Augustine: DE CIVITATE DEI

[I] Sicut in proximo libro superiore promisimus, iste huius totius operis ultimus disputationem de ciuitatis Dei aeterna beatitudine continebit, quae non propter aetatis per multa saecula longitudinem tamen quandocumque finiendam aeternitatis nomen accepit, sed quem ad modum scriptum est in euangelio, regno eius non erit finis; nec ita ut aliis moriendo decedentibus, aliis succedentibus oriendo species in ea perpetuitatis appareat, sicut in arbore, quae perenni fronde uestitur, eadem uidetur uiriditas permanere, dum labentibus et cadentibus foliis subinde alia, quae nascuntur, faciem conseruant opacitatis; sed omnes in ea ciues inmortales erunt, adipiscentibus et hominibus, quod numquam sancti angeli perdiderunt. Faciet hoc Deus omnipotentissimus eius conditor. Promisit enim nec mentiri potest, et quibus fidem hinc quoque faceret, multa sua et non promissa et promissa iam fecit.

[1] As we promised in the immediately preceding book, this, the ultimate of this whole work, will contain a disputation concerning the eternal beatitude of the City of God, which did not receive the name of eternity on account of an age-length through many ages, which must nevertheless at some time be finished, but, as it is written in the Gospel, of his kingdom there will be no end; nor in such a way that, with some departing by dying and others succeeding by being born, an appearance of perpetuity should seem to show itself in it, as in a tree which is clothed with perennial foliage the same greenness seems to remain, while, the leaves slipping and falling, others which are born forthwith preserve the face of shade; but all the citizens in it will be immortal, with men also attaining what the holy angels have never lost. The most almighty God, its Founder, will do this. For he has promised and cannot lie, and, that he might thereby also establish faith for them, he has already done many things of his own, both unpromised and promised.

Ipse est enim, qui in principio condidit mundum, plenum bonis omnibus uisibilibus atque intellegibilibus rebus, in quo nihil melius instituit quam spiritus, quibus intellegentiam dedit et suae contemplationis habiles capacesque sui praestitit atque una societate deuinxit, quam sanctam et supernam dicimus ciuitatem, in qua res, qua sustententur beatique sint, Deus ipse illis est, tamquam uita uictusque communis; qui liberum arbitrium eidem intellectuali naturae tribuit tale, ut, si uellet, desereret Deum, beatitudinem scilicet suam, miseria continuo secutura; qui, cum praesciret angelos quosdam per elationem, qua ipsi sibi ad beatam uitam sufficere uellent, tanti boni desertores futuros, non eis ademit hanc potestatem, potentius et melius esse iudicans etiam de malis bene facere quam mala esse non sinere (quae omnino nulla essent, nisi natura mutabilis, quamuis bona et a summo Deo atque incommutabili bono, qui bona omnia condidit, instituta, peccando ea sibi ipsa fecisset; quo etiam peccato suo teste conuincitur bonam conditam se esse naturam; nisi enim magnum et ipsa, licet non aequale Conditori, bonum esset, profecto desertio Dei tamquam luminis sui malum eius esse non posset; nam sicut caecitas oculi uitium est et idem ipsum indicat ad lumen uidendum esse oculum creatum ac per hoc etiam ipso uitio suo excellentius ostenditur ceteris membris membrum capax luminis — non enim alia causa esset uitium eius carere lumine —: ita natura, quae fruebatur Deo, optimam se institutam docet etiam ipso uitio, quo ideo misera est quia non fruitur Deo); qui casum angelorum uoluntarium iustissima poena sempiternae infelicitatis obstrinxit atque in eo summo bono permanentibus ceteris, ut de sua sine fine permansione certi essent, tamquam ipsius praemium permansionis dedit; qui fecit hominem etiam ipsum rectum cum eodem libero arbitrio, terrenum quidem animal, sed caelo dignum, si suo cohaereret auctori, miseria similiter, si eum desereret, secutura, qualis naturae huius modi conueniret (quem similiter cum praeuaricatione legis Dei per Dei desertionem peccaturum esse praesciret, nec illi ademit liberi arbitrii potestatem, simul praeuidens, quid boni de malo eius esset ipse facturus); qui de mortali progenie merito iusteque damnata tantum populum gratia sua colligit, ut inde suppleat et instauret partem, quae lapsa est angelorum, ac sic illa dilecta et superna ciuitas non fraudetur suorum numero ciuium, quin etiam fortassis et uberiore laetetur.

For he himself is the very one who in the beginning founded the world, full of all good things, visible and intelligible, in which he instituted nothing better than spirits, to whom he gave intelligence and rendered them apt for his contemplation and capable of himself, and bound them by one society, which we call the holy and supernal city, in which the resource by which they are sustained and are blessed is God himself, as a common life and nourishment; who granted to that same intellectual nature such free will that, if it should will it, it would desert God—namely its own beatitude—misery straightway to follow; who, although he foreknew that certain angels, through elation whereby they would wish to suffice for themselves unto a blessed life, would be deserters of so great a good, did not take from them this power, judging it to be more potent and better even to make good out of evils than not to allow evils to be (which would not exist at all, unless a mutable nature—although good and established by the supreme God and unchangeable Good, who founded all goods—had made them for itself by sinning; by which very sin, its own witness, the nature is convicted that it was created good; for unless it also were a great good, albeit not equal to the Creator, assuredly the desertion of God, as of its light, could not be its evil; for just as blindness of the eye is a defect and that very thing indicates that the eye has been created to see the light, and by this very defect of its it is shown more excellently than the other members to be a member capable of light — for there would be no other cause of its defect, to be without light —: so the nature which was enjoying God shows itself to have been established most excellent even by that very defect, by which it is therefore miserable because it does not enjoy God); who bound the voluntary fall of the angels with the most just penalty of everlasting unhappiness, and, for the rest who remain in that highest good, that they might be certain of their endurance without end, gave as though the very reward of abiding their permanence; who made man himself also upright with the same free will, an earthly animal indeed, but worthy of heaven if he should cohere to his Author, and misery likewise, if he should desert him, to follow—such as would befit a nature of this sort (whom, although he similarly foreknew that he would sin by transgression of the law of God through desertion of God, he did not take from him the power of free will, at the same time foreseeing what good out of his evil he himself would make); who from the mortal progeny deservedly and justly condemned gathers by his grace so great a people, that from thence he may supply and restore the part of the angels which fell, and thus that beloved and supernal city be not defrauded of the number of its citizens, nay even perchance rejoice with a richer abundance.

[II] Multa enim fiunt quidem a malis contra uoluntatem Dei; sed tantae est ille sapientiae tantaeque uirtutis, ut in eos exitus siue fines, quos bonos et iustos ipse praesciuit, tendant omnia, quae uoluntati eius uidentur aduersa. Ac per hoc cum Deus mutare dicitur uoluntatem, ut quibus lenis erat uerbi gratia reddatur iratus, illi potius quam ipse mutantur et eum quodam modo mutatum in his quae patiuntur inueniunt; sicut mutatur sol oculis sauciatis et asper quodam modo ex miti et ex delectabili molestus efficitur, cum ipse apud se ipsum maneat idem qui fuit. Dicitur etiam uoluntas Dei, quam facit in cordibus oboedientium mandatis eius, de qua dicit apostolus: Deus enim est, qui operatur in uobis et uelle, sicut iustitia Dei non solum qua ipse iustus est dicitur, sed illa etiam quam in homine, qui ab illo iustificatur, facit.

[2] For many things indeed are done by the wicked against the will of God; but He is of so great wisdom and of so great virtue that all things which seem adverse to His will tend toward those outcomes or ends which He Himself foreknew to be good and just. And thus, when God is said to change His will, so that, for example, He is rendered angry toward those to whom He had been mild, they rather than He are changed, and they find Him as it were changed in the things which they undergo; just as the sun is changed to wounded eyes and, from gentle and delightful, becomes in a manner harsh and troublesome, while He remains with Himself the same as He was. The will of God is also so called which He makes in the hearts of those obedient to His mandates, of which the apostle says: “For it is God who works in you even the willing,” just as the justice of God is said not only of that by which He Himself is just, but also of that which He makes in the man who is justified by Him.

Sic et lex eius uocatur, quae potius est hominum, sed ab ipso data; nam utique homines erant, quibus ait Iesus: In lege uestra scriptum est, cum alio loco legamus: Lex Dei eius in corde eius. Secundum hanc uoluntatem, quam Deus operatur in hominibus, etiam uelle dicitur, quod non ipse uult, sed suos id uolentes facit; sicut dicitur cognouisse, quod ut cognosceretur fecit, a quibus ignorabatur. Neque enim dicente apostolo: Nunc autem cognoscentes Deum, immo cognoti a Deo, fas est ut credamus, quod eos tunc cognouerit Deus praecognitos ante constitutionem mundi; sed tunc cognouisse dictus est, quod tunc ut cognosceretur effecit.

