fieri meliorem, id est, optimum; ut ambo quidem in Christi membra transeant consecrati; sed unus deprehensus in mala vita, alter in bona natura.

54. IUL. Since I have buttressed these points, so far as this place for the moment allowed, let us return to that whence we departed; about this very matter, wherever it shall be opportune, we shall speak more fully. Behold with how great a light of confession I have disapproved both those who would deny Baptism to little ones, and you who dare to stain the justice of God by its prejudgment; protesting that I hold nothing other than that the instituted mysteries are to be handled in every age with the very same words with which they were handed down, nor ought they to be changed according to the variety of causes; but rather that the sinner, from being evil, becomes perfectly good; the innocent, however, who has no evil of his own will, from good becomes better, that is, best; so that both, having been consecrated, pass over into the members of Christ; but the one is apprehended in an evil life, the other in a good nature.

Ille enim innocentiam, quam exortus acceperat, prava actione corrupit; hic vero sine laude, sine crimine voluntatis, hoc solum habet, quod a Deo conditore suscepit, qui infucata primaevitate felicior, bonum simplicitatis suae vitiare non potuit, nullum habens de actibus meritum, sed hoc solum retinens, quod tanti opificis dignatione possedit.

For he corrupted the innocence which he had received at his arising by depraved action; but this one, without praise, without any crime of will, has only this which he received from God the Founder—who, more fortunate in unfeigned primevalness, could not vitiate the good of his simplicity—having no merit from deeds, but retaining only this which he possessed by the condescension of so great an Artificer.

AUG. Quare ergo grave iugum super eum a die exitus de ventre matris eius ⁹⁹? Cur tanta corruptibilitas corporis, ut hac aggravetur anima eius ¹⁰⁰? Cur tanta mentis obtunsio, ut etiam plagis erudiatur tarditas eius? Quousque, Iuliane, gravis es corde?

AUG. Why therefore is there a heavy yoke upon him from the day of his going forth from his mother’s womb ⁹⁹? Why so great a corruptibility of the body, that by this his soul is burdened ¹⁰⁰? Why so great a dullness of mind, that even his slowness is trained by blows? How long, Julian, are you heavy in heart?

Quousque diligis vanitatem, et quaeris mendacium ¹⁰¹, quo vestra haeresis fulciatur? Numquid si nemo peccasset, si natura humana in ea qua condita est bonitate mansisset, etiam in paradiso ad istas homo miserias, ut alia taceam, nasceretur?

How long do you love vanity, and seek a lie ¹⁰¹, by which your heresy may be buttressed? Would it be the case that if no one had sinned, if human nature had remained in the goodness in which it was created, even in paradise a man would be born into these miseries, to say nothing of other things?

Infantes quoque sunt veteres homines.

Infants also are old men.

55. IUL. Aetas igitur illa sicut misericordiam Christi praedicat innovata, id est, innovantis mysterii virtute provecta; ita iniquitatem iudicis, infamiam iustitiae, aut accusata, aut aggravata convincit.

55. IUL. Therefore that age, renewed— that is, carried forward by the virtue of the innovating mystery— just as it proclaims the mercy of Christ; so it convicts the iniquity of the judge, the infamy of justice, whether being accused or being aggravated.

AUG. Ex qua vetustate aetas illa dicitur innovata, cum sit ortu nova? Labia dolosa sunt ista; si vis agnoscere vetustatem, ex qua parvuli christiana gratia renovantur, audi fideliter quod ait homo Dei Reticius ab Augustoduno episcopus, qui cum Melchiade Romano Episcopo quondam iudex sedit, Donatumque damnavit haereticum.

AUG. From what antiquity is that age said to be renewed, since it is new in its origin? Those are deceitful lips; if you wish to recognize the antiquity from which little ones are renewed by Christian grace, listen faithfully to what the man of God Reticius, bishop from Augustodunum, said, who once sat as judge with Melchiades, the Roman Bishop, and condemned Donatus as a heretic.

Hic enim cum de christiano Baptismate loqueretur: Hanc igitur, inquit, principalem esse in Ecclesia indulgentiam, neminem praeterit, in qua antiqui criminis omne pondus exponimus, et ignorantiae nostrae facinora prisca delemus; ubi et veterem hominem cum ingenitis sceleribus exuimus ¹⁰². Audisne non postea perpetrata, sed etiam ingenita scelera veteris hominis? Numquid Manichaeus fuit iste Reticius? Quomodo ergo non dolose innovari parvulos dicitis in christiana regeneratione, qui mala, quae ingeneravit antiqui criminis pondus, in vetere homine non vultis agnoscere?

For here, when he was speaking about Christian Baptism: This therefore, he says, is the principal indulgence in the Church—this escapes no one—in which we lay down the whole weight of the ancient crime, and we blot out the former misdeeds of our ignorance; where also we strip off the old man together with his inborn crimes ¹⁰². Do you hear not crimes perpetrated afterwards, but even the inborn crimes of the old man? Was this Reticius perhaps a Manichaean? How then do you not say deceitfully that infants are renewed in Christian regeneration, you who are unwilling to acknowledge, in the old man, the evils which the weight of the ancient crime has ingenerated?

Deinde, si aggravata aetas illa iniquitatem iudicis convincit, ut dicis, itane non est aggravata gravi iugo super filios Adam? Et tamen non est hinc iniquus Deus; ac per hoc merito est aggravata. Nullum est autem huius aetatis meritum malum, si non est originale peccatum.

Then, if that age, being aggravated, convicts the iniquity of the judge, as you say, is it not thus aggravated with a heavy yoke over the sons of Adam? And yet God is not unjust from this; and through this it is aggravated deservedly. But there is no evil merit of this age, if there is not original sin.

Dic quare exsufflentur.

Say why they are exsufflated.

56. IUL. Non ergo unitate sacramenti rea monstratur infantia, sed veritate iudicii nihil aliud quam innocens approbatur.

56. IUL. Therefore, infancy is not shown guilty by the unity of the sacrament, but by the verity of judgment it is approved as nothing other than innocent.

AUG. Invenisse te putas quare baptizetur; dic quare exsuffletur. Certe Pelagii auctoris vestri magna et invicta est putata sententia, ubi ait: Si Adae peccatum etiam non peccantibus nocuit, ergo et Christi iustitia etiam non credentibus prodest ¹⁰³. Quid ergo de parvulis dicitis quando baptizantur?

AUG. You think you have found why he is baptized; say why he is exsufflated. Certainly the opinion of Pelagius, your author, has been thought great and unconquered, where he says: If Adam’s sin harmed even those not sinning, therefore Christ’s justice also benefits even those not believing ¹⁰³. What, therefore, do you say about infants when they are baptized?

Credunt, an non credunt? Si dixeritis: Non credunt, quomodo non eis Christi iustitia etiam non credentibus prodest, ut Regnum caelorum possideant? Aut si prodest, ut cogimini confiteri; sic igitur eis nocuit Adae peccatum nondum peccandi habentibus voluntatem, quomodo eis prodest iustitia Christi nondum credendi habentibus voluntatem?

Do they believe, or do they not believe? If you will say: They do not believe, how does the justice of Christ profit even non-believers, so that they may possess the Kingdom of Heaven? Or if it does profit, as you are compelled to confess; thus therefore the sin of Adam harmed them, when they did not yet have the will to sin, just as the justice of Christ profits them, when they do not yet have the will to believe?

Si autem dixeritis: Per alios credunt, sic etiam per alium peccaverunt. Et quoniam verum est quod per alios credunt (propter hoc enim et fideles per totam Ecclesiam nuncupantur), profecto pertinent ad illud quod ait Dominus: Qui autem non crediderit, condemnabitur ¹⁰⁴. Condemnabuntur ergo si per alios non credant, cum per se ipsos non valent credere; condemnari autem iuste nullo modo possent, si non sub peccato, ac per hoc et sub peccati principe nascerentur. Propter hoc ergo et exsufflantur.

But if you should say: They believe through others, thus also they sinned through another. And since it is true that they believe through others (for on this account they are even called the faithful throughout the whole Church), surely they pertain to that which the Lord says: But whoever does not believe shall be condemned ¹⁰⁴. Therefore they will be condemned if through others they do not believe, since through themselves they are not able to believe; yet to be condemned justly they could in no way be, if they were not born under sin, and therefore also under the prince of sin. For this reason, therefore, they are also exsufflated.

Removete ab eis deceptoriam vanitatem vestram; sinite parvulos venire ad Iesum ¹⁰⁵, qui salvum facit populum suum (in quo utique et ipsi sunt) a peccatis eorum ¹⁰⁶.

Remove from them your deceptive vanity; allow the little ones to come to Jesus ¹⁰⁵, who saves his people (in which assuredly they themselves also are) from their sins ¹⁰⁶.

Potest Deus dimittere maioribus peccata propria et parvulis imputare aliena.

God can remit to adults their own sins and impute to little ones alien sins.

57. IUL. Quamquam mihi, ut de statu explicando immorer parvulorum, consequentia rationis indicit, quae res sua lege coniunctas dividi non sinit. Ceterum facilior esset iactura nascentium, si non eis compericlitaretur ipsa maiestas.

57. IUL. Although for me the consequence of reason enjoins that I linger in explaining the status of the little ones—a thing which does not allow things conjoined by its own law to be divided. However, the loss of the nascent would be easier, if Majesty itself were not imperiled on their account.

Excusa igitur Deum, et accusa parvulum; iustum doceatur ille quod facit, qui sine iustitia Deus esse non potest; et quaevis suscipiat persona supplicium. Ceterum nunc extra sacrilegium res, quas putas esse consertas, mutuo sibi vehementer repugnant. Dicis enim, quoniam unis mysteriis, idololatrae ac parricidae, imbuuntur et parvuli, omnes scelestos posse convinci; et addis rem multo absurdiorem, a Sacramenti huius, de quo agimus, auctore aliena peccata innocentibus imputari.

Excuse God, then, and accuse the infant; let what he does be taught as just—he who cannot be God without justice; and let whatever person whatsoever undergo punishment. But now, apart from the sacrilege, the things which you think to be linked together strongly conflict with one another. For you say that, since by the same mysteries idolaters and parricides are imbued, and the little ones as well, all can be convicted as wicked; and you add a much more absurd thing: that by the Author of this Sacrament, about which we are dealing, others’ sins are imputed to the innocent.

Hoc est quod pugnare dixi, quia non capit rerum natura ut uno tempore et adeo sit misericors Deus, ut propria unicuique confitenti peccata condonet; et adeo crudelis, ut innocenti impingat aliena. Horum prorsus cum alterum dederis, alterum sustulisti; si donat veniam reis, non calumniatur innoxiis; si calumniatur innocuis, numquam parcit obnoxiis.

This is what I said was a clash, because the nature of things does not admit that at one and the same time God should be so merciful as to pardon to each confessing person his own proper sins, and so cruel as to thrust upon the innocent the alien sins of others. Of these, once you have granted the one, you have removed the other: if he grants pardon to the guilty, he does not calumniate the guiltless; if he calumniates the innocent, he never spares those liable.

AUG. Tu potius facis iniustum Deum, cum tibi videtur iniustum peccata patrum reddere in filios, quod se ille facere et verbis saepe testatur et rebus ostendit. Tu, inquam, facis iniustum Deum, sub cuius omnipotentis cura, cum videas gravi iugo miseriae parvulos premi, nullum eos peccatum habere contendis, simul accusans et Deum, et Ecclesiam; Deum quidem, si gravantur et affliguntur immeriti; Ecclesiam vero, si exsufflantur a iure diabolicae potestatis alieni.

AUG. You rather make God unjust, when it seems to you unjust to render the sins of the fathers upon the sons, which He both often testifies by words that He does and shows by deeds. You, I say, make God unjust, under whose omnipotent care, when you see little ones pressed by the heavy yoke of misery, you assert that they have no sin, at once accusing both God and the Church; God indeed, if the undeserving are burdened and afflicted; but the Church, if those alien from the right of diabolic power are exsufflated.

Ubi autem somniasti, idololatris et parricidis originalia parvulorum nos aequare peccata? Verum tamen mysteriis indita remissio peccatorum, in peccatis, et maioribus, et minoribus, et pluribus, et paucioribus, et singulis, vera est; in nullis vero peccatis, sicut esse parvulorum dicitis, falsa est. Sic autem aliena sunt originalia peccata propter nullum in eis nostrae voluntatis arbitrium, ut tamen propter originis contagium esse inveniantur et nostra.

Where, however, did you dream that we equate the original sins of little ones with those of idolaters and parricides? Yet the remission of sins imparted in the mysteries, in sins both greater and lesser, both more numerous and fewer, and in individual ones, is true; but in the case of no sins, as you say is the case of little ones, it is false. And thus original sins are alien, because there is in them no arbitration of our will; yet on account of the contagion of origin they are found to be ours as well.

Quid est ergo quod clamas, et dicis non posse Deum et dimittere peccata maioribus propria, et imputare parvulis aliena; nec vis attendere, quod nonnisi in Christo renatis utraque; non renatis autem in Christo, neutra dimittat? Ipsa sunt enim christianae gratiae sacramenta abscondita sapientibus et prudentibus, et revelata parvulis ¹⁰⁷. In quibus o si esses, nec quasi magnus in tua virtute confideres, profecto intellegeres, sic imputari generatis parvulis iniustitiam primi hominis ad subeundum supplicium, quemadmodum imputatur parvulis regeneratis iustitia secundi hominis ad obtinendum Regnum caelorum; quamvis voluntate atque opere proprio nec illum in malo, nec istum in bono reperiantur imitati.

What is it, then, that you cry out, and say that God cannot both remit to the older ones their own sins, and impute to little ones what is alien; nor are you willing to consider that He remits both only to those reborn in Christ, but to those not reborn in Christ He remits neither? For these are the sacraments of Christian grace, hidden from the wise and the prudent, and revealed to little ones ¹⁰⁷. In which—O if you were—and you would not, as if great, put confidence in your own virtue, you would assuredly understand that thus the injustice of the first man is imputed to little ones as born for the undergoing of punishment, just as the justice of the second man is imputed to little ones as reborn for the obtaining of the Kingdom of heaven; although by their own will and deed they are found to have imitated neither that one in evil nor this one in good.