So also his law is called “his,” which is rather of men, but given by himself; for indeed they were men to whom Jesus says, “In your law it is written,” while in another place we read: “The law of his God in his heart.” According to this will, which God operates in human beings, even “to will” is said of him—what he does not will himself, but makes his own to will; just as he is said to have “known” what he brought it about should be known by those by whom he was unknown. For with the Apostle saying, “But now, knowing God, nay rather, being known by God,” it is not right that we should believe that God then knew those whom he had foreknown before the constitution of the world; but he is said then to have known, because he then brought it about that he should be known.

De his locutionum modis iam et in superioribus libris memini disputatum. Secundum hanc ergo uoluntatem, qua Deum uelle dicimus quod alios efficit uelle, a quibus futura nesciuntur, multa uult nec facit. Multa enim uolunt fieri sancti eius ab illo inspirata sancta uoluntate, nec fiunt, sicut orant pro quibusdam pie sancteque, et quod orant non facit, cum ipse in eis hanc orandi uoluntatem sancto Spiritu suo fecerit.

Of these modes of locution I recall that there has already been dispute in the preceding books. According to this will, therefore, by which we say that God wills what he causes others to will—by whom future things are not known—he wills many things and does not do them. For his saints want many things to come to pass, by a holy will inspired by him, and they do not come to pass; just as they pray piously and holily for certain persons, and what they pray he does not do, although he himself has made in them this will of praying by his Holy Spirit.

Ac per hoc, quando secundum Deum uolunt et orant sancti, ut quisque sit saluus, possumus illo modo locutionis dicere: "Vult Deus et non facit"; ut ipsum dicamus uelle, qui ut uelint isti facit. Secundum illam uero uoluntatem suam, quae cum eius praescientia sempiterna est, profecto in caelo et in terra omnia quaecumque uoluit non solum praeterita uel praesentia, sed etiam futura iam fecit. Verum antequam ueniat tempus, quo uoluit ut fieret, quod ante tempora uniuersa praesciuit atque disposuit, dicimus: "Fiet quando Deus uoluerit"; si autem non solum tempus quo futurum est, uerum etiam utrum futurum sit ignoramus, dicimus: "Fiet, si Deus uoluerit"; non quia Deus nouam uoluntatem, quam non habuit, tunc habebit; sed quia id, quod ex aeternitate in eius inmutabili praeparatum est uoluntate, tunc erit.

And therefore, when the saints will and pray according to God, that each person be saved, we can in that mode of locution say: "God wills and does not do"; so that we may say that He Himself wills, who makes these to will. But according to that will of His which is sempiternal with His prescience, assuredly in heaven and on earth whatever He has willed, not only things past or present, but even things future, He has already done. Yet before the time comes in which He willed that there be done what He foreknew and disposed before all times, we say: "It will happen when God wills"; but if we are ignorant not only of the time when it will be, but also whether it will be, we say: "It will happen, if God wills"; not because God will then have a new will which He did not have, but because that which from eternity has been prepared in His immutable will will then be.

[III] Quapropter, ut cetera tam multa praeteream, sicut nunc in Christo uidemus impleri quod promisit Abrahae dicens: In semine tuo benedicentur omnes gentes: ita quod eidem semini eius promisit implebitur, ubi ait per prophetam: Resurgent qui erant in monumentis, et quod ait: Erit caelum nouum et terra noua, et non erunt memores priorum, nec ascendet in cor ipsorum, sed laetitiam et exultationem inuenient in ea. Ecce ego faciam Hierusalem exultationem et populum meum laetitiam; et exultabo in Hierusalem et laetabor in populo meo, et ultra non audietur in illa uox fletus. et per alium prophetam quod praenuntiauit dicens eidem prophetae: In tempore illo saluabitur populus tuus omnis quo inuentus fuerit scriptus in libro, et multi dormientium in terrae puluere (siue, ut quidam interpretati sunt, aggere) exurgent, hi in uitam aeternam et hi in opprobrium et in confusionem aeternam . et alio loco per eundem prophetam: Accipient regnum sancti Altissimi et obtinebunt illud usque on saeculum et usque in saeculum saeculorum; et paulo post: Regnum, inquit, eius regnum sempiternum; et alia quae ad hoc pertinentia in libro uicensimo posui, siue quae non posui et tamen in e.isdem litteris scripta sunt, uenient et haec, sicut ista uenerunt, quae increduli non putabant esse uentura. Idem quippe Deus utraque promisit, utraque uentura esse praedixit, quem perhorrescunt numina paganorum, etiam teste Porphyrio, nobilissimo philosopho paganorum.

[3] Wherefore, to pass by so many other things, just as now in Christ we see fulfilled what He promised to Abraham, saying: In your seed all nations shall be blessed: so what He promised to that same seed of his will be fulfilled, where He says through the prophet: They who were in the monuments shall rise again, and what He says: There shall be a new heaven and a new earth, and they will not be mindful of the former things, nor will it ascend into their heart, but they will find joy and exultation in her. Behold, I will make Jerusalem an exultation and my people a joy; and I will exult in Jerusalem and I will rejoice in my people, and no longer shall the voice of weeping be heard in her. and through another prophet what He foretold, saying to the same prophet: In that time all your people shall be saved, everyone who shall be found written in the book, and many of those sleeping in the dust of the earth (or, as some have interpreted, in the embankment) shall arise, these into eternal life and those into opprobrium and into eternal confusion. and in another place through the same prophet: The saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom and shall hold it unto the age and unto the age of ages; and a little after: His kingdom, he says, is a sempiternal kingdom; and other things pertaining to this I set forth in the twentieth book, whether those which I did not set forth and yet are written in those same letters, these too will come, just as those came, which the unbelievers did not think would come. For the same God promised both, foretold that both would come, whom the divinities of the pagans shudder at, Porphyry also bearing witness, the most noble philosopher of the pagans.

[IV] Sed uidelicet homines docti atque sapientes contra uim tantae auctoritatis, quae omnia genera hominum, sicut tanto ante praedixit, in hoc credendum sperandumque conuertit, acute sibi argumentari uidentur aduersus corporum resurrectionem et dicere quod in tertio de re publica libro a Cicerone commemoratum est. Nam cum Herculem et Romulum ex hominibus deos esse factos asseueraret: "Quorum non corpora, inquit, sunt in caelum elata; neque enim natura pateretur, ut id quod esset e terra nisi in terra maneret." Haec est magna ratio sapientium, quorum Dominus nouit cogitationes, quoniam uanae sunt. Si enim animae tantummodo essemus, id est sine ullo corpore spiritus, et in caelo habitantes terrena animalia nesciremus nobisque futurum esse diceretur, ut terrenis corporibus animandis quodam uinculo mirabili necteremur: nonne multo fortius argumentaremur id credere recusantes et diceremus naturam non pati, ut res incorporea ligamento corporeo uinciretur?

[4] But, to be sure, learned and wise men, against the force of so great an authority—which, as he foretold so long before, has converted all kinds of human beings to believing and hoping in this—seem to argue shrewdly to themselves against the resurrection of bodies and to say what is recorded by Cicero in the third book of On the Republic. For when he asserted that Hercules and Romulus were made gods from among men: “Of whom,” he says, “their bodies were not borne up into heaven; for nature would not allow that what was of earth should remain anywhere but in earth.” This is the great rationale of the wise, whose thoughts the Lord knows, because they are vain. For if we were souls only—that is, spirits without any body—and, dwelling in heaven, knew nothing of terrestrial animals, and it were said to us that our future would be to be bound by some wondrous bond for the animating of earthly bodies, would we not much more strongly argue, refusing to believe it, and say that nature does not suffer that an incorporeal thing be fettered by a corporeal ligature?

Et tamen plena est terra uegetantibus animis haec membra terrena, miro sibi modo conexa et implicita. Cur ergo eodem uolente Deo, qui fecit hoc animal, non poterit terrenum corpus in caeleste corpus attolli, si animus omni ac per hoc etiam caelesti corpore praestabilior terreno corpori potuit inligari? An terrena particula tam exigua potuit aliquid caelesti corpore melius apud se tenere, ut sensum haberet et uitam, et eam sentientem atque uiuentem dedignabitur caelum suscipere aut susceptam non poterit sustinere, cum de re sentiat et uiuat ista meliore, quam est corpus omne caeleste?

And yet the earth is full of animating souls that quicken these terrene members, marvellously conjoined and interwoven with them. Why then, by the same God willing it, who made this animal, will a terrene body not be able to be lifted up into a celestial body, if the animus, superior to every body and therefore also to a celestial body, was able to be bound to a terrene body? Or could an earthly particle so slight hold with itself something better than a celestial body, so that it might have sense and life, and will heaven disdain to receive her, sensing and living, or, once received, be unable to sustain her, since she perceives and lives by a reality better than any celestial body?

Sed ideo nunc non fit, quia nondum est tempus quo id fieri uoluit, qui hoc, quod uidendo iam uiluit, multo mirabilius quam illud, quod ab istis non creditur, fecit. Cur enim non uehementius admiramur incorporeos animos, caelesti corpore potiores, terrenis inligari corporibus quam corpora licet terrena sedibus quamuis caelestibus, tamen corporeis sublimari, nisi quia hoc uidere consueuimus et hoc sumus, illud uero nondum sumus nec aliquando adhuc uidimus? Nam profecto sobria ratione consulta mirabilioris esse diuini operis reperitur incorporalibus corporalia quodam modo attexere quam licet diuersa, quia illa caelestia, ista terrestria, tamen corpora et corpora copulare.

But for this reason it does not happen now, because the time is not yet when he willed it to be done—he who made this thing, which by being seen has already cheapened, much more wondrously than that which is not believed by those men. For why do we not more vehemently admire that incorporeal souls, superior to a celestial body, are bound to terrestrial bodies, rather than that bodies, albeit earthly, be exalted to abodes, however heavenly yet still corporeal, unless because we are accustomed to see this, and this is what we are, whereas that we are not yet, nor have we ever yet seen? For indeed, with sober reason consulted, it is found to be the more marvelous work of the divine to weave, in some manner, corporeal things to incorporeal, than—though they are diverse, because those are celestial and these terrestrial—yet to couple bodies with bodies.

[V] Sed hoc incredibile fuerit aliquando: ecce iam credidit [V] Sed hoc incredibile fuerit aliquando: ecce iam credidit mtem turbidus, fumeus, corruptibilis atque corruptor. Nec tamen corrumpit montes, in quibus iugiter aestuat, cauernasque terrarum. Verum esto, sit illi iste dissimilis, ut terrenis habitationibus congruat: cur ergo nolunt, ut credamus naturam corporum terrenorum aliquando incorruptibilem factam caelo conuenientem futuram, sicut nunc ignis corruptibilis his conuenit terris?

[5] But this may at some time have been unbelievable: behold, now it is believed [5] But this may at some time have been unbelievable: behold, now it is believed the fire, turbid, smoky, corruptible and a corruptor. Nor yet does it corrupt the mountains in which it seethes continually, and the caverns of the earth. But be it so; let this be unlike that, so that it may be congruent with earthly habitations: why then do they not want us to believe that the nature of earthly bodies will someday, having been made incorruptible, be fitting to heaven, just as now corruptible fire is fitting to these lands?

Nihil igitur afferunt ex ponderibus atque ordine elementorum, unde omnipotenti Deo, quominus faciat corpora nostra talia, ut etiam in caelo possint habitare, praescribant.

Therefore they bring forward nothing from the weights and the order of the elements, whereby they might prescribe to the omnipotent God, to prevent him from making our bodies such that they can even inhabit heaven.

[XII] Sed scrupulosissime quaerere et fidem, qua credimus resurrecturam carnem, ita quaerendo adsolent inridere: utrum fetus abortiui resurgant; et quoniam Dominus ait: Amen, dico uobis, capillus capitis uestri non peribit, utrum statura et robur aequalia futura sint omnibus an diuersae corporum quantitates. Si enim aequalitas erit corporum, unde habebunt quod hic non habuerunt in mole corporis illi abortiui, si resurgent et ipsi? Aut si non resurgent, quia nec nati sunt, sed effusi, eandem quaestionem de paruulis uersant, unde illis mensura corporis, quam nunc defuisse uidemus, accedat, cum in hac aetate moriuntur.

[12] But to inquire most scrupulously, and thus by such inquiry to mock the faith by which we believe the flesh will rise again: whether aborted fetuses will rise; and since the Lord says: “Amen, I say to you, the hair of your head will not perish,” whether stature and strength will be equal for all, or the quantities of bodies diverse. For if there will be equality of bodies, whence will those aborted have, if they also rise, what they did not have here in the mass of a body? Or if they will not rise, because they were not born but poured out, they turn the same question about little ones, whence there shall accrue to them the measure of body which we now see to have been lacking, when they die at this age.

Neque enim dicturi sumus eos non resurrecturos, qui non solum generationis, uerum etiam regenerationis capaces sunt. Deinde interrogant, quem modum ipsa aequalitas habitura sit. Si enim tam magni et tam longi erunt omnes, quam fuerunt quicumque hic fuerunt maximi atque longissimi, non solum de paruulis, sed de plurimis quaerunt, unde illis accessurum sit, quod hic defuit, si hoc quisque recipiat, quod hic habuit; si autem, quod ait apostolus, occursuros nos omnes in mensuram aetatis plenitudinis Christi, et illud alterum: Quos praedestinauit conformes <fieri> imaginis filii sui, sic intellegendum est, ut statura et modus corporis Christi omnium, qui in regno eius erunt, humanorum corporum sit futurus: "Multis erit, inquiunt, de magnitudine et longitudine detrahendum corporis; et ubi iam erit: capillus capitis uestri non peribit, si de ipsa corporis quantitate tam multum peribit?" Quamuis et de ipsis capillis possit inquiri, utrum redeat quidquid tondentibus decidit.

For we are not going to say that those will not rise again who are capable not only of generation but also of regeneration. Then they ask what measure that very equality will have. For if all are going to be as great and as tall as were whoever here were the greatest and tallest, they ask not only about the little ones, but about very many others, whence there will accrue to them what here was lacking, if each one receives what he had here; but if, as the Apostle says, that we shall all come to the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ, and that other saying: those whom he predestined to be made conform to the image of his Son, is to be understood thus, that the stature and mode of Christ’s body will be the future standard of all human bodies who will be in his kingdom: “For many,” they say, “there will have to be subtracted from the magnitude and length of the body; and where then will be: ‘the hair of your head will not perish,’ if from the very quantity of the body so much will perish?” Although about the hairs themselves it can also be inquired whether whatever fell to the shearers returns.

Quod si rediturum est, quis non exhorreat illam deformitatem? Nam hoc et de unguibus uidetur necessario secuturum, ut redeat tam multum quod corporis curatura desecuit. Et ubi erit decus, quod certe maius, quam in ista esse corruptione potuit, in illa iam inmortalitate esse debebit?

But if it is going to return, who would not shudder at that deformity? For this too seems necessarily to follow concerning the nails, that as much would return as the body’s grooming has cut away. And where will the grace be, which surely ought to be greater in that immortality than it could be in this corruption?

Si autem non redibit, ergo peribit. Quo modo igitur, inquiunt, capillus capitis non peribit? De macie quoque uel pinguedine similiter disputant.

If, however, it will not return, then it will perish. How, therefore, they say, will the hair of the head not perish? About emaciation or fatness they likewise dispute.

Nam si aequales omnes erunt, non utique alii macri, alii pingues erunt. Accedet ergo aliis aliquid, aliis minuetur; ac per hoc non, quod erat, recipiendum, sed alicubi addendum est, quod non fuit, et alicubi perdendum, quod fuit.

For if all will be equal, to be sure some will not be lean and others fat. Therefore something will be added to some, to others it will be diminished; and through this it is not what was that is to be received back, but somewhere there must be added what was not, and somewhere lost what was.

De ipsis etiam corruptionibus et dilapsionibus corporum mortuorum, cum aliud uertatur in puluerem, in auras aliud exhaletur, sint quos bestiae, sint quos ignis absumit, naufragio uel quibuscumque aquis ita quidam pereant, ut eorum carnes in umorem putredo dissoluat, non mediocriter permouentur atque omnia ista recolligi in carnem et redintegrari posse non credunt. Consectantur etiam quasque foeditates et uitia, siue accidant siue nascantur, ubi et monstrosos partus cum horrore atque inrisione commemorant, et requirunt, quaenam cuiusque deformitatis resurrectio sit futura. Si enim nihil tale redire in corpus hominis dixerimus, responsionem nostram de locis uulnerum, cum quibus Dominum Christum resurrexisse praedicamus, se confutaturos esse praesumunt.

About the very corruptions and dilapsions of dead bodies—when one thing is turned into dust, another is exhaled into the airs; there are those whom beasts consume, there are those whom fire consumes; and by shipwreck or by whatever waters some likewise perish, so that putrefaction dissolves their flesh into moisture—they are moved not moderately and do not believe that all these things can be re-collected into flesh and be reintegrated. They also chase after all sorts of foulnesses and vices, whether they happen or are inborn, where they recount monstrous births with horror and derision, and they inquire what the resurrection of each deformity will be. For if we say that nothing of the sort will return into a man’s body, they presume that they will confute our answer about the sites of the wounds, with which we proclaim that the Lord Christ rose again.