Obscaenitas tua.

Your obscenity.

58. IUL. Nihil itaque in verbis tuis, coactus, ut dicis, timore praeterii. Quid enim in tam elegantis ingenii possem pavere monumentis, nisi forte hoc solum, quod horrorem de obscaenitatis tuae impugnatione perpetior?

58. IUL. Therefore I have passed over nothing in your words, compelled, as you say, by fear. For what could I be afraid of in the monuments of so elegant a genius, unless perhaps this alone: that I continually endure a shudder from the impugnation of your obscenity?

AUG. Si emeres ista convicia, prodigum te dicerem; gratis tibi adiacent; cur non eis fruaris, quibus maledicum animum pascis?

AUG. If you were buying those invectives, I would call you prodigal; they lie ready for you gratis; why do you not enjoy them, with which you feed your maledictory spirit?

Concilium malignantium qui credunt peccatum originale.

Council of the malignant who believe in original sin.

59. IUL. Audi igitur, contra ea quae dixisti, breviter: non sunt Ecclesiae catholicae pectora, quae sermo tuus convenit, si a pietate et ratione discordant. Quod utrumque committunt, cum nec de Dei aequitate bene aestimant, nec mysteriorum, quae criminantur, sapientiam et divitias intellegunt.

59. IUL. Listen, then, briefly, in reply to the things you have said: they are not the hearts of the Catholic Church that your discourse befits, if they are discordant from piety and reason. They commit both faults, since they neither judge well concerning the equity of God, nor understand the wisdom and riches of the mysteries which they criminated.

Non est haec fides antiquitus tradita atque fundata, nisi in conciliis malignantium, inspirata a diabolo, prolata a Manichaeo, celebrata a Marcione, Fausto, Adimanto, omnibusque eorum satellitibus, et nunc a te in Italiam, quod graviter gemimus, eructata.

This is not the faith anciently handed down and founded, except in the councils of the malevolent, inspired by the Devil, brought forth by Manichaeus, celebrated by Marcion, Faustus, Adimantus, and all their satellites, and now by you into Italy—which we grievously lament—belched out.

AUG. Quo ore, qua fronte concilium malignantium dicis, consensionem tot catholicorum, qui doctores Ecclesiarum fuerunt ante nos? Quasi vero, si in concilio episcoporum, quod non salubriter, sed iactanter, propter vestras quaestiones debere dicitis congregari, sederent episcopi, quos supra memoravi, ut alios omittam, Cyprianus, Hilarius, Ambrosius, Gregorius, Basilius, Ioannes Constantinopolitanus, aliquos eorum qui nunc manent facile inveniretis, quos eis in doctrina ecclesiastica antiquitus tradita aequare, nedum praeferre possetis.

AUG. With what mouth, with what brow do you call a council of the malignant the consensus of so many Catholics who were doctors of the Churches before us? As though, indeed, if in a council of bishops—which you say ought to be convened, not salubriously but vauntingly, on account of your questions—there were to sit the bishops whom I mentioned above, to omit others, Cyprian, Hilary, Ambrose, Gregory, Basil, John of Constantinople, you would easily find some of those who now remain, whom you could equal to them in ecclesiastical doctrine handed down from antiquity, not to say prefer.

Cum ergo ipsi contra vos de peccato originali proferant apertas clarasque sententias, et quas paulo ante posui, et alias plurimas; horumne in catholica veritate consensum audetis malignantium appellare concilium? Et cogitatis, quid istis contradicatis, ac non potius quo fugiatis, si eis consentire non vultis? Sed quoniam me dixisti eructasse in Italiam quod gematis, eumdem illum episcopum Italiae a tuo doctore laudatum in tuam frontem replico Ambrosium.

Since therefore they themselves proffer against you, concerning original sin, manifest and clear sentences—both those which I set down a little before, and many others besides—do you dare to entitle the consensus of these men in Catholic truth a council of the malignant? And you are considering what you might contradict to these, and not rather where you might flee, if you are unwilling to consent to them? But since you have said that I belched forth into Italy that which you lament, I throw back in your face Ambrose, that same bishop of Italy, praised by your doctor.

Omnes homines, inquit, sub peccato nascimur, quorum ipse ortus in vitio est; sicut habes lectum, dicente David: "ce in iniquitatibus conceptus sum, et in delictis peperit me mater mea " ¹⁰⁸. Ideo Pauli caro corpus mortis erat, sicut ipse ait: "is me liberabit de corpore mortis huius? " ¹⁰⁹. Christi autem caro damnavit peccatum, quod nascendo non sensit, quod moriendo crucifixit, ut in carne nostra esset iustificatio per gratiam, ubi erat ante colluvio per culpam ¹¹⁰. Hanc ergo fidem antiquitus traditam dico atque fundatam; tu renuis, et cui relucteris, non respicis. Numquid huic eam a diabolo dicere poteris inspiratam?

All men, he says, are born under sin, whose very origin is in vice; as you have read, David saying: "Behold, in iniquities I was conceived, and in delicts my mother bore me " ¹⁰⁸. Therefore Paul’s flesh was a body of death, as he himself says: "Who will deliver me from this body of death? " ¹⁰⁹. But the flesh of Christ condemned sin, which by being born he did not feel, which by dying he crucified, so that in our flesh there might be justification through grace, where before there was a colluvion through fault ¹¹⁰. Therefore I say this faith was delivered of old and founded; you refuse, and you do not regard whom you resist. Will you be able to say that this was inspired to him by the devil?

Numquid iste Manichaeus est? Numquid Marcion, Faustus, Adimantus? Non utique, sed longe his dissimilis, longeque contrarius.

Is this one a Manichaean? Is he Marcion, Faustus, Adimantus? By no means, but far dissimilar to these, and far contrary.

Pelagius certe dicat quis iste sit. Ille, ille est, cuius fidem, et puris mum in Scripturis sensum ne inimicus quidem ausus est reprehendere. Quid est, Iuliane?

Let Pelagius at any rate say who this man is. He, he it is, whose faith, and whose most pure sense in the Scriptures, not even an enemy dared to reprehend. What say you, Julian?

Ubi te vides? Ille, cuius ne inimicus quidem reprehendere ausus est fidem, hanc habebat fidem, quam tu ita reprehendis, ut eam tribuas conciliis malignantium. Ecce non est eorum, sed est Ambrosii; quia vera est, quia sana est, quia ut dixi, antiquitus tradita atque fundata est, haec et mea est.

Where do you see yourself? That man, whose faith not even an enemy dared to reprehend, had this faith, which you reprehend in such a way that you ascribe it to the councils of the malicious. Behold, it is not theirs, but it is Ambrose’s; because it is true, because it is sound, because, as I said, it has been handed down and founded from ancient times—this is mine as well.

Non ergo hanc in Italiam (quod vos gemere dicitis) eructavi; sed potius ab isto episcopo Italiae hanc praedicante et docente lavacrum regenerationis accepi. Quoniam fides ista catholica est, et tamen tua non est; tu ergo ubi es? Vide, obsecro, et redi. Videre tibi expedit, non invidere; redire cupimus, non perire.

Therefore I did not eructate this into Italy (as you say, groaning); but rather from that bishop of Italy, as he was preaching and teaching, I received the laver of regeneration. Since this faith is catholic, and yet it is not yours; where then are you? See, I beg, and return. It is expedient for you to see, not to envy; we desire you to return, not to perish.

Voluntas assensus, contagium.

The will’s assent, contagion.

60. IUL. Nihil est peccati in homine, si nihil est propriae voluntatis vel assensionis; hoc mihi hominum genus, quod vel leviter sapit, sine dubitatione consentit. Tu autem concedis nihil fuisse in parvulis propriae voluntatis; non ego, sed ratio concludit: nihil igitur in eis esse peccati.

60. IUL. There is nothing of sin in a human being, if there is nothing of one’s own will or assent; this genus of men, which even lightly savors (of wisdom), consents to this without doubt. But you concede that there was nothing of their own will in little ones; not I, but reason concludes: therefore there is nothing of sin in them.

Nequaquam ergo propter hoc ad Ecclesiam deferuntur, ut infamentur, immo ut infament Deum: sed deferuntur, ut laudent Deum, quem et bonorum naturalium et donorum spiritalium protestantur auctorem.

By no means, therefore, are they brought to the Church for this purpose, that they be defamed—much less that they defame God; rather, they are brought, that they may praise God, whom they also protest as the author both of natural goods and of spiritual gifts.

AUG. Non infamantur, cum exsufflantur, sed eruuntur de potestate tenebrarum; nec infamant Deum, sed quo creatore nati sunt, hoc indigent salvatore; et ideo renascendo, ex Adam transferuntur ad Christum. Ubi autem dixisti: Nihil est peccati in homine, si nihil est propriae voluntatis, vel assensionis, plenius verum diceres, si adderes: Vel contagionis.

AUG. They are not defamed when they are exsufflated, but are rescued from the power of darkness; nor do they defame God, but him by whose creating they were born, him they need as Savior; and therefore by being reborn, they are transferred from Adam to Christ. But where you said: There is nothing of sin in a man, if there is nothing of his own will or assent, you would speak the fuller truth if you were to add: Or of contagion.

Quod innascitur perseverat.

What is inborn perseveres.

61. IUL. Originale autem peccatum, si generatione primae nativitatis attrahitur, nuptias quidem a Deo institutas damnare potest, ceterum auferri a parvulis non potest; quoniam quod innascitur, usque ad finem eius, cui a principiorum causis inhaeserit, perseverat.

61. IUL. But original sin, if it is drawn along by the generation of the first nativity, can indeed condemn nuptials instituted by God; however, it cannot be taken away from infants; since what is inborn perseveres until the end of him to whom it has adhered from the causes of the beginnings.

AUG. Nec nuptias damnat, quia non ipsae sunt causa eius; et aufertur ab Omnipotente illo, qui et homo nasci potuit sine illo.

AUG. Nor does he condemn nuptials, because they themselves are not the cause of it; and it is taken away by that Omnipotent One, who also was able to be born a man without it.

Omnia sunt consequenter dicta.

All things have been said consistently.

62. IUL. Nullam itaque tibi calumniam commovemus, quasi damnes nuptias, et quasi hominem, qui ex illis nascitur, opus diaboli esse dicas; nec infideliter hoc obicimus, nec imperite colligimus; sed qui sit consequentium sententiarum effectus, sollicite et simpliciter intuemur. Numquam sunt enim sine commixtione nuptiae corporales.

62. JUL. We therefore stir up no calumny against you, as though you condemn marriages, and as though you say that the man who is born from them is a work of the devil; nor do we allege this in bad faith, nor do we gather it unskillfully; but we carefully and simply look at what is the effect of the consequent propositions. For bodily marriages are never without commixture.

Tu dicis, quicumque ex illa commixtione nascuntur, ad diabolum pertinere; dubio procul pronuntias nuptias ad ius daemonis pertinere.

You say that whoever are born from that commixture pertain to the devil; beyond doubt you pronounce that nuptials pertain to the jurisdiction of the demon.

AUG. Numquid nos dicimus, sine commixtione corporis nuptias in paradiso esse potuisse, si nemo peccasset? Sed non ibi esset malum, quo nunc bene utitur pudicitia coniugalis.

AUG. Do we say that nuptials in paradise could have been without a commixture of the body, if no one had sinned? But there would not be there the evil which conjugal pudicity now uses well.

Illud autem malum est a vulnere, quod diabolica inflixit astutia. Hinc rea tenetur propago mortalium; hinc est qui nascitur sub principe peccatorum, donec renascatur in Christo, qui nullum habuit omnino peccatum; a quo solo vinculum solvitur mortis, quia solus fuit liber in mortuis.

But that evil is from a wound, which diabolical astuteness inflicted. Hence the lineage of mortals is held guilty; hence he who is born is under the prince of sinners, until he is reborn in Christ, who had absolutely no sin; by whom alone the bond of death is loosed, because he alone was free among the dead.

Crudelis misericordia.

Cruel mercy.

63. IUL. Dicis trahi naturae conditione peccatum, qui vis hoc malum a voluntate primi hominis accidisse. Differo hic responsionem, qua convincendus es quod sine verecundia mentiaris.

63. JUL. You say that sin is drawn by the condition of nature, you who wish this evil to have happened from the will of the first man. I defer the reply here, by which you are to be convicted that you lie without shame.

Sed quod ad praesentem locum spectat, colligo, et sapientiae ratiocinanti credo, quod naturam videlicet diabolicam sine ambiguitate definias. Nam si in ea vel per eam est, propter quod homo a diabolo possidetur; irrefutabiliter diaboli est, per quod Dei imaginem sibi potuit vindicare. Immo nec imago Dei est, quae per exortum suum in regno diaboli est.

But as regards the present passage, I infer, and I trust reasoning wisdom, that you, to wit, define nature as diabolic without ambiguity. For if in it or through it there is that on account of which a man is possessed by the devil, then it is irrefutably the devil’s, by which he was able to vindicate to himself the image of God. Nay rather, it is not even the image of God which, by its origin, is in the kingdom of the devil.

AUG. Credis, sed opinanti stultitiae, non ratiocinanti sapientiae. Sine parvulos erui de potestate tenebrarum, ut Christi transferantur in regnum.

AUG. You believe, but in opining foolishness, not in reasoning wisdom. Allow the little ones to be rescued from the power of darkness, that they may be transferred into the kingdom of Christ.

Nam dicendo eos veteris delicti non habere contagium, et sic removendo a misericordia Salvatoris, qui salvum facit populum suum a peccatis eorum ¹¹¹, unde vocatus est Iesus; nihil agis, nisi ut ira Dei maneat super eos, de qua locutus est Iob, dicens: Homo natus ex muliere, brevis vitae, et plenus irae, et sicut flos feni decidit, fugit autem sicut umbra, et non stabit; nonne et huius curam fecisti, et hunc fecisti intrare in conspectu in iudicium? Quis enim erit mundus a sordibus? Ne unus quidem, etiamsi unius fuerit diei vita eius super terram ¹¹². Sed videlicet, homo misericors, miseraris imaginem Dei, ne dicas eam sub peccato carnaliter nasci.