Sed inter haec omnia quaestio difficillima illa proponitur, in cuius carnem reditura sit caro, qua corpus alterius uescentis humana uiscera fame compellente nutritur. In carnem quippe conuersa est eius, qui talibus uixit alimentis, et ea, quae macies ostenderat, detrimenta suppleuit. Vtrum ergo illi redeat homini cuius caro prius fuit, an illi potius cuius postea facta est, ad hoc percontantur, ut fidem resurrectionis inludant ac sic animae humanae aut alternantes, sicut Plato, ueras infelicitates falsasque promittant beatitudines aut post multas itidem per diuersa corpora reuolutiones aliquando tamen eam, sicut Porphyrius, finire miserias et ad eas numquam redire fateantur; non tamen corpus habendo inmortale, sed corpus omne fugiendo.

But amid all these things that most difficult question is proposed: into whose flesh the flesh is going to return, in the case where the body of another, feeding upon human viscera, is nourished, being compelled by hunger. For it has been converted into the flesh of him who lived on such aliments, and it supplied the losses which leanness had shown. Whether, therefore, it returns to that man whose flesh it first was, or rather to him of whom later it was made, they inquire to this end, that they may mock the faith of the resurrection, and thus either—alternating, as Plato—promise to the human soul true infelicities and false beatitudes, or—after many revolutions likewise through diverse bodies—at length nevertheless, as Porphyry, confess that it ends its miseries and never returns to them; not, however, by having an immortal body, but by fleeing every body.

[XIII] Ad haec ergo, quae ab eorum parte contraria me digerente mihi uidentur opposita, misericordia Dei meis nisibus opem ferente respondeam. Abortiuos fetus, qui, cum iam uixissent in utero, ibi sunt mortui, resurrecturos ut adfirmare, ita negare non audeo; quamuis non uideam quo modo ad eos non pertineat resurrectio mortuorum, si non eximuntur de numero mortuorum. Aut enim non omnes mortui resurgent et erunt aliquae humanae animae si ne corporibus in aeternum, quae corpora humana, quamuis intra uiscera materna, gestarunt; aut si omnes animae humanae recipient resurgentia sua corpora, quae habuerunt, ubicumque uiuentia et morientia reliquerunt, non inuenio quem ad modum dicam ad resurrectionem non pertinere mortuorum quoscumque mortuos etiam in uteris matrum.

[13] To these things, then, which from their side, as I set in order the contrary arguments, seem to me to be opposed, let me respond, the mercy of God bringing aid to my endeavors. As for abortive fetuses, who, when they had already lived in the womb, died there, I do not dare as much to affirm as to deny that they will rise again; although I do not see how the resurrection of the dead does not pertain to them, if they are not removed from the number of the dead. For either not all the dead will rise again, and there will be some human souls without bodies forever, who bore human bodies, although within the maternal viscera; or, if all human souls receive their own bodies rising again, which they had, wherever, living and dying, they left them, I do not find in what way I might say that the resurrection of the dead does not pertain to whatever dead, even those in the wombs of mothers.

Sed utrumlibet de his quisque sentiat, quod de iam natis infantibus dixerimus, hoc etiam de illis intellegendum est, si resurgent.

But whichever of these each one may think, what we have said about infants already born is to be understood of them also, if they shall rise again.

[XIV] Quid ergo de infantibus dicturi sumus, nisi quia non in ea resurrecturi sunt corporis exiguitate, qua mortui, sed quod eis tardius accessurum erat tempore, hoc sunt illi Dei opere miro atque celerrimo recepturi? In sententia quippe Domini, qua ait: Capillus capitis uestri non peribit, dictum est non defuturum esse quod fuit, non autem negatum est adfuturum esse quod defuit. Defuit autem infanti mortuo perfecta quantitas sui corporis; perfecto quippe infanti deest utique perfectio magnitudinis corporalis, quae cum accesserit, statura iam longior esse non possit.

[14] What, then, are we to say about infants, except that they are not going to rise again in that exiguity of body in which they died, but that which would have come to them later in time, this they will receive by the wondrous and most swift work of God? For in the sentence of the Lord, wherein he says: “A hair of your head will not perish,” it was said that what was will not be lacking; but it was not denied that what was lacking will be present. Now to an infant who died there was lacking the perfect quantity of its body; for indeed to a complete infant there is, of course, lacking the perfection of corporeal magnitude, which, once it has been added, the stature can no longer be increased in length.

Hunc perfectionis modum sic habent omnes, ut cum illo concipiantur atque nascantur; sed habent in ratione, non mole; sicut ipsa membra omnia iam sunt latenter in semine, cum etiam natis nonnulla adhuc desint, sicut dentes ac si quid eius modi. In qua ratione uniuscuiusque materiae indita corporali iam quodam modo, ut ita dicam, liciatum uidetur esse, quod nondum est, immo quod latet, sed accessu temporis erit uel potius apparebit. In hac ergo infans iam breuis aut longus est, qui breuis longusue futurus est.

All have this mode of perfection in such a way that they are conceived and born with it; but they have it in reason, not in mass; just as all the members are already latent in the seed, although in those even when born some things are still lacking, such as teeth and whatever of that sort. In which rationale the bodily material implanted in each already, in a certain manner, so to speak, seems licensed to be what is not yet—rather, what lies hidden—but by the accession of time will be, or rather will appear. In this respect, therefore, the infant is already short or tall, who will be going to be short or tall.

Secundum hanc rationem profecto in resurrectione corporis detrimenta corporis non timemus, quia, etsi aequalitas futura esset omnium, ita ut omnes usque ad giganteas magnitudines peruenirent, ne illi, qui maximi fuerunt, minus haberent aliquid in statura, quod eis contra sententiam Christi periret, qui dixit nec capillum capitis esse periturum, Creatori utique, qui creauit cuncta de nihilo, quo modo deesse posset unde adderet quod addendum esse mirus artifex nosset?

According to this reasoning, assuredly in the resurrection of the body we do not fear detriments of the body, because even if there were going to be an equality of all, such that all would arrive even to gigantic magnitudes, lest those who were the greatest should have something less in stature—something which would perish for them contrary to the sentence of Christ, who said that not even a hair of the head shall perish—to the Creator, surely, who created all things out of nothing, how could there be lacking any source whence he might add what the wondrous artificer would know ought to be added?

[XV] Sed utique Christus in ea mensura corporis, in qua mortuus est, resurrexit, nec fas est dicere, cum resurrectionis omnium tempus uenerit, accessuram corpori eius eam magnitudinem, quam non habuit, quando in ea discipulis, in qua illis erat notus, apparuit, ut longissimis fieri possit aequalis. Si autem dixerimus ad dominici corporis modum etiam quorumque maiora corpora redigenda, peribit de multorum corporibus plurimum, cum ipse nec capillum periturum esse promiserit. Restat ergo, ut suam recipiat quisque mensuram, quam uel habuit in iuuentute, etiamsi senex est mortuus, uel fuerat habiturus, si est ante defunctus, atque illud, quod commemorauit apostolus de mensura aetatis plenitudinis Christi, aut propter aliud intellegamus dictum esse, id est, ut illi capiti in populis Christianis accedente omnium perfectione membrorum aetatis eius mensura compleatur, aut, si hoc de resurrectione corporum dictum est, sic accipiamus dictum, ut nec infra nec ultra iuuenalem formam resurgant corpora mortuorum, sed in eius aetate et robore, usque ad quam Christum hic peruenisse cognouimus (circa triginta quippe annos definierunt esse etiam saeculi huius doctissimi homines iuuentutem; quae cum fuerit spatio proprio terminata, inde iam hominem in detrimenta uergere grauioris ac senilis aetatis); et ideo non esse dictum in mensuram corporis uel in mensuram staturae, sed in mensuram aetatis plenitudinis Christi.

[15] But assuredly Christ rose again in that measure of body in which he died, nor is it right to say that, when the time of the resurrection of all shall have come, there will be added to his body that magnitude which he did not have when he appeared to the disciples in that form in which he was known to them, so that he might be made equal to the very tallest. But if we should say that even the larger bodies of anyone are to be reduced to the mode of the Lord’s body, very much would perish from the bodies of many, since he himself promised that not even a hair would perish. It remains, therefore, that each one should receive his own measure, which either he had in youth, even if he died an old man, or was going to have, if he died beforehand; and that which the Apostle commemorated about “the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ,” let us understand to have been said either for another reason, that is, that for that head, as in Christian peoples there accrues the perfection of all the members, the measure of his age is made complete; or, if this was said about the resurrection of bodies, let us take it thus, that the bodies of the dead rise again neither below nor beyond the youthful form, but in that age and robustness up to which we have known that Christ came here (indeed, the most learned men even of this age have defined youth as about thirty years; which, when it has been terminated by its proper span, from then a man already inclines into the detriments of a heavier and senile age); and therefore that it is not said into the measure of the body or into the measure of stature, but into the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ.