For by saying that they have not the contagion of the ancient delict, and so removing them from the mercy of the Savior, who saves his people from their sins ¹¹¹, whence he was called Jesus, you accomplish nothing except that the wrath of God remain upon them, about which Job spoke, saying: Man born of woman, short of life, and full of wrath, and as the flower of the grass he falls, and he flees like a shadow, and will not stand; have you not also taken care for this one, and made him enter into judgment in your sight? For who will be clean from sordidness? Not even one, even if his life on earth were of one day ¹¹². But plainly, O merciful man, you take pity on the image of God, lest you say that it is born carnally under sin.

O quam crudelis est ista vana misericordia tua, quae parvulis negat misericordiam Salvatoris sui; qui venit quaerere quod perierat ¹¹³! Per illas igitur sordes, sine quibus homo Dei dicit esse neminem, etsi unius diei sit vita eius super terram, sibi vindicat diabolus imaginem Dei, non per substantiam, quam creavit Deus. Vitiata est enim natura, non vitium est. Sed tu: Nec imago Dei est, inquis, quae per exortum suum in regno diaboli est. Quid, si tibi alius dicat: Non est imago Dei, quae nullo rea peccato, non tamen intrat in regnum Dei?

O how cruel is that vain mercy of yours, which denies to little ones the mercy of their Savior; who came to seek what had perished ¹¹³! Through those defilements, therefore, without which the man of God says there is no one, even if his life be of one day upon the earth, the devil claims for himself the image of God—not by the substance, which God created. For nature has been vitiated; it is not the vice itself. But you: Nor is it the image of God, you say, which by its birth is in the kingdom of the devil. What if another should say to you: It is not the image of God, which, guilty of no sin, nevertheless does not enter into the kingdom of God?

Nonne, quid respondeas non habebis, si vana respondere nolueris? Et certe propterea est homo imago Dei, quia factus est ad similitudinem Dei ¹¹⁴. Cur ergo et vanitati similis factus est, propter quod dies eius velut umbra praetereunt ¹¹⁵? Non enim ab hac vanitate separaturus es parvulos, cum dies eorum velut umbra praetereant. Postremo numquid eos et a viventibus separabis?

Will you not have anything to answer, if you are unwilling to answer with a vain reply? And certainly for that reason man is the image of God, because he was made according to the similitude of God ¹¹⁴. Why then has he also been made like unto vanity, on account of which his days pass by like a shadow ¹¹⁵? For you are not going to separate the little ones from this vanity, since their days pass like a shadow. Finally, will you even separate them from the living?

Audi ergo eum qui dicit in Psalmo: Ecce veteres posuisti dies meos, et substantia mea tamquam nihil ante te; verumtamen universa vanitas, omnis homo vivens ¹¹⁶. Cum ergo sit imago Dei omnis homo vivens, dic unde sit etiam vanitas omnis homo vivens . Sed quid dicturus es, qui non vis agnoscere, aliud horum esse ex conditione Dei, aliud accidisse ex conditione peccati? Permittite, quaesumus, ut homo vivens, qui ad Dei similitudinem factus est, eruatur a potestate tenebrarum, sub qua vanitati similis factus est; eruatur autem nunc interim a reatus obligatione; post hanc vero corruptibilem vitam, ab omni etiam vanitate.

Therefore hear him who says in the Psalm: Behold, you have set my days as old, and my substance as as nothing before you; nevertheless, altogether vanity, every man living ¹¹⁶. Since therefore every man living is the image of God, say whence it is also that vanity, every man living. But what will you say, you who are unwilling to acknowledge that one of these is from the condition of God, the other has happened from the condition of sin? Permit, we beseech, that the living man, who was made according to the likeness of God, be rescued from the power of darkness, under which he has been made like to vanity; let him be rescued now, in the meantime, from the obligation of guilt; but after this corruptible life, from all vanity as well.

Novus Calliphons.

New Calliphons.

64. IUL. Si igitur legas opus meum, desines mirari, cur ad verba tua, quae supra posueram, reverterim. Promiseram quippe me de scriptis tuis probaturum, quoniam tu inter impietatem quam biberas, et eius invidiam quam time s, pariter utrumque dixisses, et quod a Catholicis, et quod a Manichaeis asseri solet.

64. IUL. If therefore you read my work, you will cease to marvel why I have returned to your words, which I had set above. For I had indeed promised that I would prove from your writings that you, between the impiety which you had imbibed and the ill-will of it which you fear, had said both alike—both what is wont to be asserted by Catholics and what by Manichaeans.

Est itaque ibi talis ordo verborum admotus tuo capiti, quod nunc fronte sycophantae interpolatum fuisse mentitus es. Scio me magna pollicitum, id est, ut de adversarii sermonibus approbarem et eos, qui homines opus Dei negant, iure damnari, et istum ipsum, qui hoc confitetur, nihil aliud agere, quam ut peculium diaboli confirmet esse quidquid de nuptiarum fecunditate procedit. Hoc enim genere, patrocinii sui quoque legibus, Manichaeorum opinio destruetur. Verum id tota libri eius exordia publicarunt.

Accordingly, there is there such an order of words affixed to your heading, which now, with the sycophant’s brow, you have lied was interpolated. I know I have promised great things, that is, that from the discourses of the adversary I would prove both that those who deny that humans are the work of God are condemned by right, and that this very man, who confesses this, does nothing else than to confirm that whatever proceeds from the fecundity of marriages is the devil’s peculium. For by this method, and even by the laws of his own advocacy, the opinion of the Manichaeans will be overthrown. But the entire exordia of his book have made that public.

Ait enim opus esse divinum homines, qui ex nuptiis, id est, ex maribus nascuntur et feminis; qua sententia omne quod erat acturus evertit, nobisque assentitur dicentibus esse impios, qui haec audeant denegare. Absoluta igitur iam una pars est: superest ut ostendam id eum, quod nuper impugnarat, astruere. Quibus dictis partem tui capitis retractavi, in qua dixeras: Eos, qui de tali commixtione nascuntur, dicimus trahere originale peccatum, eosque de parentibus qualibuscumque nascantur, non negamus adhuc esse sub diabolo, nisi renascantur in Christo, et per eius gratiam de potestate eruti tenebrarum, in regnum illius qui ex eadem sexus utriusque commixtione nasci noluit, transferantur ¹¹⁷. Cur ergo putes hinc te excusari posse ab errore Manichaeorum, quia ausus es sententiam, cum qua omnibus ingenii tui viribus luctabaris, inserere; cum hoc non patrocinium erroris tui, sed testimonium sit stultitiae singularis, qui putas Calliphontis more virtutem et vitia, iustitiam et iniquitatem oratione tua posse in foedera convenire?

For he says that human beings who are born from nuptials, that is, from males and females, are a divine work; by which sentiment he overturns everything he was about to do, and he assents to us when we say that they are impious who dare to deny these things. One part, then, is now completed: it remains that I show that he establishes that which he lately impugned. Having said these things, I have re-examined a part of your chapter, in which you had said: Those who are born from such commixtion, we say, draw original sin, and those who are born from parents of whatever sort, we do not deny that they are still under the devil, unless they be reborn in Christ, and by his grace, rescued from the power of darkness, be transferred into the kingdom of him who was unwilling to be born from that same commixtion of both sexes ¹¹⁷. Why, therefore, do you think you can from this be excused from the error of the Manichaeans, because you dared to insert a sentence with which you were wrestling with all the powers of your wit; since this is not a defense of your error, but a testimony of singular stupidity, you who think, after the fashion of Calliphon, that virtues and vices, justice and iniquity, can by your speech come into league?

Quod autem ait Apostolus: Qui eruit nos de potestate tenebrarum, et transtulit in regnum Filii dilectionis suae ¹¹⁸; lege quartum operis mei librum, et tunc tibi quid Magister Gentium senserit, innotescet.

But as for what the Apostle says: Who rescued us from the power of darkness, and transferred us into the kingdom of the Son of his love ¹¹⁸; read the fourth book of my work, and then it will become known to you what the Teacher of the Nations thought.

AUG. Sexto nostro responsum est quarto tuo, et nunc ego magis admoneo ut illa tua et mea legant, qui volunt scire quantum ibi fueris a veritate devius, et quanta sis veritate convictus. De hac autem chartula, in qua ex tuis libris quaedam decerpta conscripta sunt, liberum tibi est mihi imputare quod ille fecit, qui eam misit homini, a quo missa est mihi.

AUG. Our sixth answered your fourth, and now I more strongly admonish that those writings of yours and mine be read by those who wish to know how far you there have deviated from the truth, and how greatly you have been convicted by the truth. But concerning this little paper, in which certain things excerpted from your books have been written down, you are free to impute to me what that man did, who sent it to the man by whom it was sent to me.

Ille quippe quod voluit, in ea posuit ex opere tuo, et quod voluit praetermisit; unde tibi iam supra breviter satisque respondi. Quid te obscuris tuis adversus Apostoli manifesta conaris involvere? Ille Deum praedicans ait: Qui eruit nos de potestate tenebrarum, et transtulit in regnum Filii caritatis suae ¹¹⁹; et tu dicis hoc ab illo, exceptis parvulis, dictum.

For indeed he put into it from your work what he wished, and what he wished he passed over; whence I have already above answered you briefly and sufficiently. Why do you attempt to entangle with your obscurities against the Apostle’s manifest statements? He, proclaiming God, says: Who rescued us from the power of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his charity ¹¹⁹; and you say that this was said by him, infants excepted.

Si ergo non eruuntur parvuli de potestate tenebrarum, non sunt mortui; si non sunt mortui, non pro eis mortuus est Christus; tu autem etiam pro ipsis Christum mortuum confiteris; et idem Apostolus dicit: Unus pro omnibus mortuus est; ergo omnes mortui sunt ¹²⁰. Conclusio haec Apostoli invicta est; ac per hoc quia et pro parvulis mortuus est, profecto etiam parvuli mortui sunt. Mortuus est porro Christus, ut evacuaret eum qui potestatem habebat mortis, id est, diabolum ¹²¹. Sine igitur parvulos, ut vivant, de potestate erui tenebrarum. Quid est autem, quod mihi Calliphontis morem obicis, vel errorem, in eo quod me putare dicis virtutem et vitia, iustitiam et iniquitatem oratione mea posse in foedera convenire?

If therefore the little ones are not rescued from the power of darkness, they are not dead; if they are not dead, Christ did not die for them; but you confess that Christ also died for them; and the same Apostle says: One died for all; therefore all have died ¹²⁰. This conclusion of the Apostle is unconquered; and through this, since He also died for the little ones, assuredly the little ones also are dead. Furthermore Christ died, that he might make void him who had the power of death, that is, the devil ¹²¹. Therefore allow the little ones, that they may live, to be rescued from the power of darkness. What is it, moreover, that you object to me Calliphon’s practice, or error, in that you say that I think virtue and vices, justice and iniquity, by my oration can come together into covenants?

Ego quidem absit ut hoc vel corde teneam, vel sermone suadeam; sed tam bene te intellexisse istum philosophum gratulor ¹²². Etenim cum ille putaverit in virtute animi et in voluptate corporis esse hominis bonum; tu eum dicis virtutes et vitia voluisse coniungere; ac per hoc, sicut decuit, vitium iudicasti esse corporalis appetentiam voluptatis; vitium est igitur libido, quam laudas. Subrepsit itaque undecumque tuis sensibus veritas, ut susceptae tuae causam paululum deserens, quod dicimus diceres.

For my part, far be it that I should either hold this in my heart or recommend it in speech; but I congratulate you that you have understood that philosopher so well ¹²². For whereas he thought that the good of man lies in the virtue of the mind and in the pleasure of the body, you say that he wished to conjoin virtues and vices; and through this, as was fitting, you judged the corporeal appetite for pleasure to be a vice; libido is therefore a vice, which you praise. Accordingly, truth has crept in from somewhere into your senses, so that, deserting a little the cause you have undertaken, you said what we say.

Non sunt nuptiae solum sexus utriusque commixtio.

Nuptials are not only the commixture of both sexes.

65. IUL. Argui ergo, et iure argui, deiectam et debilem varietatem, qua fuerat effectum ut et nuptias te non damnare praemitteres, et diceres, ob viri et feminae commixtionem, quam de nuptiarum conditione et natura venire perspicuum est, immo in qua sola (quantum ad conflictum nostrum respicit) nuptiarum veritas est, homines in diaboli iura transcribi.

65. IUL. I therefore accused, and I accused justly, an abject and feeble inconsistency, by which it had been brought about that you both would preface that you do not condemn marriages, and would say that, on account of the commixture of man and woman—which it is clear comes from the condition and nature of marriage, indeed in which alone (so far as our conflict is concerned) the truth of marriage is—human beings are transferred into the jurisdiction of the devil.

AUG. Si in sola viri et feminae commixtione est veritas nuptiarum; eadem ergo est veritas adulteriorum quae nuptiarum, quia in utrisque est ista sexus utriusque commixtio. Quod si absurdissimum est; non in sola, ut deliras, commixtione maris et feminae nuptiarum veritas est, quamvis sine illa nuptiae filios propagare non possint; sed alia sunt ad nuptias proprie pertinentia, quibus ab adulteriis nuptiae discernuntur, sicut est thori coniugalis fides, et cura ordinate filios procreandi et, quae maxima differentia est, bonus usus mali, hoc est, bonus usus concupiscentiae carnis, quo malo adulteri utuntur male.

AUG. If the truth of marriages is in the commixture of man and woman alone, then the same truth belongs to adulteries as to marriages, because in both there is that commixture of both sexes. But if that is most absurd, the truth of marriages is not, as you rave, in the sole commixture of male and female—although without it marriages cannot propagate children—but there are other things properly pertaining to marriages, by which marriages are distinguished from adulteries, such as the faith of the conjugal bed, and the care of procreating children in an orderly way, and, which is the greatest difference, the good use of an evil, that is, the good use of the concupiscence of the flesh, which evil adulterers use ill.

Traducianae nationis primas.

The primate of the Traducian nation.

66. IUL. Quam commixtionem ita exsecrabilem persuadere conatus es, ut velis intellegi Christum, non propter signi splendorem, sed propter damnandam sexuum coniunctionem nasci de virgine matre voluisse. Quid ergo umquam a quoquam dici improbius aut impudentius potuit, quam hoc, quod duos velut reges de humanitatis possessione certantes his signis, et duo eorum regna separasti, ut diceres, dia li esse quidquid nuptiae protulissent, Dei vero solum quod Virgo peperisset?

66. IUL. Such a commixtion you have tried to persuade as execrable, that you wish it to be understood that Christ willed to be born of a virgin mother, not on account of the splendor of the sign, but for the condemning of the conjunction of the sexes. What, then, could ever have been said by anyone more wickedly or more impudently than this: that by these signs you have set forth two, as it were, kings contending for the possession of humanity, and you have separated their two kingdoms, so as to say that whatever marriages had brought forth was the Devil’s, but God’s only what the Virgin had borne?

Quid est aliud, Virginis fecundatorem et egentissimum ostendere inopia portionis suae, et eumdem negare eorum qui prodeunt de nuptiis hominum conditorem? Teneat igitur verbi tui lector diligens chirographum, sciatque te, discipulum fidelem Manichaeorum et Traducianae nationis primatem, nihil aliud quam commixtionem legitimi damnasse coniugii.

What else is it than to show the Fecundator of the Virgin as most needy through the poverty of his own portion, and to deny that this same one is the Creator of those who proceed from the nuptials of men? Let the diligent reader, therefore, hold the chirograph of your word, and let him know you, a faithful disciple of the Manichaeans and the primate of the Traducian nation, to have condemned nothing other than the commixion of legitimate marriage.

AUG. Non habes exercitatos sensus ad separandum bonum a malo. Et hominum et Angelorum natura atque substantia vel bonorum vel malorum Deo creatore subsistit; sed vitia naturarum atque substantiarum, quae Manichaei naturas dicunt esse atque substantias, veritas autem negat, Deus iustus atque omnipotens ordinatione iudiciaria esse permittit; et ipsa sunt mala, quae nisi ex bonis et in bonis naturis inesse non possunt.

AUG. You do not have senses exercised to separate the good from the evil. Both the nature and the substance of humans and of Angels, whether of the good or of the evil, subsist by God the Creator; but the vices of natures and substances—which the Manichaeans say are natures and substances, but Truth denies—God, just and omnipotent, by judicial ordination permits to exist; and these themselves are evils, which cannot inhere except from good things and in good natures.

Sic sunt autem in diaboli potestate quaecumque illi, Deo iudicante, subduntur, ut a Dei potestate, sub qua et ipse diabolus constitutus est, aliena esse non possint. Cum igitur omnes Angeli et omnes homines sub Dei sint potestate, inanis est loquacitas tua, qua dicis Deum et diabolum divisisse inter se, quis eorum quos habeat sub propria potestate. In quem vero crudo pectore evomas istas, quibus pasceris, contumelias, paulisper attende.

Thus, whatever things are subjected to him, with God judging, are in the power of the Devil, in such a way that they cannot be alien from the power of God, under which even the Devil himself has been constituted. Since, therefore, all Angels and all men are under the power of God, your loquacity is vain, by which you say that God and the devil have divided between themselves which of them has whom under his own power. But for a little while attend to the person upon whom, with a crude breast, you vomit these contumelies with which you feed yourself.

En adest ille Ambrosius; de hoc in quod inveheris, quid dicat vide: Quomodo solus, inquit, potuit iustus esse, cum generatio omnis erraret, nisi natus ex Virgine generationis obnoxiae privilegio minime teneretur? ¹²³ Audi adhuc, audi, et protervam linguam frontis elisione compesce: Non enim virilis coitus, inquit, vulvae virginalis secreta reseravit; sed immaculatum semen inviolabili utero Spiritus Sanctus infudit; solus enim per omnia ex natis de femina sanctus Dominus Iesus, qui terrenae contagia corruptelae, immaculati partus novitate non senserit, et caelesti maiestate depulerit ¹²⁴. Cernis nempe, quod dico, quis dixerit? Cernis, quidquid contra me dicis, contra quem dicas? Si enim ego hinc sum discipulus Manichaei, hoc est et ille.

Lo, that Ambrose is present; concerning this, against which you inveigh, see what he says: How alone, he says, could he be just, when every generation was erring, unless, born of a Virgin, he were in no way held by the privilege of the generation that is liable? ¹²³ Listen still, listen, and restrain your insolent tongue by a clipping of the brow: For it was not a virile coitus, he says, that unlocked the secret places of the virginal womb; but the Holy Spirit poured an immaculate seed into the inviolate uterus; for alone through all things among those born of a woman, the holy Lord Jesus did not sense the contagions of earthly corruption by the newness of an immaculate birth, and by heavenly majesty he drove them away ¹²⁴. You see, indeed, what I say, who it is that has said it? You see that whatever you say against me, against whom you say it? For if from this I am a disciple of Manichaeus, so is he as well.

Non est autem hoc ille, qui haec ante nos dixit. Non est hoc igitur, quisquis haec dicit; sed haereticus manifestus est, quisquis huic antiquo catholico dogmati contradicit.

But the man who said these things before us is not this. Therefore, whoever says these things is not this; but whoever contradicts this ancient catholic dogma is a manifest heretic.

Ab Apostolo vita hominum, non natura damnatur.

By the Apostle, the life of men is condemned, not nature.

67. IUL. Sed iam pergamus ad cetera. De me itaque scribens, post illa quae supra texui verba tua, haec quae sequuntur adiungis: Post haec illud nostrum posuit, ubi diximus: Haec enim quae ab impudentibus impudenter laudatur, pudenda concupiscentia, nulla esset, nisi homo ante peccasset; nuptiae vero essent, etiamsi nemo peccasset; fieret quippe sine isto morbo seminatio filiorum.

67. IUL. But now let us proceed to the rest. Therefore, writing about me, after those words of yours which I have woven above, you add the following: After these things he set down that statement of ours, where we said: For this shameful concupiscence, which is impudently lauded by the impudent, would not exist, unless man had previously sinned; but nuptials indeed would exist, even if no one had sinned; for the semination of sons would be brought about without this disease.

Huc usque ille verba mea posuit. Timuit enim quod adiunxi: Potest in corpore vitae illius, sine quo nunc fieri non potest in corpore mortis huius. Et hic ut meam sententiam non finiret, sed eam quodam modo detruncaret, illud Apostoli testimonium formidavit, ubi ait: "ser ego homo, quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius?

Up to this point he placed my words. He feared, in fact, what I added: It can be in the body of that life, without which now it cannot be done in the body of this death. And here, so that he would not finish my opinion, but would in a certain way truncate it, that testimony of the Apostle he dreaded, where he says: "Wretched man that I am, who will deliver me from the body of this death?"

Gratia Dei per Iesum Christum Dominum nostrum " ¹²⁵. Non enim erat corpus mortis huius in paradiso ante peccatum, propter quod diximus: In corpore vitae illius, quae ibi erat, sine isto morbo seminationem fieri potuisse filiorum, sine quo in corpore mortis huius fieri non potest ¹²⁶. Tenes tu quidem consuetudinem tuam, equidem in hoc potissimum opere consequenter, ut qui contra veritatem agis, nihil verum loquaris; sed numerosis eruditionis tuae peccatis correptionum multitudo vix sufficit. Ideo hic iam breviter annotabo, te fallere; me autem, vel post hoc opus intelleges, insolentem esse mendacii. Tibi ergo huius vitii vindica totam possessionem, ut ab Evangelio, nec sane iniuria audire possis, quia ab initio mendax es, sicut et pater tuus ¹²⁷, vel ille ad cuius te dicis dominium pertinuisse nascentem, vel alter secundarius, qui te elegantibus, quae tamen inter honestos nominari non queant, imbuit sacramentis.

"The grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord" ¹²⁵. For the body of this death was not in paradise before sin, on account of which we said: In the body of that life, which was there, the semination of children could have been effected without this disease—without which it cannot be done in the body of this death ¹²⁶. You indeed keep your custom—especially in this work consistently—that you, who act against the truth, speak nothing true; but the multitude of corrections scarcely suffices for the numerous sins of your erudition. Therefore here I will now briefly annotate that you deceive; but as for me, even after this work you will understand that I am unaccustomed to lying. Therefore claim for yourself the full possession of this vice, so that from the Gospel, and not indeed unjustly, you may be able to hear that from the beginning you are a liar, just as also your father ¹²⁷, either that one to whose dominion you say you belonged when being born, or the other, the secondary one, who imbued you with elegant sacraments—which nevertheless cannot be named among honorable people.

Totum ergo hoc protuli in opere meo priore, quod tu praetermissum esse confingis; quod quanta sit disputationis veritate ac luce convictum, si prope ultimas primi voluminis mei partes legas, etiam ipse poteris confiteri. Non ergo tua detruncata sententia, sed integra valenti est responsione destructa. Nunc autem audi breviter Apostolus hoc quod ait: Miser ergo homo, quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius?

Therefore I brought forth all this in my prior work, which you feign to have been passed over; how greatly it has been convicted by the truth and light of the disputation, if you read near the ultimate parts of my first volume, you yourself also will be able to confess. It is not, therefore, your truncated sentence, but intact, that has been destroyed by a powerful response. Now, however, hear briefly the Apostle in this that he says: Wretched man, therefore, who will deliver me from the body of this death?

Gratia Dei per Iesum Christum Dominum nostrum; non ad mortalitatem nostri corporis rettulit, quam caro animalium de naturae institutione suscepit, sed ad consuetudinem delinquendi; a quo reatu post incarnationem Christi, per Testamentum Novum, quisquis ad virtutis studia migraverit, liberatur. Ibi ergo sub persona Iudaeorum loquens, illecebrarum cupiditate etiam post interdictum sacrae legis errantium, ostendit unicum esse in illa tempestate subsidium, si crederent Christo; qui sic indicebat cautiones de futuris, ut veniam condonaret peractis; nec insistebat reis in tentatione supplicii, sed currentes liberalissimo gremio confovebat; non exanimans terrore depressos, sed reparans benignitate correctos. Quam benignitatem ipse iam senserat, qui dicebat: Humanus sermo, quoniam Christus Iesus venit in hunc mundum peccatores salvos facere, quorum primus sum ego; sed ideo misericordiam consecutus sum, ut in me ostenderet Christus Iesus omnem patientiam, ad exemplum eorum, qui credituri sunt illi in vitam aeternam ¹²⁸. Quod ut intellegeres ad vitam malam, non ad naturam hominum pertinere; ne per adventus Christi causam, putares ab eo etiam parvulos peccatores pronuntiatos, ait: In me ostendit omnem patientiam. Patientia autem Dei illa est, de qua ad Romanos loquitur: An ignoras quoniam bonitas Dei ad paenitentiam te adducit?

The grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord; he did not refer it to the mortality of our body, which the flesh of animals received from the institution of nature, but to the custom of delinquency; from which guilt, after the Incarnation of Christ, through the New Testament, whoever has migrated to the pursuits of virtue is set free. There, therefore, speaking under the persona of the Jews—erring by the cupidity of allurements even after the interdiction of the sacred law—he shows that in that season there is a single succor, if they would believe Christ; who thus was publishing cautions about things to come, so as to grant pardon for things done; and he did not press the accused in the temptation of punishment, but cherished those running to him in a most liberal bosom; not exanimating those pressed down by terror, but repairing by benignity those corrected. Which benignity he himself had already felt, who used to say: A human saying, since Christ Jesus came into this world to make sinners safe, of whom I am the first; but for this reason I obtained mercy, that in me Christ Jesus might show all patience, for an example of those who are going to believe in him unto eternal life ¹²⁸. Which, that you might understand pertains to an evil life, not to the nature of human beings; lest, on account of the advent of Christ, you should think that even little children were by him pronounced sinners, he says: In me he showed all patience. But the patience of God is that of which he speaks to the Romans: Do you not know that the goodness of God leads you to repentance?

Se ndum autem duritiam tuam et cor impaenitens thesaurizas tibi iram in die irae ¹²⁹. Exercetur ergo patientia Dei, cum non exiguo tempore exspectatur humana conversio. In parvulis autem non potest apparere patientia. Si enim essent peccata naturae, quae eis Salvator adscriberet; patiens quidem falso, saevus vero certissime diceretur.

Acc ording, however, to your hardness and impenitent heart, you treasure up for yourself wrath on the day of wrath ¹²⁹. Therefore the patience of God is exercised, when human conversion is awaited for no small time. But in infants patience cannot appear. For if there were sins of nature, which the Savior would ascribe to them, he would indeed be called patient falsely, but most certainly he would be called savage.

Non potest autem Deus nisi pius et iustus esse, quod est Deus meus Iesus Christus; cuius patientiam, vel Paulus diu persecutor, vel alii sub quorum persona loquitur, experti sunt; quia diu exspectati sunt, licet sero liberati. Ac per hoc ab Apostolo vita hominum, non natura damnatur. Commendans ergo hanc gratiam Iudaeis, quia lex punit scelestos, nec habet illam efficientiam misericordiae, quam Baptisma, in quo confessione brevi actuum delicta purgantur, ostendit debere illos currere ad Christum, implorare opem huius indulgentiae; et advertere quod lex morum vulneribus comminetur, gratia vero efficaciter celeriterque medeatur.

But God cannot be anything except pious and just, which is my God Jesus Christ; whose patience both Paul, long a persecutor, and others in whose person he speaks, experienced; because they were long awaited, though liberated late. And thus by the Apostle the life (conduct) of men, not nature, is condemned. Therefore commending this grace to the Jews, since the Law punishes the wicked, nor has that efficacy of mercy which Baptism has, in which by a brief confession the delicts of deeds are purged, he shows that they ought to run to Christ, to implore the help of this indulgence; and to notice that the Law threatens on account of the wounds of morals, but grace effectively and swiftly administers healing.