[XVI] Illud etiam, quod ait praedestinatos conformes imaginis filii Dei, potest et secundum interiorem hominem intellegi (unde nobis alio loco dicit: Nolite conformari huic saeculo, sed reformamini in nouitate mentis uestrae; ubi ergo reformamur, ne conformemur huic saeculo, ibi conformamur Dei filio); potest et sic accipi, ut, quem ad modum nobis ille mortalitate, ita nos illi efficiamur inmortalitate conformes; quod quidem et ad ipsam resurrectionem corporum pertinet. Si autem etiam in his uerbis, qua forma resurrectura sint corpora, sumus admoniti, sicut illa mensura, ita et ista conformatio non quantitatis intellegenda est, sed aetatis. Resurgent itaque omnes tam magni corpore, quam uel erant uel futuri erant aetate iuuenali; quamuis nihil oberit, etiamsi erit infantilis uel senilis corporis forma, ubi nec mentis nec ipsius corporis ulla remanebit infirmitas.

[16] That also which he says, that the predestined are conform to the image of the Son of God, can be understood according to the inner man (whence he says to us in another place: Do not be conformed to this age, but be re-formed in the newness of your mind; where therefore we are re-formed, lest we be conformed to this age, there we are conformed to the Son of God); it can also be taken thus, that, just as he was like us in mortality, so we be made conform to him in immortality; which indeed pertains even to the very resurrection of bodies. But if in these words as well we are admonished as to in what form the bodies are going to rise, just as that measure, so also this conformation is to be understood not of quantity but of age. Therefore all will rise as great in body as they either were or were going to be in youthful age; although nothing will hinder, even if there will be the form of an infantile or senile body, where no infirmity either of the mind or of the body itself will remain.

Vnde etiam si quis in eo corporis modo, in quo defunctus est, resurrecturum unumquemque contendit, non est cum illo laboriosa contradictione pugnandum.

Whence also, if anyone contends that each person will be resurrected in that mode of body in which he died, there is no need to fight against him with laborious contradiction.

[XVII] Nonnulli propter hoc, quod dictum est: Donec occurramus omnes in uirum perfectum, in mensuram aetatis plenitudinis Christi, et: Conformes imaginis filii Dei, nec in sexu femineo resurrecturas feminas credunt, sed in uirili omnes aiunt, quoniam Deus solum uirum fecit ex limo, feminam ex uiro. Sed mihi melius sapere uidentur, qui utrumque sexum resurrecturum esse non dubitant. Non enim libido ibi erit, quae confusionis est causa.

[17] Some, on account of this which has been said: Until we all meet into a perfect man, into the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ, and: Conformed to the image of the Son of God, do not believe that females will rise in the female sex, but say that all will be in the male, since God made only the man from clay, the woman from the man. But they seem to me to be wiser who do not doubt that both sexes will rise. For there will be no libido there, which is the cause of confusion.

Nam priusquam peccassent, nudi erant, et non confundebantur uir et femina. Corporibus ergo illis uitia detrahentur, natura seruabitur. Non est autem uitium sexus femineus, sed natura, quae tunc quidem et a concubitu et a partu inmunis erit; erunt tamen membra feminea, non adcommodata usui ueteri, sed decori nouo, quo non alliciatur aspicientis concupiscentia, quae nulla erit, sed Dei laudetur sapientia atque clementia, qui et quod non erat fecit et liberauit a corruptione quod fecit.

For before they had sinned, they were naked, and the man and the woman were not put to shame. Therefore from those bodies the vices will be removed, the nature will be preserved. Now the female sex is not a vice, but a nature, which then indeed will be immune both from concubitus and from parturition; nevertheless there will be female members, not accommodated to the old use, but to a new decorum, whereby the concupiscence of the beholder is not enticed—which will not exist—but the wisdom and clemency of God are praised, who both made what was not, and liberated from corruption what he made.

Vt enim in exordio generis humani de latere uiri dormientis costa detracta femina fieret, Christum et ecclesiam tali facto iam tunc prophetari oportebat. Sopor quippe ille uiri mors erat Christi, cuius exanimis in cruce pendentis latus lancea perforatum est atque inde sanguis et aqua defluxit; quae sacramenta esse nouimus, quibus aedificatur ecclesia. Nam hoc etiam uerbo scriptura usa est, ubi non legitur "formauit" aut "finxit", sed: Aedificauit eam in mulierem; unde et apostolus aedificationem dicit corporis Christi, quod est ecclesia.

For just as, in the exordium of the human race, from the side of the sleeping man a rib was drawn so that the woman might be made, it was fitting that by such a deed Christ and the Church should already then be prophesied. For that sleep of the man was the death of Christ, whose side, as he hung lifeless upon the cross, was pierced with a lance, and from there blood and water flowed down— which we know to be sacraments, by which the Church is edified. For even this very word Scripture used, where it is not read “formed” or “fashioned,” but: “He built her into a woman”; whence also the Apostle speaks of the edification of the body of Christ, which is the Church.

Creatura est ergo Dei femina sicut uir; sed ut de uiro fieret, unitas commendata; ut autem illo modo fieret, Christus, ut dictum est, et ecclesia figurata est. Qui ergo utrumque sexum instituit, utrumque restituet. Denique ipse Iesus interrogatus a Sadducaeis, qui negabant resurrectionem, cuius septem fratrum erit uxor, quam singuli habuerunt, dum quisque eorum uellet defuncti semen, sicut lex praeceperat, excitare: Erratis, inquit, nescientes scripturas, neque uirtutem Dei; et cum locus esset, ut diceret: "De qua enim me interrogatis, uir erit etiam ipsa, non mulier", non hoc dixit, sed dixit: In resurrectione enim neque nubent neque uxores ducent, sed sunt sicut angeli Dei in caelo,. aequales utique angelis inmortalitate ac felicitate, non carne; sicut nec resurrectione, qua non indiguerunt angeli, quoniam nec mori potuerunt.

Therefore the woman is a creature of God just as the man; but in order that she might be made from the man, unity was commended; and in order that she might be made in that manner, Christ, as has been said, and the church were prefigured. He, therefore, who instituted both sexes, will restore both. Finally, Jesus himself, when questioned by the Sadducees, who denied the resurrection, as to whose wife she will be of the seven brothers, whom each had, while each of them wished to raise up the seed of the deceased, as the law had prescribed: You err, he says, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God; and although there was room for him to say: "As for her about whom you ask me, she too will be a man, not a woman", he did not say this, but said: In the resurrection, indeed, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels of God in heaven,. equal, of course, to the angels in immortality and felicity, not in flesh; just as not in the resurrection, of which the angels had no need, since they could not die.

Nuptias ergo Dominus futuras esse negauit in resurrectione, non feminas, et ibi negauit, ubi talis quaestio uertebatur, ut eam negato sexu muliebri celeriore facilitate dissolueret, si eum ibi praenosceret non futurum; immo etiam futurum esse firmauit dicendo: Non nubent, quod ad feminas pertinet, nec uxores ducent, quod ad uiros. Erunt ergo, quae uel nubere hic solent, uel ducere uxores; sed ibi non facient.

Therefore the Lord denied that nuptials would exist in the resurrection, not women; and he denied it there, where such a question was being turned, so that he might, with swifter facility, resolve it by the female sex being denied, if he foreknew that it would not be there in the future; nay rather, he even affirmed that it would be there by saying: “They will not marry,” which pertains to females, “nor will they take wives,” which pertains to males. Therefore there will be those who here are accustomed either to marry or to lead wives; but there they will not do so.

[XVIII] Proinde quod ait apostolus, occursuros nos omnes in uirum perfectum, totius ipsius circumstantiam lectionis considerare debemus, quae ita se habet: Qui descendit, inquit, ipse est et qui ascendit super omnes caelos, ut adimpleret omnia. Et ipse dedit quosdam quidem apostolos, quosdam autem prophetas, quosdam uero euangelistas, quosdam autem pastores et doctores ad consummationem sanctorum in opus ministerii, in aedificationem corporis Christi, donec occurramus omnes in unitatem fidei et agnitionem filii Dei, in uirum perfectum, in mensuram aetatis plenitudinis Christi,. ut ultra non simus paruuli iactati et circumlati omni uento doctrinae, in inlusione hominum, in astutia ad machinationem erroris, ueritatem autem facientes in caritate augeamur in illo per omnia, qui est caput Christus,. ex quo totum corpus conexum et compactum per omnem tactum subministrationis secundum operationem in mensuram uniuscuiusque partis incrementum corporis facit in aedificationem sui in caritate. Ecce qui est uir perfectus, caput et corpus, quod constat omnibus membris, quae suo tempore complebuntur, cotidie tamen eidem corpori accedunt, dum aedificatur ecclesia, cui dicitur: Vos autem estis corpus Christi et membra, et alibi: Pro corpore, inquit, eius quod est ecclesia, itemque alibi: Vnus panis, unum corpus multi sumus.