Corpus itaque mortis, peccata dixit esse, non carnem; nam si de membrorum miseria pronuntiasset, quam peccato aestimas contigisse, rectius mortem corporis, quam corpus mortis vocasset. Verum ut scias, secundum consuetudinem Scripturarum peccata membra dici; lege ad Colossenses, ubi ipse Apostolus ait: Mortificate membra vestra, quae sunt super terram; fornicationem, immunditiam et avaritiam, quae est simulacrorum servitus; propter quae venit ira Dei in filios incredulitatis, in quibus et vos aliquando ambulastis, cum viveretis in illis ¹³⁰. Ecce quomodo membra appellat, quae peccata pronuntiat. Corpus autem peccati hic ipsum ad Romanos: Vetus homo noster, inquit, simul confixus est cruci, ut destruatur corpus peccati, ut ultra non serviamus peccato ¹³¹. Hoc itaque more et hic exclamavit sub persona, ut diximus, Iudaeorum: Miser ego homo, quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius? ¹³² id est: Quis me liberabit a reatu peccatorum meorum, quae commisi, cum vitare potuissem?

Therefore he said the body of death to be sins, not the flesh; for if he had pronounced concerning the misery of the members, which you reckon to have happened through sin, he would more rightly have called it the death of the body, rather than the body of death. But that you may know that, according to the custom of the Scriptures, sins are called members; read to the Colossians, where the Apostle himself says: Put to death your members which are upon the earth: fornication, uncleanness, and avarice, which is the service of idols; for which things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of unbelief, among whom you also once walked, when you were living in them ¹³⁰. Behold how he calls “members” the very things which he pronounces to be sins. But the body of sin—here the same to the Romans: Our old man, he says, has been co-crucified, so that the body of sin may be destroyed, that we may no longer serve sin ¹³¹. In this fashion, therefore, here too he cried out under the person, as we said, of the Jews: Wretched man that I am, who will deliver me from the body of this death? ¹³² that is: Who will free me from the guilt of my sins, which I committed, when I could have avoided them?

Quae legis severitas non donat, sed ulciscitur? Quis me ab his membris, id est a vitiis, quae improborum imitatione collegi, ut peccati plenum corpus exstruerem, poterit vindicare? Quis, inquam?

What are those things which the severity of the law does not forgive but avenges? Who will vindicate me from these members, that is, from the vices, which by imitation of the wicked I have gathered, in order to erect a body full of sin? Who, I say?

Et respondit, quasi rerum ipsarum voce commonitus: Gratia Dei per Iesum Christum Dominum nostrum ¹³³. Gratia Dei, quae acceptam fert iustitiam fidelium sine operibus, secundum quod David dicit: Beati quorum remissae sunt iniquitates, et quorum tecta sunt peccata; beatus vir cui non imputavit Dominus peccatum ¹³⁴. Qui ergo facit hominem beatum, etiam ipse beatus est, iustitia sempiterna, per quam non donat peccatum, nisi quod iure potuit imputare. Non autem iure potuit imputare, si non illud cui imputatur, potuit et cavere. Nemo autem potest cavere naturalia.

And he replied, as if admonished by the very voice of the things themselves: The grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord ¹³³. The grace of God, which bears the righteousness received by the faithful without works, according to what David says: Blessed are they whose iniquities have been remitted, and whose sins have been covered; blessed the man to whom the Lord did not impute sin ¹³⁴. He therefore who makes a man blessed is himself also blessed, the everlasting justice, through which he does not grant remission of sin, except that which he was able by right to impute. But he could not by right impute, if the one to whom it is imputed could not also beware—i.e., avoid—it. No one, however, can avoid what is natural.

Igitur nullus prorsus habere potest de naturae necessitate peccatum. Haec breviter dixisse sufficiat.

Therefore no one at all can have sin from the necessity of nature. Let it suffice to have said these things briefly.

AUG. Conatus es quidem quod ait Apostolus: Quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius? in sensum vestrum disputando convertere; sed hoc te non posse, ille melius vidit, qui viro illustri chartulam misit; et ideo verba mea commemorans id praetermisit, ne tua rideretur exspectata et prolata responsio. Quis enim non rideat quod nescio utrum vobis persuadere potueritis, et tamen aliis persuadendum putastis, Iudaei Apostolum induxisse personam, nondum sub Christi gratia constituti, atque dicentis: Miser ego homo, quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius?

AUG. You indeed tried to convert what the Apostle says: Who will deliver me from the body of this death? into your sense by disputation; but that you could not do, he saw better who sent a little note to the illustrious man; and therefore, recalling my words, he passed that by, lest your awaited and brought-forth response be laughed at. For who would not laugh at this—that I do not know whether you were able to persuade yourselves, and yet you thought it should be persuaded to others—that the Apostle introduced the person of a Jew, not yet constituted under the grace of Christ, and saying: Wretched man that I am, who will deliver me from the body of this death?

Gratia Dei per Iesum Christum Dominum nostrum ¹³⁵. Itane vero Iudaeus, nondumque Christianus est, qui dicit: Dei gratia me liberabit per Iesum Christum Dominum nostrum? Verum hoc omitto; illud autem quis ferat, de praeteritis suis peccatis putare hominem dicere: Quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius? ut ei per ignoscentis Christi gratiam remittantur; cum dilucide appareat, unde ad ista verba pervenerit? Ecce verba eius sunt in auribus nostris; videamus ergo, utrum ex eo quod egit volens, an ex eo quod agit nolens, miserum se esse fateatur.

The grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord ¹³⁵. Is he then a Jew, and not yet a Christian, who says: The grace of God will free me through Jesus Christ our Lord? But I pass this over; yet who could endure this, to think that the man is speaking about his past sins: Who will deliver me from the body of this death? so that they might be remitted to him through the grace of the forgiving Christ; since it plainly appears whence he has come to these words? Behold, his words are in our ears; let us therefore see whether he admits that he is wretched on account of that which he did willingly, or on account of that which he does unwillingly.

Clamat homo: Non quod volo, ago; sed quod odi, illud facio ¹³⁶. Clamat: Iam non ego operor illud, sed id quod habitat in me peccatum. Scio enim quia non habitat in me, hoc est in carne mea, bonum; velle enim adiacet mihi; perficere autem bonum, non invenio. Non enim quod volo, facio bonum; se quod nolo malum, hoc ago ¹³⁷. Non ait: Feci, sed: facio ; non ait: Operatus sum, sed: operor; non ait: Egi, sed: ago; et hoc: Non quod volo, sed: quod nolo. Postremo, condelectatur legi Dei secundum interiorem hominem; videt autem aliam legem in membris suis, repugnantem legi mentis suae; qua lege utique compellitur, non quod vult, facere bonum, sed quod non vult malum, hoc agere.

The man cries out: Not what I will, I do; but what I hate, that I do ¹³⁶. He cries out: Now no longer do I work that, but the sin which dwells in me. For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, good does not dwell; for to will is at hand for me; but to perfect the good, I do not find. For not the good that I will do do I; but what I do not will, evil, this I do ¹³⁷. He does not say: I did, but: I do ; he does not say: I have worked, but: I work; he does not say: I acted, but: I act; and this: Not what I will, but: what I do not will. Finally, he takes delight together with the law of God according to the inner man; but he sees another law in his members, repugnant to the law of his mind; by which law he is of course compelled, not to do the good which he wills, but to do this—the evil which he does not will.

Propter hoc exclamat: Miser ego homo, quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius? ¹³⁸ Et tu contra clarissimam veritatem oculos claudis, gemitumque eius exponis, non ut omnibus patet, sed ut tibi placet, dicens: Quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius? hoc est: Quis me liberabit a reatu peccatorum meorum quae commisi? Ille dicit: Quod nolo malum, hoc ago ; et tu dicis: Quae commisi. Usque adeone desperas de hominibus qui haec legunt, ut non ipsum malint audire quam te, et ipsi potius quam tibi credere?

For this reason he cries out: Wretched man that I am, who will deliver me from the body of this death? ¹³⁸ And you, against the most clarion truth, close your eyes, and you expound his groan, not as it lies open to all, but as it pleases you, saying: Who will deliver me from the body of this death? that is: Who will deliver me from the guilt of my sins which I have committed? He says: What evil I do not will, this I do; and you say: Which I have committed. Do you really despair to such a degree of the people who read these things, that they would prefer to hear him himself rather than you, and to believe him rather than you?

Sine hominem gratiam Dei, non solum quia peccavit, ut absolvatur, verum etiam ne peccet, ut adiuvetur, exposcere: quod isto loco agitur. Qui enim dicit: Quod nolo malum, hoc ago, non est locus ut dicat: Dimitte nobis debita nostra, sed: Ne nos inferas in tentationem ¹³⁹. Unusquisque autem tentatur , sicut ait apostolus Iacobus, a concupiscentia sua attractus et illectus ¹⁴⁰. Hoc malum est de quo ait: Scio quia non habitat in me, hoc est in carne mea, bonum ¹⁴¹. Hoc malum est in corpo mortis huius. Hoc malum non fuit in paradiso ante peccatum; quia nondum erat haec caro corpus mortis huius; cui dicetur in fine: Ubi est, mors, contentio tua? ¹⁴² Sed tunc dicetur, cum corruptibile hoc induerit incorruptionem, et mortale hoc induerit immortalitatem ¹⁴³; nunc autem corpus est mortis; quia idem ipse dixit Apostolus: Corpus mortuum est propter peccatum ¹⁴⁴. Audi catholicos intellectores Apostoli; accipe eorum verba, non mea, cum quibus accipio convicia tua; audi non Pelagium, sed Ambrosium.

Allow the man to beseech the grace of God, not only because he has sinned, that he may be absolved, but also lest he sin, that he may be helped: this is what is being handled in this place. For he who says: What evil I do not will, this I do, it is not the place for him to say: Forgive us our debts, but: Lead us not into temptation ¹³⁹. But each one is tempted, as the apostle James says, drawn away by his own concupiscence and enticed ¹⁴⁰. This is the evil of which he says: I know that there dwells not in me, that is, in my flesh, the good ¹⁴¹. This evil is in the body of this death. This evil was not in paradise before sin; because as yet this flesh was not the body of this death; to which it shall be said at the end: Where, O death, is your contention? ¹⁴² But then it shall be said, when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality ¹⁴³; now, however, it is a body of death; because the Apostle himself said the same: The body is dead because of sin ¹⁴⁴. Hear the catholic interpreters of the Apostle; take their words, not mine, along with whom I receive your invectives; hear not Pelagius, but Ambrose.

Etiam Pauli caro, inquit, corpus mortis erat, sicut ipse ait: "Quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius?" ¹⁴⁵. Audi non Caelestium, sed Gregorium: Intra nosmetipsos, inquit, propriis vitiis ac passionibus impugnamur, et die noctuque ignitis stimulis corporis humilitatis huius et corporis mortis urgemur, nunc latenter, nunc etiam palam, provocantibus ubique et irritantibus rerum visibilium illecebris, luto hoc faecis, cui inhaesimus, caeni sui fetorem venis capacioribus exhalante; sed et lege peccati, quae est in membris nostris, legi spiritus repugnante ¹⁴⁶. His tu luminibus caelestis civitatis oblatrans: Corpus mortis, inquis, peccata dixit esse, non carnem; negans Apostolum hoc ad mortalitatem nostri corporis retulisse: Quam caro, inquis, animalium de naturae institutione suscepit. Hoc enim sapis, quod Pelagius in iudicio Palaestino ficto corde damnavit, Adam scilicet mortalem factum, ita ut sive peccaret, sive non peccaret, moriturus esset. Ac sic resistens his viris, et aliis eorum sociis fidei sanae, tot tantisque doctoribus, cogeris implere paradisum, etiamsi nemo peccasset, dolore parturientium, labore nascentium, gemitibus languentium, funeribus morientium, maerore lugentium. Quid igitur mirum, si et de isto paradiso, quod est Ecclesia, foras istis; qui paradisum illum, de quo foras ierunt, qui nos in istas miserias peccando miserunt, talem facitis, qualem non dico Christianorum nullus, sed nec hominum quisquam suspicari audet, si non sit insanus?

Even Paul’s flesh, he says, was a body of death, as he himself says: “Who will deliver me from the body of this death?” ¹⁴⁵. Hear not Celestius, but Gregory: Within our very selves, he says, we are assailed by our own vices and passions, and day and night we are pressed by the fiery goads of the body of this humiliation and of the body of death, now secretly, now even openly, with the allurements of visible things everywhere provoking and irritating, with this mud of dregs, to which we have stuck, exhaling the stench of its mire through more capacious veins; and also with the law of sin, which is in our members, contending against the law of the spirit ¹⁴⁶. Against these lights of the heavenly city you bark: “Body of death,” you say, he said were sins, not flesh; denying that the Apostle referred this to the mortality of our body: which the flesh of animals, you say, received from the institution of nature. For you savor that which Pelagius in the Palestinian judgment condemned with a feigned heart—namely, that Adam was made mortal, so that whether he sinned or did not sin, he would die. And thus, resisting these men and other associates of their sound faith, so many and so great doctors, you are compelled to fill paradise—even if no one had sinned—with the pain of women in labor, the toil of the newborn, the groans of the sick, the funerals of the dying, the sorrow of mourners. What then is marvelous, if from this paradise, which is the Church, you are outside; you who make that paradise, from which those went outside who by sinning sent us into these miseries, of such a sort as—not to say none of Christians—but not even any human being dares to suspect, unless he be insane?

Monica meribula vocata est.

Monica was called Meribula.

68. IUL. In primo enim opere latius disputata sunt. Quamvis nec tu dilucide loquaris, quam mortem intellegi velis, cuius corpus dicis in paradiso non fuisse ante peccatum; quia in libris, quos ad Marcellini nomen edidisti, mortalem Adam factum fuisse professus es ¹⁴⁷. Quod vero adiungis morbum esse negotium nuptiarum, leniter audiri potest, si hoc solum de tuis parentibus dicas.