[18] Accordingly, as the apostle says that we shall all meet into a perfect man, we must consider the whole circumstance of that very reading, which is as follows: He who descended, he says, is the same also who ascended above all the heavens, that he might fulfill all things. And he himself gave some indeed as apostles, but some as prophets, some truly as evangelists, but some as pastors and doctors, for the consummation of the saints, for the work of ministry, for the edification of the body of Christ, until we may all meet into the unity of faith and the agnition of the Son of God, into a perfect man, into the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ,. so that we may no longer be little children tossed and carried about by every wind of doctrine, in the illusion of men, in craftiness unto the machination of error; but doing the truth in charity we may be increased in him through all things, who is the head, Christ,. from whom the whole body, connected and compacted through every joint of subministration according to the operation in the measure of each single part, makes the increase of the body for the edification of itself in charity. Behold who is the perfect man: the head and the body, which consists of all the members, which will be completed in their time; yet daily they are added to the same body, while the church is being built, to which it is said: But you are the body of Christ and members, and elsewhere: For his body, he says, which is the church, and likewise elsewhere: One bread, one body we many are.

De cuius corporis aedificatione et. hic dictum est: Ad consummationem sanctorum in opus ministerii, in aedificationem corporis Christi ac deinde subiectum unde nunc agimus: Donec occurramus omnes in unitatem fidei et agnitionem filii Dei, in uirum perfectum, in mensuram aetatis plenitudinis Christi, et cetera; donec eadem mensura in quo corpore intellegenda esset, ostenderet dicens: Augeamur in illo per omnia, qui est caput Christus, ex quo totum corpus conexum et compactum per omnem tactum subministrationis secundum operationem on mensuram uniuscuiusque partis. Sicut ergo est mensura uniuscuiusque partis, ita totius corporis, quod omnibus suis partibus constat, est utique mensura plenitudinis, de qua dictum est: In mensuram aetatis plenitudinis Christi. Quam plenitudinem etiam illo commemorauit loco, ubi ait de Christo: Et ipsum dedit caput super omnia ecclesiae, quae est corpus eius, plenitudo eius, qui omnia in omnibus impletur.

Of the edification of which body it is also said here: For the consummation of the saints unto a work of ministry, unto the edification of the body of Christ; and then there is subjoined that whereof we are now treating: Until we all meet into the unity of faith and the recognition of the Son of God, into a perfect man, into the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ, and the rest; until he should show in which body that same measure is to be understood, saying: Let us grow in him through all things, who is the head, Christ, from whom the whole body, knit together and compacted through every contact of supply, according to the operation in the measure of each part. Therefore as there is a measure of each part, so of the whole body, which consists of all its parts, there is assuredly a measure of fullness, of which it was said: Into the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ. Which fullness he also commemorated in that place where he says of Christ: And him he gave as head over all things to the Church, which is his body, his fullness, who is filled all in all.

Verum si hoc ad resurrectionis formam, in qua erit unusquisque, referendum esset, quid nos impediret nominato uiro intellegere et feminam, ut uirum pro homine positum acciperemus? sicut in eo quod dictum est: Beatus uir qui timet Dominum, utique ibi sunt et feminae, quae timent Dominum.

Yet if this were to be referred to the form of the resurrection, in which each one will be, what would hinder us, with “man” named, from understanding the woman also, so that we might accept “man” as set for “human being”? just as in that which has been said: “Blessed is the man who fears the Lord,” surely women too are there who fear the Lord.

[XIX] Quid iam respondeam de capillis atque unguibus? Semel quippe intellecto ita nihil periturum esse de corpore, ut deforme nihil sit in corpore, simul intellegitur ea, quae deformem factura fuerant enormitatem, massae ipsi accessura esse, non locis in quibus membrorum forma turpetur. Velut si de limo uas fieret, quod rursus in eundem limum redactum totum de toto iterum fieret, non esset necesse ut illa pars limi, quae in ansa fuerat, ad ansam rediret, aut quae fundum fecerat, ipsa rursus faceret fundum,.dum tamen totum reuerteretur in totum, id est, totus ille limus in totum uas nulla sui perdita parte remearet.

[19] What am I now to answer about hair and nails? For once it has been understood that nothing will perish from the body in such a way that nothing deformed will be in the body, at the same time it is understood that the things which would have produced a deformed enormity will accede to the mass itself, not to the places where the form of the members would be disfigured. As if a vessel were made from clay, which, reduced back again into the same clay, were made whole out of the whole again, it would not be necessary that that part of clay which had been in the handle should return to the handle, or that that which had made the bottom should itself again make the bottom, while nevertheless the whole should revert into the whole, that is, that that whole clay should go back into the whole vessel with no part of itself lost.

Quapropter si capilli totiens tonsi unguesue desecti ad sua loca deformiter redeunt, non redibunt; nec tamen cuique resurgenti peribunt, quia in eandem carnem, ut quemcumque ibi locum corporis teneant, seruata partium congruentia materiae mutabilitate uertentur. Quamuis quod ait Dominus: Capillus capitis uestri non peribit, non de longitudine, sed de numero capillorum dictum multo aptius possit intellegi; unde et alibi dicit: Capilli capitis uestri numerati sunt <omnes> Neque hoc ideo dixerim, quod aliquid existimem corpori cuique periturum, quod naturaliter inerat; sed quod deforme natum fuerat (non utique ob aliud, nisi ut hinc quoque ostenderetur, quam sit poenalis condicio ista mortalium), sic esse rediturum, ut seruata integritate substantiae deformitas pereat. Si enim statuam potest artifex homo, quam propter aliquam causam deformem fecerat, conflare et pulcherrimam reddere, ita ut nihil inde substantiae, sed sola deformitas pereat, ac si quid in illa figura priore indecenter extabat nec parilitate partium congruebat, non de toto, unde fecerat, amputare atque separare, sed ita conspergere uniuerso atque miscere, ut nec foeditatem faciat nec minuat quantitatem: quid de omnipotenti artifice sentiendum est?

Wherefore, if hairs so often shorn and nails cut off return to their places in a misshapen way, they will not return; yet neither will they perish for anyone rising again, because into the same flesh, so as to hold whatever place of the body there, with the congruence of the parts preserved, they will be turned by the mutability of the material. Although what the Lord says: “The hair of your head shall not perish,” can much more fittingly be understood as said not of the length but of the number of the hairs; whence elsewhere he says: “The hairs of your head are numbered <all>.” Nor have I said this for this reason, that I think anything in anyone’s body that was naturally inherent will perish; but that what had been born deformed (surely for no other reason except that from this too it might be shown how penal this condition of mortals is) will so return that, with the integrity of the substance preserved, the deformity may perish. For if a human artificer can melt down a statue which for some cause he had made deformed and render it most beautiful, in such wise that nothing of the substance perishes therefrom, but only the deformity, and if anything in that earlier figure projected indecently and did not agree with the parity of the parts, not to cut off and separate it from the whole whence he had made it, but so to sprinkle it through and mix it with the whole as to make neither foulness nor diminish quantity: what is to be thought about the omnipotent Artificer?

Ergone non poterit quasque deformitates humanorum corporum, non modo usitatas, uerum etiam raras atque monstrosas, quae huic miserae uitae congruunt, abhorrent autem ab illa futura felicitate sanctorum, sic auferre ac perdere, ut, quascumque earum faciunt etsi naturalia, tamen indecora excrementa substantiae corporalis, nulla eius deminutione tolluntur?

So then, will He not be able to take away and do away with whatever deformities of human bodies, not only the usual, but even the rare and monstrous ones—which are congruent with this wretched life, but are abhorrent to that future felicity of the saints—in such a way that whatever of them constitute, though natural, yet indecorous excrements of bodily substance are removed with no diminution of it?

Ac per hoc non est macris pinguibusque metuendum, ne ibi etiam tales sint, quales si possent nec hic esse uoluissent. Omnis enim corporis pulchritudo est partium congruentia cum quadam coloris suauitate. Vbi autem non est partium congruentia, aut ideo quid offendit quia prauum est, aut ideo quia parum, aut ideo quia nimium.

And therefore the thin and the fat need not be afraid, lest there too they be such as, if they could, they would not have wished to be here. For all beauty of the body is a congruence of parts with a certain suavity of color. But where there is not a congruence of parts, something offends either for this reason, because it is crooked, or for this reason, because it is too little, or for this reason, because it is too much.