68. IUL. For in the first work these matters were discussed more at length. Although you do not speak clearly either, which death you wish to be understood—the one whose body you say was not in paradise before the sin; because in the books which you published under the name of Marcellinus, you professed that Adam had been made mortal ¹⁴⁷. But what you add, that the business of nuptials is a disease, can be heard leniently, if you say this only about your own parents.

Conscius enim forte esse potes matris tuae morbi alicuius occulti, quam in libris Confessionis, ut ipso verbo utar, meribibulam vocatam esse signasti ¹⁴⁸. Ceterum in sanctorum connubio, et in omnium honestorum, nullus omnino morbus est. Quia nec Apostolus morbum pro remedio concessit, cum per reverentiam nuptia m a morbo fornicationis, Ecclesiae homines muniebat; qui sensus quomodo et frontem tuam et dogma penitus eraserit, primi voluminis mei prope ultima parte monstratur; quod et in toto ipsius responsionis corpore, prout locorum opportunitas attulit, explicatum est.

For you can perhaps be conscious of some hidden illness of your mother, whom, in the books of the Confession—to use the very word—you noted as having been called “wine-bibber” ¹⁴⁸. Otherwise, in the connubium of the saints, and of all honorable people, there is absolutely no disease. For neither did the Apostle grant disease as a remedy, when, by the reverence of marriages, he was fortifying the men of the Church against the disease of fornication; how that sense has utterly erased both your brow and your dogma is shown near the very end of my first volume; and this also has been explained in the whole body of that Response, as the opportunity of the places afforded.

AUG. Nusquam sic apparuit dolus tuus, et per scientiam damnata conscientia. Scis enim, scis omnino; tam quippe apertum est, ut qui libros illos legit, hoc nescire non possit; scis, inquam, in libris quos ad Marcellinum edidi, me vehementer egisse contra incipientem surgere iam tunc haeresim vestram, ne crederetur Adam, etiamsi non peccasset, fuisse moriturus.

AUG. Nowhere has your deceit thus appeared, and, through knowledge, a conscience condemned. For you know—you know altogether; for it is so open that whoever reads those books cannot be ignorant of this; you know, I say, that in the books which I published to Marcellinus, I contended vehemently against your heresy already then beginning to arise, lest it be believed that Adam, even if he had not sinned, would have been going to die.

Sed quoniam mortalem hactenus dixi, quia poterat mori, poterat namque peccare; tu eis qui libros illos non legerunt, nec fortasse lecturi sunt, fuco insidioso, si haec tua legerent, subripere voluisti; quasi ego ita dixerim, Adam mortalem factum, ut sive peccaret, sive non peccaret, moriturus esset. Hoc enim vobiscum agitur, hinc tota de hac re inter nos et vos vertitur quaestio, quod nos dicimus, Adam si non peccasset, nec corporis mortem fuisse passurum; vos autem, sive peccasset, sive non peccasset, corpore fuisse moriturum. Quid est ergo quod ignorare te fingis, quam mortem intellegi velim, cuius corpus dico in paradiso non fuisse ante peccatum; cum scias, in libris illis quid egerim, quamque aperte dilucideque egerim, non fuisse Deum puniendo dicturum peccatori: Terra es, et in terram ibis ¹⁴⁹ (quod de morte corporis dictum quis non intellegit?), si Adam etiam nulla iniquitate commissa iturus esset in terram, id est, vel corpore moriturus?

But since I have thus far said “mortal,” because he could die—for he could indeed sin—you wished, with an insidious gloss, to slip this upon those who have not read those books, nor perhaps are going to read them, if they were to read these writings of yours; as if I had so said that Adam was made mortal that, whether he sinned or did not sin, he would be going to die. For this is what is being transacted with you; hence the whole question about this matter is turned between us and you: that we say Adam, if he had not sinned, would not have been going to suffer death of the body; but you, whether he sinned or did not sin, [say] that he would have been going to die in body. What then is this that you pretend not to know—what death I wish to be understood, namely that of the body, which I say was not in Paradise before the sin—since you know, in those books, what I did, and how openly and clearly I did it: that God would not, by way of punishing, have said to the sinner, You are earth, and into earth you shall go ¹⁴⁹ (who does not understand that this was said of the death of the body?), if Adam also, with no iniquity committed, were going to go into the earth, that is, to die in body?

Quod autem etiam matrem meam, quae te nihil laesit, nec contra te aliquid disputavit, convicio lacerandam putasti, victus es maledicendi libidine, non timens quod scriptum est: Neque maledici regnum Dei possidebunt ¹⁵⁰. Sed quid mirum est quod te inimicum etiam eius ostendis, cum sis inimicus gratiae Dei, qua eam dixi ab illo puellari vitio liberatam? Ego vero parentes tuos tamquam catholicos christianos honorabiles habeo, eisque gratulor quod ante defuncti sunt, quam haereticum te viderent. Non autem dicimus, morbum esse negotium nuptiarum, quod est liberorum procreandorum causa concumbere, non satiandae libidinis; quam tu negas morbum, cum fatearis adversus eam provisum fuisse coniugale remedium.

But that you even thought that my mother, who harmed you in nothing and disputed nothing against you, should be torn with revilement, you were overcome by the lust of slandering, not fearing what is written: Neither shall revilers possess the kingdom of God ¹⁵⁰. But what wonder is it that you show yourself an enemy even of her, since you are an enemy of the grace of God, by which I said she was freed from that girlhood vice? As for me, I hold your parents as honorable Catholic Christians, and I congratulate them that they died before they should see you a heretic. Nor do we say that the business of nuptials is a disease—that is, to lie together for the sake of begetting children, not for the satiating of libido; which you deny to be a disease, while you confess that a conjugal remedy has been provided against it.

Nam utique ne fornicatio perpetretur, libidini, quam laudas, contradicitur, obsistitur, repugnatur. Ut si eum, qui procreandis filiis constitutus est, transgreditur limitem; saltem qui ei cedit, in coniuge venialiter peccet; coniugibus enim loquebatur Apostolus, ubi cum dixisset: Nolite fraudare invicem, nisi ex consensu ad tempus, ut vacetis orationi; et iterum ad id ipsum estote, ne vos tentet Sa nas propter intemperantiam vestram; continuo subiecit, atque ait: Hoc autem dico secundum veniam, non secundum imperium ¹⁵¹. Hoc itaque malo sola bene utitur intentione propagandae prolis pudicitia coniugalis; huic malo venialiter in coniuge ceditur, non causa prolis, sed carnalis tantummodo voluptatis; huic malo resistitur, ne appetitus damnabilis voluptatis expleatur. Hoc malum habitat in corpore mortis huius; propter cuius motum, etiam mente non consentiente importunum, dicitur: Scio quia non habitat in me, hoc est in carne mea, bonum ¹⁵². Hoc malum non erat in corpore vitae illius, ubi aut voluntati servientibus etiam genitalibus membris, libido nulla erat, aut omnino se umquam contra voluntatis arbitrium non movebat.

For indeed, lest fornication be perpetrated, libido, which you praise, is gainsaid, withstood, resisted. So that, if it oversteps the limit which has been appointed for the procreating of children, at least he who yields to it may sin venially with his spouse; for the Apostle was speaking to married couples, where, when he had said: Do not defraud one another, except by consent for a time, that you may have leisure for prayer; and again be together for this same thing, lest Sa tan tempt you on account of your incontinence; he immediately subjoined and said: But this I say by way of permission, not by way of command ¹⁵¹. To this evil, therefore, conjugal modesty makes good use only with the intention of propagating offspring; to this evil one yields venially with a spouse, not for the cause of offspring, but solely for carnal pleasure; to this evil one resists, lest the appetite of damnable pleasure be fulfilled. This evil inhabits the body of this death; on account of whose movement, importunate even when the mind does not consent, it is said: I know that there dwells no good in me, that is, in my flesh ¹⁵². This evil was not in the body of that life, where either, with even the genital members serving the will, there was no libido, or else it never moved itself at all against the judgment of the will.

Huius mali repente exorti puduit eos ¹⁵³, qui priusquam peccarent nudi erant, et non pudebat eos ¹⁵⁴. Huius mali laudes impudenter sparsisti etiam quattuor illis libris tuis, quibus coactus sum respondere sex meis.

They were ashamed at the sudden arising of this evil ¹⁵³, who before they sinned had been naked, and it did not shame them ¹⁵⁴. The praises of this evil you shamelessly scattered even in those four books of yours, to which I was compelled to respond with six of mine.

1 - AMBROSIUS, De paenitentia 1, 3, 13; cf. C. duas epp. Pelag. 4, 11, 29.
2 - Ps 143, 4.
3 - Cf. Lev 12, 6-8.
4 - Cf. Gen 17, 14.
5 - Cf. Ios 6, 21; 10, 32.
6 - Ps 143, 4.
7 - 1 Cor 15, 22.
8 - Iob 14, 4-5 (sec. LXX).
9 - Cf. De nupt.

1 - AMBROSE, On Penitence 1, 3, 13; cf. Against the Two Letters of the Pelagians 4, 11, 29.
2 - Ps 143, 4.
3 - Cf. Lev 12, 6-8.
4 - Cf. Gen 17, 14.
5 - Cf. Josh 6, 21; 10, 32.
6 - Ps 143, 4.
7 - 1 Cor 15, 22.
8 - Job 14, 4-5 (according to 70).
9 - Cf. On Marriage.

et concup. 1, 1.
10 - Cf. Mt 23, 27.
11 - 2 Cor 5, 20.
12 - Cf. De nupt. et concup. 2, 2.
13 - De nupt. et concup. 2, 2.
14 - Cf. De nupt.

and concupiscence. 1, 1.
10 - Cf. Matt 23, 27.
11 - 2 Cor 5, 20.
12 - Cf. On marriage and concupiscence. 2, 2.
13 - On marriage and concupiscence. 2, 2.
14 - Cf. On marriage

et concup. 2, 2.
15 - Cf. De nupt. et concup. 2, 2.
16 - Rom 5, 12.
17 - Cf. De nupt. et concup. 1, 1.
18 - De nupt.

and concupiscence. 2, 2.
15 - Cf. On Marriage and Concupiscence. 2, 2.
16 - Rom 5, 12.
17 - Cf. On Marriage and Concupiscence. 1, 1.
18 - On Marriage

et concup. 2, 3s.
19 - Cf. CICERO, Catil. 1, 1.
20 - Cf. C. Iul. 6, 75.
21 - Cf. Confess. 5, 6-7. 13.
22 - Cf. Rom 5, 12.
23 - Deut 32, 4.
24 - Ps 10, 8.
25 - Ps 118, 172.
26 - Cf. Eccli 40, 1.
27 - Cf. Mt 1, 21.
28 - Cf. Ezech 13, 18.
29 - Eccle 9, 18.
30 - Eccle 1, 2-3.
31 - Ps 143, 4.
32 - Cf. Ps 143, 4.
33 - Rom 10, 3.
34 - Cf. Mt 20, 1-10.
35 - Rom 9, 16.
36 - Rom 11, 33.
37 - Cf. 1 Cor 1, 27.
38 - Ps 48, 7.
39 - 1 Cor 1, 20.
40 - Cf. De duab. anim. 15.
41 - Ibidem.
42 - Eccli 15, 14. 17-18.
43 - Isa 1, 19-20.
44 - 1 Cor 15, 34.
45 - Gal 6, 7-8.
46 - Phil 2, 13.
47 - Prov 4, 27.
48 - De duab.

et concup. 2, 3s.
19 - Cf. CICERO, Catil. 1, 1.
20 - Cf. C. Iul. 6, 75.
21 - Cf. Confess. 5, 6-7. 13.
22 - Cf. Rom 5, 12.
23 - Deut 32, 4.
24 - Ps 10, 8.
25 - Ps 118, 172.
26 - Cf. Eccli 40, 1.
27 - Cf. Mt 1, 21.
28 - Cf. Ezek 13, 18.
29 - Eccles 9, 18.
30 - Eccles 1, 2-3.
31 - Ps 143, 4.
32 - Cf. Ps 143, 4.
33 - Rom 10, 3.
34 - Cf. Mt 20, 1-10.
35 - Rom 9, 16.
36 - Rom 11, 33.
37 - Cf. 1 Cor 1, 27.
38 - Ps 48, 7.
39 - 1 Cor 1, 20.
40 - Cf. De duab. anim. 15.
41 - Ibidem.
42 - Eccli 15, 14. 17-18.
43 - Isa 1, 19-20.
44 - 1 Cor 15, 34.
45 - Gal 6, 7-8.
46 - Phil 2, 13.
47 - Prov 4, 27.
48 - De duab.

anim. 15.
49 - Ibidem.
50 - Rom 7, 19.
51 - Mt 23, 26.
52 - Sap 2, 21.
53 - Ps 68, 24.
54 - Cf. Rom 8, 10.
55 - AMBROSIUS, In Luc. 7, 234.
56 - Cf. De nupt. et concup. 1, 22.
57 - 1 Cor 8, 5-6.
58 - Cf. VERG., Aen. 7, 565.

souls. 15.
49 - In the same place.
50 - Romans 7, 19.
51 - Matthew 23, 26.
52 - Wisdom 2, 21.
53 - Psalm 68, 24.
54 - Compare Romans 8, 10.
55 - AMBROSE, On Luke 7, 234.
56 - Compare On Marriage and Concupiscence 1, 22.
57 - 1 Corinthians 8, 5-6.
58 - Compare VERGIL, Aeneid 7, 565.

59 - Rom 5, 8.
60 - Rom 8, 32.
61 - Cf. Hebr 7, 9-10.
62 - AMBROSIUS, De paradiso 13, 67.
63 - AMBROSIUS, In Luc. 7, 234.
64 - PELAGIUS, De lib. arb. 3.
65 - AMBROSIUS, De paenitentia 1, 3, 13.
66 - Rom 5, 8.
67 - Rom 8, 32.
68 - Rom 9, 20.
69 - Rom 11, 33.
70 - 2 Tim 2, 19.
71 - AMBROSIUS, In Luc. 7, 234.