Proinde nulla erit deformitas, quam facit incongruentia partium, ubi et quae praua sunt corrigentur, et quod minus est quam decet, unde Creator nouit, inde supplebitur, et quod plus est quam decet, materiae seruata integritate detrahetur. Coloris porro suauitas quanta erit, ubi iusti fulgebunt sicut sol in regno Patris sui! Quae claritas in Christi corpore, cum resurrexit, ab oculis discipulorum potius abscondita fuisse quam defuisse credenda est.

Accordingly there will be no deformity which the incongruity of the parts makes, where both the things that are crooked will be corrected, and what is less than is fitting, whence the Creator knows, from there will be supplemented, and what is more than is fitting, with the integrity of the material preserved, will be taken away. Moreover, how great will be the suavity of color, where the just will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father! That brightness in the body of Christ, when he rose again, is to be believed to have been hidden from the eyes of the disciples rather than to have been lacking.

Non enim eam ferret humanus atque infirmus aspectus, quando ille a suis ita deberet adtendi, ut posset agnosci. Quo pertinuit etiam, ut contrectantibus ostenderet suorum uulnerum cicatrices, ut etiam cibum potumque sumeret, non alimentorum indigentia, sed ea qua et hoc poterat potestate. Cum autem aliquid non uidetur, quamuis adsit, a quibus alia, quae pariter adsunt, uidentur, sicut illam claritatem dicimus adfuisse non uisam, a quibus alia uidebantur: *a)orasi/ Graece dicitur, quod nostri interpretes Latine dicere non ualentes in libro geneseos caecitatem interpretati sunt.

For the human and infirm sight would not have borne it, since he ought to be attended by his own in such a way that he could be recognized. Whereunto it also pertained that he showed to those handling him the cicatrices of his wounds, and that he even took food and drink, not from indigence of aliment, but by the power by which he could do this as well. But when something is not seen, although it is present, by those by whom other things that are likewise present are seen—just as we say that that brightness was present yet not seen, by those by whom other things were seen—*a)orasi/ it is called in Greek, which our interpreters, not being able to say it in Latin, translated as “blindness” in the book of Genesis.

Hanc enim sunt passi Sodomitae, quando quaerebant ostium iusti uiri nec poterant inuenire. Quae si fuisset caecitas, qua fit ut nihil possit uideri, non ostium qua ingrederentur, sed duces itineris a quibus inde abducerentur, inquirerent.

For the Sodomites suffered this when they were seeking the door of the just man and could not find it. But if it had been blindness, by which it comes about that nothing can be seen, they would be inquiring not for the door by which they might enter, but for guides of the way by whom they might be led away from there.

Nescio quo autem modo sic afficimur amore martyrum beatorum, ut uelimus in illo regno in eorum corporibus uidere uulnerum cicatrices, quae pro Christi nomine pertulerunt; et fortasse uidebimus. Non enim deformitas in eis, sed dignitas erit, et quaedam, quamuis in corpore, non corporis, sed uirtutis pulchritudo fulgebit. Nec ideo tamen si aliqua martyribus amputata et ablata sunt membra, sine ipsis membris erunt in resurrectione mortuorum, quibus dictum est: Capillus capitis uestri non peribit.

I know not by what manner, however, we are so affected by love of the blessed martyrs, that we should wish in that kingdom to see in their bodies the scars of the wounds which they bore for the name of Christ; and perhaps we shall see them. For there will be not deformity in them, but dignity, and a certain beauty, although in the body, yet not of the body, but of virtue, will shine forth. Nor therefore, if some limbs have been amputated and taken away from the martyrs, will they be without those very limbs in the resurrection of the dead, to whom it has been said: The hair of your head will not perish.

Sed si hoc decebit in illo nouo saeculo, ut indicia gloriosorum uulnerum in illa inmortali carne cernantur, ubi membra, ut praeciderentur, percussa uel secta sunt, ibi cicatrices, sed tamen eisdem membris redditis, non perditis, apparebunt. Quamuis itaque omnia quae acciderunt corpori uitia tunc non erunt, non sunt tamen deputanda uel appellanda uitia uirtutis indicia.

But if this shall be fitting in that new age, that the indications of glorious wounds be discerned in that immortal flesh, where the limbs, so that they might be cut off, were struck or cleft, there the scars—yet with the same limbs restored, not lost—will appear. Although, therefore, all the defects that befell the body will not then exist, nevertheless the indications of virtue are not to be reckoned or called defects.

[XX] Absit autem, ut ad resuscitanda corpora uitaeque reddenda non possit omnipotentia Creatoris omnia reuocare, quae uel bestiae uel ignis absumpsit, uel in puluerem cineremue conlapsum uel in umorem solutum uel in auras est exhalatum. Absit ut sinus ullus secretumque naturae ita recipiat aliquid subtractum sensibus nostris, ut omnium Creatoris aut cognitionem lateat aut effugiat potestatem. Deum certe uolens, sicut poterat, definire Cicero, tantus auctor ipsorum: "Mens quaedam est, inquit, soluta et libera, secreta ab omni concretione mortali, omnia sentiens et mouens ipsaque praedita motu sempiterno." Hoc autem repperit in doctrinis magnorum philosophorum.

[20] Far be it, however, that, for the resurrecting of bodies and the restoring of life, the omnipotence of the Creator should not be able to call back all things which either beasts or fire have consumed, or that have collapsed into dust or ash, or have been dissolved into moisture, or have been exhaled into the airs. Far be it that any bosom or secret of nature should so receive something withdrawn from our senses as either to lie hidden from the cognition of the Creator of all things or to escape His power. Cicero, certainly wishing, as he was able, to define God, so great an authority of theirs, says: "There is a certain mind," he says, "loosed and free, separated from every mortal concretion, sensing and moving all things, and itself endowed with sempiternal motion." And this he found in the doctrines of the great philosophers.

Vt igitur secundum ipsos loquar, quo modo aliquid uel latet omnia sentientem uel inreuocabiliter fugit omnia mouentem?

So then, that I may speak according to them, how does anything either lie hidden from the one perceiving all, or irrevocably escape the one moving all?

Vnde iam etiam quaestio illa soluenda est, quae difficilior uidetur ceteris, ubi quaeritur, cum caro mortui hominis etiam alterius fit uiuentis caro, cui potius eorum in resurrectione reddatur. Si enim quispiam confectus fame atque compulsus uescatur cadaueribus hominum, quod malum aliquotiens accidisse et uetus testatur historia et nostrorum temporum infelicia experimenta docuerunt: num quisquam ueridica ratione contendet totum digestum fuisse per imos meatus, nihil inde in eius carnem mutatum atque conuersum, cum ipsa macies, quae fuit et non est, satis indicet quae illis escis detrimenta suppleta sint? Iam itaque aliqua paulo ante praemisi, quae ad istum quoque nodum soluendum ualere debebunt.

Whence now also that question must be solved, which seems more difficult than the rest, where it is asked, when the flesh of a dead man also becomes the flesh of another living man, to which of them rather it should be restored in the resurrection. For if someone, worn out by hunger and compelled, should feed on the cadavers of men—an evil which has on several occasions happened, as both ancient history attests and the unhappy experiences of our times have taught—would anyone with veridical reason contend that the whole was digested through the lowest passages, that nothing from it was changed and converted into his flesh, since the very leanness, which was and is not, sufficiently indicates what losses have been made up by those foods? Already therefore I have put forward some things a little before, which ought also to avail for solving this knot.

Quidquid enim carnium exhausit fames, utique in auras est exhalatum, unde diximus omnipotentem Deum posse reuocare, quod fugit. Reddetur ergo caro illa homini, in quo esse caro humana primitus coepit. Ab illo quippe altero tamquam mutuo sumpta deputanda est; quae sicut aes alienum ei redhibenda est, unde sumpta est.

For whatever flesh hunger has exhausted has assuredly been exhaled into the air, whence we have said that the omnipotent God is able to recall what has fled. Therefore that flesh will be returned to the man in whom human flesh first began to be. For from that other it must be reckoned as taken as on loan; and, like a debt, it must be restored to him from whom it was taken.

Sua uero illi, quem fames exinanierat, ab eo, qui potest etiam exhalata reuocare, reddetur. Quamuis etsi omnibus perisset modis nec ulla eius materies in ullis naturae latebris remansisset, unde uellet, eam repararet Omnipotens. Sed propter sententiam Veritatis, qua dictum est: Capillus capitis uestri non peribit, absurdum est, ut putemus, cum capillus hominis perire non possit, tantas carnes fame depastas atque consumptas perire potuisse.

But his own [flesh] will indeed be restored to that man whom hunger had emptied, by Him who can even recall what has been exhaled. Although, even if it had perished in every way and none of its matter had remained in any recesses of nature, the Omnipotent would restore it from wherever he willed. But because of the sentence of Truth, wherein it was said: "The hair of your head will not perish," it is absurd that we should think, since a man’s hair cannot perish, that such great quantities of flesh, grazed down and consumed by hunger, could have perished.