59 - Romans 5, 8.
60 - Romans 8, 32.
61 - Cf. Hebrews 7, 9-10.
62 - AMBROSE, On Paradise 13, 67.
63 - AMBROSE, On Luke 7, 234.
64 - PELAGIUS, On Free Will. 3.
65 - AMBROSE, On Repentance 1, 3, 13.
66 - Romans 5, 8.
67 - Romans 8, 32.
68 - Romans 9, 20.
69 - Romans 11, 33.
70 - 2 Timothy 2, 19.
71 - AMBROSE, On Luke 7, 234.

72 - Lc 19, 10.
73 - Cf. Eccli 40, 1.
74 - Cf. Hebr 12, 23.
75 - 1 Tim 6, 16.
76 - Cf. Gen 17, 12-14.
77 - Ex 34, 7; Ier 32, 18.
78 - Cf. Rom 8, 10.
79 - Cf. Hebr 12, 23.
80 - Cf. Col 1, 13.
81 - Cf. CYPRIANUS, Ep. ad Fidum 64, 5.
82 - Cf. Eccli 40, 1.
83 - De nupt. et concup. 1, 1.
84 - Ibidem.
85 - Col 1, 13.
86 - De nupt.

72 - Lk 19, 10.
73 - Cf. Sir 40, 1.
74 - Cf. Heb 12, 23.
75 - 1 Tim 6, 16.
76 - Cf. Gen 17, 12-14.
77 - Ex 34, 7; Jer 32, 18.
78 - Cf. Rom 8, 10.
79 - Cf. Heb 12, 23.
80 - Cf. Col 1, 13.
81 - Cf. CYPRIAN, Epistle to Fidus 64, 5.
82 - Cf. Sir 40, 1.
83 - On Marriage and Concupiscence 1, 1.
84 - In the same place.
85 - Col 1, 13.
86 - On Marriage

et concup. 2, 4-5.
87 - CYPRIANUS, Ep. ad Fidum 64, 5.
88 - Ps 118, 175.
89 - Ps 50, 7.
90 - HILARIUS, In Ps 118, 175.
91 - AMBROSIUS, De paenitentia 1, 3, 13.
92 - GREGORIUS NAZ., Orat.

and Concupiscence. 2, 4-5.
87 - CYPRIAN, Epistle to Fidus 64, 5.
88 - Ps 118, 175.
89 - Ps 50, 7.
90 - HILARY, On Ps 118, 175.
91 - AMBROSE, On Penance 1, 3, 13.
92 - GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS, Oration

in Christi Natalem 38, 17.
93 - BASILIUS, Serm. I de ieiunio4.
94 - IOANNES CONSTANTINOP., Ep. ad Olymp. 3, 3.
95 - Eph 4, 5.
96 - C. Iul. 3, 8 ss.
97 - Cf. Mt 1, 21.
98 - GREGORIUS NAZ., Orat. in Christi Natalem 38, 17.
99 - Cf. Eccli 40, 1.
100 - Cf. Sap 9, 15.
101 - Cf. Ps 4, 3.
102 - C. Iul. 1, 7.
103 - Cf. De pecc.

on the Nativity of Christ 38, 17.
93 - BASIL, Sermon 1 on fasting4.
94 - JOHN OF CONSTANTINOPLE, Letter to Olympias 3, 3.
95 - Eph 4, 5.
96 - Against Julian 3, 8 and following.
97 - Cf. Mt 1, 21.
98 - GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS, Oration on the Nativity of Christ 38, 17.
99 - Cf. Eccli 40, 1.
100 - Cf. Sap 9, 15.
101 - Cf. Ps 4, 3.
102 - Against Julian 1, 7.
103 - Cf. On sin.

mer.et rem. 3, 2.
104 - Mc 16, 16.
105 - Mc 10, 14; cf. Mt 19, 14; Lc 18, 16.
106 - Mt 1, 21.
107 - Cf. Mt 11, 25.
108 - Ps 50, 7.
109 - Rom 7, 24.
110 - AMBROSIUS, De paenitentia 1, 3, 13.
111 - Mt 1, 21.
112 - Iob 14, 1-5 (sec. LXX).
113 - Lc 19, 10.
114 - Cf. Gen 1, 26; 5, 1.
115 - Ps 143, 4.
116 - Ps 38, 6.
117 - De nupt. et concup. 1, 1.
118 - Col 1, 13.
119 - Ibidem.
120 - 2 Cor 5, 14.
121 - Hebr 2, 14.
122 - Cf. CICERO, De fin. 2, 11, 34; 5, 25, 73; LACT., De falsa sap. 3, 7.
123 - AMBROSIUS, De Arca Noe 3, 7.
124 - AMBROSIUS, Lib II in Lc 2, 23. 56.
125 - Rom 7, 24-25.
126 - DE NUPT.

On merits and remission 3, 2.
104 - Mk 16, 16.
105 - Mk 10, 14; cf. Mt 19, 14; Lk 18, 16.
106 - Mt 1, 21.
107 - Cf. Mt 11, 25.
108 - Ps 50, 7.
109 - Rom 7, 24.
110 - AMBROSE, On Penance 1, 3, 13.
111 - Mt 1, 21.
112 - Job 14, 1-5 (acc. to the 70).
113 - Lk 19, 10.
114 - Cf. Gen 1, 26; 5, 1.
115 - Ps 143, 4.
116 - Ps 38, 6.
117 - On Marriage and Concupiscence 1, 1.
118 - Col 1, 13.
119 - In the same place.
120 - 2 Cor 5, 14.
121 - Heb 2, 14.
122 - Cf. CICERO, On Ends 2, 11, 34; 5, 25, 73; LACT., On False Wisdom 3, 7.
123 - AMBROSE, On the Ark of Noah 3, 7.
124 - AMBROSE, Book 2 on Lk 2, 23. 56.
125 - Rom 7, 24-25.
126 - ON MARRIAGE.

ET CONCUP. 2, 6.
127 - Cf. Io 8, 44.
128 - 1 Tim 1, 15-16.
129 - Rom 2, 4-5.
130 - Col 3, 5-7.
131 - Rom 6, 6.
132 - Rom 7, 24.
133 - Rom 7, 25.
134 - Ps 31, 1-2.
135 - Rom 7, 24-25.
136 - Rom 7, 15.
137 - Rom 7, 17-19.
138 - Rom 7, 24.
139 - Mt 6, 12-13.
140 - Iac 1, 14.
141 - Rom 7, 18.
142 - Cf. 1 Cor 15, 54-55.
143 - 1 Cor 15, 53-54.
144 - Rom 8, 10.
145 - AMBROSIUS, De paenitentia 1, 3, 13; Rom 7, 24.
146 - GREGORIUS NAZ., Orat. I de fuga sua 2, 9.
147 - Cf. De pecc.

AND CONCUPISCENCE 2, 6.
127 - Cf. Jn 8, 44.
128 - 1 Tim 1, 15-16.
129 - Rom 2, 4-5.
130 - Col 3, 5-7.
131 - Rom 6, 6.
132 - Rom 7, 24.
133 - Rom 7, 25.
134 - Ps 31, 1-2.
135 - Rom 7, 24-25.
136 - Rom 7, 15.
137 - Rom 7, 17-19.
138 - Rom 7, 24.
139 - Mt 6, 12-13.
140 - Jas 1, 14.
141 - Rom 7, 18.
142 - Cf. 1 Cor 15, 54-55.
143 - 1 Cor 15, 53-54.
144 - Rom 8, 10.
145 - AMBROSE, On Penance 1, 3, 13; Rom 7, 24.
146 - GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS, Oration 1 On His Flight 2, 9.
147 - Cf. On sins

mer. et rem. 1, 3-4.
148 - Cf. Confess. 9, 18.
149 - Gen 3, 19.
150 - 1 Cor 6, 10.
151 - 1 Cor 7, 5-6.
152 - Rom 7, 18.
153 - Cf. Gen 3, 7.
154 - Cf. Gen 2, 25.
155 - Rom 7, 23.
156 - Rom 7, 24-25.
157 - Rom 6, 19.
158 - Rom 7, 5.
159 - GREGORIUS NAZ., Orat. I de fuga sua 2, 9.
160 - Cf. Gal 5, 17.
161 - AMBROSIUS, De paenitentia 1, 3, 13.
162 - GREGORIUS NAZ., Orat.

mer. et rem. 1, 3-4.
148 - Cf. Confess. 9, 18.
149 - Gen 3, 19.
150 - 1 Cor 6, 10.
151 - 1 Cor 7, 5-6.
152 - Rom 7, 18.
153 - Cf. Gen 3, 7.
154 - Cf. Gen 2, 25.
155 - Rom 7, 23.
156 - Rom 7, 24-25.
157 - Rom 6, 19.
158 - Rom 7, 5.
159 - GREGORIUS NAZ., Orat. 1 de fuga sua 2, 9.
160 - Cf. Gal 5, 17.
161 - AMBROSIUS, De paenitentia 1, 3, 13.
162 - GREGORIUS NAZ., Orat.

in Natalem Domini 41, 14.
163 - GREGORIUS NAZ., Orat. in Pentecosten.
164 - HILARIUS, In Ps. 118, 75.
165 - De nupt. et concup. 2, 6.
166 - AMBROSIUS, In Luc. 7, 142-143.

on the Nativity of the Lord 41, 14.
163 - GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS, Oration on Pentecost.
164 - HILARY, On Ps. 118, 75.
165 - On Marriage and Concupiscence. 2, 6.
166 - AMBROSE, On Luke 7, 142-143.

167 - AMBROSIUS, In Luc. 7, 141.
168 - AMBROSIUS, In Luc. 7, 141.
169 - Gal 5, 17; CYPRIANUS, De Orat.

167 - AMBROSE, On Luke 7, 141.
168 - AMBROSE, On Luke 7, 141.
169 - Galatians 5, 17; CYPRIAN, On Prayer.

Dominica 16.
170 - Gal 5, 16.
171 - Gal 5, 17.
172 - Gal 3, 2.
173 - Cf. supra71.
174 - Mt 26, 41.
175 - Cf. Ps 48, 7.
176 - De nupt. et concup. 2, 6-7.
177 - De nupt. et concup. 2, 8.
178 - Io 8, 36.
179 - 2 Pt 2, 19.
180 - Rom 5, 12; De nupt.

Sunday 16.
170 - Galatians 5, 16.
171 - Galatians 5, 17.
172 - Galatians 3, 2.
173 - Cf. above71.
174 - Matthew 26, 41.
175 - Cf. Psalm 48, 7.
176 - On Marriage and Concupiscence. 2, 6-7.
177 - On Marriage and Concupiscence. 2, 8.
178 - John 8, 36.
179 - 2 Peter 2, 19.
180 - Romans 5, 12; On Marriage and Concupiscence

et concup. 2, 8.
181 - Cf. supra42.
182 - Rom 6, 20.
183 - Io 8, 36.
184 - CICERO, De officiis 1, 7.
185 - Cf. Rom 10, 3.
186 - Prov 2, 12 (sec. LXX).
187 - 2 Cor 3, 5.
188 - Ps 48, 7.
189 - Ps 17, 2.
190 - 2 Tim 2, 13.
191 - Cf. supra28. 67.
192 - Rom 5, 5.
193 - Io 8, 36.
194 - Rom 6, 22.
195 - Rom 5, 5.
196 - Io 15, 5.
197 - Io 8, 31-32.
198 - Io 8, 33.
199 - Rom 8, 21.
200 - Io 8, 34-36.
201 - Io 8, 34.
202 - Cf. Lc 13, 28-29.
203 - Cf. Rom 6, 12-13. 17-19.
204 - Ps 118, 133.
205 - Io 8, 37.
206 - Io 8, 37-38.
207 - Cf. Lc 24, 27.
208 - Cf. Act 16, 14.
209 - Io 8, 39-41.
210 - Mt 6, 13.
211 - Io 8, 36.
212 - Cf. 2 Cor 4, 2.
213 - Cf. supra69.
214 - Rom 7, 15. 19.
215 - Rom 7, 19.
216 - Eccli 40, 1.
217 - Ps 143, 4.
218 - Io 5, 43.
219 - Mt 12, 33.
220 - Io 10, 38.
221 - Mt 23, 37.
222 - Mt 23, 38.
223 - Isa 1, 19-20.
224 - Cf. AMBROSIUS, In Luc. 7, 27.
225 - Mt 6, 13.
226 - Isa 1, 20.
227 - Cf. Act 9, 1.
228 - Cf. Act 9, 4-5. 20.
229 - Io 3, 8.
230 - Io 8, 36.
231 - Rom 6, 20.
232 - Rom 6, 20-22.
233 - Rom 7, 25.
234 - Io 1, 12; C. duas epp.

and concup. 2, 8.
181 - Cf. supra42.
182 - Rom 6, 20.
183 - Jn 8, 36.
184 - CICERO, De officiis 1, 7.
185 - Cf. Rom 10, 3.
186 - Prov 2, 12 (according to the LXX).
187 - 2 Cor 3, 5.
188 - Ps 48, 7.
189 - Ps 17, 2.
190 - 2 Tim 2, 13.
191 - Cf. supra28. 67.
192 - Rom 5, 5.
193 - Jn 8, 36.
194 - Rom 6, 22.
195 - Rom 5, 5.
196 - Jn 15, 5.
197 - Jn 8, 31-32.
198 - Jn 8, 33.
199 - Rom 8, 21.
200 - Jn 8, 34-36.
201 - Jn 8, 34.
202 - Cf. Lk 13, 28-29.
203 - Cf. Rom 6, 12-13. 17-19.
204 - Ps 118, 133.
205 - Jn 8, 37.
206 - Jn 8, 37-38.
207 - Cf. Lk 24, 27.
208 - Cf. Acts 16, 14.
209 - Jn 8, 39-41.
210 - Mt 6, 13.
211 - Jn 8, 36.
212 - Cf. 2 Cor 4, 2.
213 - Cf. supra69.
214 - Rom 7, 15. 19.
215 - Rom 7, 19.
216 - Eccli 40, 1.
217 - Ps 143, 4.
218 - Jn 5, 43.
219 - Mt 12, 33.
220 - Jn 10, 38.
221 - Mt 23, 37.
222 - Mt 23, 38.
223 - Isa 1, 19-20.
224 - Cf. AMBROSIUS, In Luc. 7, 27.
225 - Mt 6, 13.
226 - Isa 1, 20.
227 - Cf. Acts 9, 1.
228 - Cf. Acts 9, 4-5. 20.
229 - Jn 3, 8.
230 - Jn 8, 36.
231 - Rom 6, 20.
232 - Rom 6, 20-22.
233 - Rom 7, 25.
234 - Jn 1, 12; C. duas epp.

Pelag. 1, 2, 4.
235 - C. duas epp. Pelag. 1, 6-7.
236 - Isa 8, 20 (sec. LXX).
237 - Cf. Io 1, 14.
238 - Cf. Rom 5, 8.
239 - Rom 8, 32.
240 - Cf. Rom 8, 17.
241 - Cf. 1 Tim 1, 8.
242 - Cf. 2 Cor 3, 6.
243 - Phil 2, 13.
244 - Prov 8, 35 (sec.

Pelag. 1, 2, 4.
235 - C. duas epp. Pelag. 1, 6-7.
236 - Isaiah 8, 20 (according to the LXX).
237 - Cf. John 1, 14.
238 - Cf. Romans 5, 8.
239 - Romans 8, 32.
240 - Cf. Romans 8, 17.
241 - Cf. 1 Timothy 1, 8.
242 - Cf. 2 Corinthians 3, 6.
243 - Philippians 2, 13.
244 - Proverbs 8, 35 (according to

LXX).
245 - 1 Io 4, 7.
246 - Cf. Eph 3, 19.
247 - 2 Cor 5, 10.
248 - Rom 8, 10-11.
249 - Cf. De gestis Pelag. 11, 23-24.
250 - IOANNES CONSTANTINOP., Ep. ad Olymp. 3, 3.
251 - Rom 7, 14-15.
252 - C. duas epp. Pelag. 1, 7.
253 - Io 15, 5.
254 - Prov 8, 35 (sec. LXX).
255 - Phil 2, 13.
256 - Ps 36, 23.
257 - C. duas epp.

70).
245 - 1 John 4, 7.
246 - Cf. Ephesians 3, 19.
247 - 2 Corinthians 5, 10.
248 - Romans 8, 10-11.
249 - Cf. On the Deeds of Pelagius 11, 23-24.
250 - JOHN OF CONSTANTINOPLE, Letter to Olympias 3, 3.
251 - Romans 7, 14-15.
252 - Against the Two Letters of the Pelagians 1, 7.
253 - John 15, 5.
254 - Proverbs 8, 35 (acc. to 70).
255 - Philippians 2, 13.
256 - Psalm 36, 23.
257 - Against the Two Letters

Pelag. 1, 7.
258 - Mt 6, 12.
259 - Cf. 1 Io 1, 8.
260 - Io 15, 5.
261 - Cf. Act 10, 1-3.
262 - Cf. Act 8, 9-13. 18-24.
263 - Ps 35, 7.
264 - Cf. Rom 11, 6.
265 - Rom 6, 20.
266 - Rom 6, 18.
267 - Rom 7, 19.
268 - Cf. supra28.
269 - Cf. Rom 8, 23.
270 - Mt 6, 12.
271 - 2 Tim 2, 13.
272 - Mt 6, 12-13.
273 - Rom 7, 19.
274 - Ps 24, 7.
275 - Iob 14, 17 (sec. LXX).
276 - Cf. C. Iul. 6, 54.
277 - Cf. supra69.
278 - Mt 6, 12-13.
279 - Mt 6, 13.
280 - Ps 24, 17.
281 - Iac 1, 14.
282 - Cf. CYPRIANUS, Ep. ad Fidum 64, 5.
283 - Rom 5, 12.
284 - Rom 6, 20.
285 - Rom 6, 21.
286 - Rom 6, 16.
287 - 2 Pt 2, 19.
288 - Rom 6, 20.
289 - Mt 6, 13.
290 - 2 Cor 13, 7.
291 - Rom 6, 19-20.
292 - Cf. supra73.
293 - De nupt. et concup. 1, 26.
294 - Rom 5, 12.
295 - AMBROSIUS, De paenitentia 1, 3, 13.
296 - Cf. supra74.
297 - Io 5, 21.
298 - Cf. Io 6, 44.
299 - Mt 11, 30.
300 - Cf. Lc 19, 10.
301 - Cf. Mt 1, 21.
302 - 2 Pt 2, 19.
303 - Cf. AMBROSIUS, In Luc. 7, 234.

Pelagius 1, 7.
258 - Matthew 6, 12.
259 - Cf. 1 John 1, 8.
260 - John 15, 5.
261 - Cf. Acts 10, 1-3.
262 - Cf. Acts 8, 9-13. 18-24.
263 - Psalm 35, 7.
264 - Cf. Romans 11, 6.
265 - Romans 6, 20.
266 - Romans 6, 18.
267 - Romans 7, 19.
268 - Cf. above28.
269 - Cf. Romans 8, 23.
270 - Matthew 6, 12.
271 - 2 Timothy 2, 13.
272 - Matthew 6, 12-13.
273 - Romans 7, 19.
274 - Psalm 24, 7.
275 - Job 14, 17 (according to the LXX).
276 - Cf. Against Julian 6, 54.
277 - Cf. above69.
278 - Matthew 6, 12-13.
279 - Matthew 6, 13.
280 - Psalm 24, 17.
281 - James 1, 14.
282 - Cf. CYPRIAN, Epistle to Fidus 64, 5.
283 - Romans 5, 12.
284 - Romans 6, 20.
285 - Romans 6, 21.
286 - Romans 6, 16.
287 - 2 Peter 2, 19.
288 - Romans 6, 20.
289 - Matthew 6, 13.
290 - 2 Corinthians 13, 7.
291 - Romans 6, 19-20.
292 - Cf. above73.
293 - On Marriage and Concupiscence 1, 26.
294 - Romans 5, 12.
295 - AMBROSE, On Penance 1, 3, 13.
296 - Cf. above74.
297 - John 5, 21.
298 - Cf. John 6, 44.
299 - Matthew 11, 30.
300 - Cf. Luke 19, 10.
301 - Cf. Matthew 1, 21.
302 - 2 Peter 2, 19.
303 - Cf. AMBROSE, On Luke 7, 234.

304 - C. Lc 19, 10; Rom 5, 12.
305 - Rom 9, 21; De nupt. et concup. 2, 8.
306 - Ps 100, 1; De nupt. et concup. 2, 8.
307 - Cf. Isa 45, 9.
308 - Cf. infra 2, 20.
309 - C. Iul. 6, 75.
310 - PROSPERUS, Excerpta296.

304 - Cf. Lk 19, 10; Rom 5, 12.
305 - Rom 9, 21; On Marriage and Concupiscence 2, 8.
306 - Ps 100, 1; On Marriage and Concupiscence 2, 8.
307 - Cf. Isa 45, 9.
308 - Cf. below 2, 20.
309 - Against Julian 6, 75.
310 - PROSPER, Excerpts296.

8.
311 - AMBROSIUS, De paenitentia 1, 3, 13.
312 - Cf. Eccli 40, 1.
313 - Cf. Col 1, 13.
314 - 2 Cor 5, 14-15.
315 - Cf. Ez 16, 48. 51. 55.
316 - Cf. Lc 19, 10.
317 - Cf. Sap 4, 11.
318 - Cf. Gen 1, 31.
319 - AMBROSIUS, In Luc. 1, 37.
320 - 1 Tim 2, 5.
321 - 2 Cor 4, 13.
322 - Eph 2, 8.
323 - Eph 6, 23.
324 - Cf. Rom 5, 16.
325 - Cf. Rom 5, 12.
326 - Rom 9, 21.
327 - AMBROSIUS, De paenitentia 1, 3, 13.
328 - Cf. Rom 5, 12.
329 - Rom 9, 20.
330 - Rom 5, 16.
331 - Io 3, 36.
332 - Rom 9, 23.
333 - Rom 9, 20.
334 - Cf. 1 Cor 1, 31.
335 - Rom 9, 20-21; cf. Isa 45, 9.
336 - Ps 100, 1.
337 - Rom 11, 34; cf. Isa 40, 13.
338 - Rom 9, 20.
339 - Cf. Rom 2, 12; 3, 29-31.
340 - Cf. Rom 3, 29.
341 - Rom 4, 4.
342 - Rom 9, 11-12.
343 - 1 Io 4, 19.
344 - Cf. Ex 3, 6; Mt 22, 32; Hebr 12, 16-17.
345 - Cf. 2 Cor 13, 3.
346 - Rom 9, 18.
347 - Rom 9, 20.
348 - Isa 45, 9; Rom 9, 20.
349 - Rom 9, 21.
350 - Cf. Act 9, 4. 8s.
351 - Rom 11, 5-6.
352 - Ez 36, 22.
353 - Ez 36, 27.
354 - Cf. De gestis Pelag. 13, 30.
355 - Rom 9, 11-12.
356 - Rom 11, 5-6.
357 - Rom 9, 12.
358 - Cf. supra132.
359 - Rom 11, 6.
360 - Rom 9, 22-24.
361 - 2 Tim 2, 20-21.
362 - Prov 8, 35 (sec. LXX).
363 - Cf. supra133.

8.
311 - AMBROSE, On Penance 1, 3, 13.
312 - Cf. Sir 40, 1.
313 - Cf. Col 1, 13.
314 - 2 Cor 5, 14-15.
315 - Cf. Ezek 16, 48. 51. 55.
316 - Cf. Lk 19, 10.
317 - Cf. Wis 4, 11.
318 - Cf. Gen 1, 31.
319 - AMBROSE, On Luke 1, 37.
320 - 1 Tim 2, 5.
321 - 2 Cor 4, 13.
322 - Eph 2, 8.
323 - Eph 6, 23.
324 - Cf. Rom 5, 16.
325 - Cf. Rom 5, 12.
326 - Rom 9, 21.
327 - AMBROSE, On Penance 1, 3, 13.
328 - Cf. Rom 5, 12.
329 - Rom 9, 20.
330 - Rom 5, 16.
331 - Jn 3, 36.
332 - Rom 9, 23.
333 - Rom 9, 20.
334 - Cf. 1 Cor 1, 31.
335 - Rom 9, 20-21; cf. Isa 45, 9.
336 - Ps 100, 1.
337 - Rom 11, 34; cf. Isa 40, 13.
338 - Rom 9, 20.
339 - Cf. Rom 2, 12; 3, 29-31.
340 - Cf. Rom 3, 29.
341 - Rom 4, 4.
342 - Rom 9, 11-12.
343 - 1 Jn 4, 19.
344 - Cf. Ex 3, 6; Mt 22, 32; Heb 12, 16-17.
345 - Cf. 2 Cor 13, 3.
346 - Rom 9, 18.
347 - Rom 9, 20.
348 - Isa 45, 9; Rom 9, 20.
349 - Rom 9, 21.
350 - Cf. Acts 9, 4. 8ff.
351 - Rom 11, 5-6.
352 - Ezek 36, 22.
353 - Ezek 36, 27.
354 - Cf. On the Deeds of the Pelagians 13, 30.
355 - Rom 9, 11-12.
356 - Rom 11, 5-6.
357 - Rom 9, 12.
358 - Cf. above132.
359 - Rom 11, 6.
360 - Rom 9, 22-24.
361 - 2 Tim 2, 20-21.
362 - Prov 8, 35 (according to the LXX).
363 - Cf. above133.

364 - 2 Tim 2, 21.
365 - AMBROSIUS, In Luc. 7, 27.
366 - Rom 9, 20-21.
367 - Rom 5, 16.
368 - Isa 1, 16-18.
369 - Isa 45, 8-13.
370 - Isa 45, 13.
371 - AMBROSIUS, In Isa.; cf. De nupt. et concup. 1, 40.
372 - Io 1, 1.
373 - Io 1, 14.
374 - AMBROSIUS, In Luc. 7, 27.
375 - Isa 45, 8-9.
376 - Cf. Num 21, 6-9.
377 - 1 Cor 1, 30-31.
378 - Isa 45, 9.
379 - Rom 9, 6-9.
380 - Rom 9, 10-13.
381 - Rom 9, 14.
382 - Rom 9, 15-16.
383 - Rom 9, 16.
384 - Ibidem.
385 - Prov 8, 35.
386 - Ps 36, 23.
387 - Rom 9, 13. 16-17.
388 - Rom 9, 18.
389 - Rom 9, 19-21.
390 - Rom 9, 24; Osea 1, 9.
391 - Isa 10, 22; cf. Rom 11, 5.
392 - Isa 1, 9.
393 - Rom 10, 13.
394 - Rom 10, 1-3.
395 - Rom 11, 1-6.
396 - Rom 11, 7.
397 - Rom 9, 11.
398 - Rom 11, 7.

364 - 2 Tim 2, 21.
365 - AMBROSE, On Luke 7, 27.
366 - Rom 9, 20-21.
367 - Rom 5, 16.
368 - Isa 1, 16-18.
369 - Isa 45, 8-13.
370 - Isa 45, 13.
371 - AMBROSE, On Isaiah; cf. On Marriage and Concupiscence 1, 40.
372 - John 1, 1.
373 - John 1, 14.
374 - AMBROSE, On Luke 7, 27.
375 - Isa 45, 8-9.
376 - Cf. Num 21, 6-9.
377 - 1 Cor 1, 30-31.
378 - Isa 45, 9.
379 - Rom 9, 6-9.
380 - Rom 9, 10-13.
381 - Rom 9, 14.
382 - Rom 9, 15-16.
383 - Rom 9, 16.
384 - In the same place.
385 - Prov 8, 35.
386 - Ps 36, 23.
387 - Rom 9, 13. 16-17.
388 - Rom 9, 18.
389 - Rom 9, 19-21.
390 - Rom 9, 24; Hosea 1, 9.
391 - Isa 10, 22; cf. Rom 11, 5.
392 - Isa 1, 9.
393 - Rom 10, 13.
394 - Rom 10, 1-3.
395 - Rom 11, 1-6.
396 - Rom 11, 7.
397 - Rom 9, 11.
398 - Rom 11, 7.