Quibus omnibus pro nostro modulo consideratis atque tractatis haec summa conficitur, ut in resurrectione carnis in aeternum eas mensuras habeat corporum magnitudo, quas habebat perficiendae siue perfectae cuiusque indita corpori ratio iuuentutis, in membrorum quoque omnium modulis congruo decore seruato. Quod decus ut seruetur, si aliquid demptum fuerit indecenti alicui granditati in parte aliqua constitutae, quod per totum spargatur, ut neque id pereat et congruentia partium ubique teneatur: non est absurdum, ut aliquid inde etiam staturae corporis addi posse credamus, cum omnibus partibus, ut decorem custodiant, id distribuitur, quod si enormiter in una esset, utique non deceret. Aut si contenditur in ea quemque statura corporis resurrecturum esse, in qua defunctus est, non pugnaciter resistendum est; tantum absit omnis deformitas, omnis infirmitas, omnis tarditas omnisque corruptio, et si quid aliud illud non decet regnum, in quo resurrectionis .et promissionis filii aequales erunt angelis Dei, si non corpore, non aetate, certe felicitate.

Quibus omnibus, considered and handled according to our measure, this sum is made up: that in the resurrection of the flesh the magnitude of bodies shall have forever those measures which the rationale of youth, given to the body of each, had for being perfected or as perfected, with the congruent decor preserved also in the modules (proportions) of all the members. And, that this comeliness may be preserved, if something be taken away from some indecent grandiosity set in any part, which is then spread through the whole so that neither it perish nor the congruence of parts anywhere fail: it is not absurd to believe that from that there can even be added something to the stature of the body, since to all the parts there is distributed, in order that they may guard the decor, that which, if it were enormously in one alone, would assuredly not be becoming. Or if it is contended that each will rise again in that stature of body in which he died, this is not to be pugnaciously resisted; only let every deformity be absent, every infirmity, every tardiness, and every corruption, and whatever else does not befit that kingdom, in which the sons of the resurrection and of the promise will be equal to the angels of God, if not in body, not in age, certainly in felicity.

[XXI] Restituetur ergo quidquid de corporibus uiuis uel post mortem de cadaueribus periit, et simul cum eo, quod in sepulcris remansit, in spiritalis corporis nouitatem ex animalis corporis uetustate mutatum resurget incorruptione atque inmortalitate uestitum. Sed etsi uel casu aliquo graui uel inimicorum inmanitate totum penitus conteratur in puluerem atque in auras uel in aquas dispersum, quantum fieri potest, nusquam esse sinatur omnino: nullo modo subtrahi poterit omnipotentiae Creatoris, sed capillus in eo capitis non peribit. Erit ergo spiritui subdita caro spiritalis, sed tamen caro, non spiritus; sicut carni subditus fuit spiritus ipse carnalis, sed tamen spiritus, non caro.

[21] Therefore there will be restored whatever from living bodies, or after death from corpses, has perished; and together with that which remained in the sepulchres, changed from the oldness of the animal body into the newness of the spiritual body, it will rise, clothed with incorruption and immortality. But even if by some grave chance or by the savagery of enemies it be entirely ground to dust and, scattered into the breezes or into the waters, so far as it can be done, be suffered to be nowhere at all: it can by no means be withdrawn from the Omnipotence of the Creator, but a hair of its head will not perish. Therefore the flesh, spiritual, will be subject to the spirit—yet nevertheless flesh, not spirit; just as the spirit itself, carnal, was subject to the flesh—yet nevertheless spirit, not flesh.

Cuius rei habemus experimentum in nostrae poenae deformitate. Non enim secundum carnem, sed utique secundum spiritum carnales erant, quibus ait apostolus: Non potui uobis loqui quasi spiritalibus, sed quasi carnalibus; et homo spiritalis sic in hac uita dicitur, ut tamen corpore adhuc carnalis sit et uideat aliam legem in membris suis repugnantem legi mentis suae; erit autem etiam corpore spiritalis, cum eadem caro sic resurrexerit, ut fiat quod scriptum est: Seminatur corpus animale, resurget corpus spiritale. Quae sit autem et quam magna spiritalis corporis gratia, quoniam nondum uenit in experimentum, uereor ne temerarium sit omne, quod de illa profertur, eloquium.

We have experimental proof of this in the deformity of our punishment. For those to whom the Apostle says, “I could not speak to you as to spiritual, but as to carnal,” were carnal not according to the flesh, but assuredly according to the spirit; and a spiritual man is thus called in this life, yet as to the body he is still carnal and sees another law in his members resisting the law of his mind; but he will be spiritual even in body, when the same flesh shall have so risen again that what is written may come to pass: “It is sown an animal body, it will rise a spiritual body.” But what the grace of the spiritual body is, and how great, since it has not yet come into experiment, I fear lest every utterance that is brought forth about it be rash.

Verum tamen quia spei nostrae gaudium propter Dei laudem non est tacendum et de intimis ardentis sancti amoris medullis dictum est: Domine, dilexi decorem domus tuae; de donis eius, quae in hac aerumnosissima uita bonis malisque largitur, ipso adiuuante coniciamus; ut possumus, quantum sit illud, quod nondum experti utique digne eloqui non ualemus. Omitto enim, quando fecit hominem rectum — omitto uitam illam duorum coniugum in paradisi fecunditate felicem, quoniam tam breuis fuit, ut ad nascentium sensum nec ipsa peruenerit: in hac, quam nouimus, in qua adhuc sumus, cuius temptationes, immo quam totam temptationem, quamdiu in ea sumus, quantumlibet proficiamus, perpeti non desinimus, quae sint indicia circa genus humanum bonitatis Dei, quis poterit explicare?

Yet nevertheless, since the joy of our hope is not to be kept silent for the praise of God, and from the inmost marrows of burning holy love it has been said: Lord, I have loved the beauty of your house; from His gifts, which in this most burdensome life He lavishes upon good and bad, let us, with His help, conjecture, as we can, how great that is which, since we have not yet experienced it, we assuredly are not able to utter worthily. I pass over, in fact, when He made man upright — I pass over that life of the two spouses happy in the fecundity of paradise, because it was so brief that it did not reach even to the perception of those being born: in this life, which we know, in which we still are, whose temptations—nay rather, which as a whole is a temptation—so long as we are in it, however much we may advance, we do not cease to endure, what indications there are around the human race of the goodness of God, who will be able to explicate?

[XXII] Nam quod ad primam originem pertinet, omnem mortalium progeniem fuisse damnatam, haec ipsa uita, si uita dicenda est, tot et tantis malis plena testatur. Quid enim aliud indicat horrenda quaedam profunditas ignorantiae, ex qua omnis error existit, qui omnes filios Adam tenebroso quodam sinu suscepit, ut homo ab illo liberari sine labore dolore timore non possit? Quid amor ipse tot rerum uanarum atque noxiarum et ex hoc mordaces curae, perturbationes, maerores, formidines, insana gaudia, discordiae, lites, bella, insidiae, iracundiae, inimicitiae, fallacia, adulatio, fraus, furtum, rapina, perfidia, superbia, ambitio, inuidentia, homicidia, parricidia, crudelitas, saeuitia, nequitia, luxuria, petulantia, inpudentia, inpudicitia, fornicationes, adulteria, incesta et contra naturam utriusque sexus tot stupra atque inmunditiae, quas turpe est etiam dicere, sacrilegia, haereses, blasphemiae, periuria, oppressiones innocentium, calumniae, circumuentiones, praeuaricationes, falsa testimonia, iniqua iudicia, uiolentiae, latrocinia et quidquid talium malorum in mentem non uenit et tamen de uita ista hominum non recedit?

[22] As regards the first origin, that the whole progeny of mortals was condemned, this very life—if it is to be called life—full of so many and such great evils, bears witness. For what else does a certain horrendous profundity of ignorance indicate, from which every error arises, which has received all the sons of Adam into a kind of shadowy bosom, so that a man cannot be freed from it without labor, pain, and fear? What of love itself for so many vain and noxious things—and from this the mordacious cares, perturbations, griefs, terrors, insane joys, discords, quarrels, wars, ambushes, angers, enmities, deceit, adulation, fraud, theft, rapine, perfidy, pride, ambition, envy, homicides, parricides, cruelty, savagery, wickedness, luxury, petulance, impudence, unchastity, fornications, adulteries, incests, and, contrary to the nature of both sexes, so many debauchings and uncleannesses (which it is shameful even to name), sacrileges, heresies, blasphemies, perjuries, oppressions of the innocent, calumnies, circumventions, prevarications, false testimonies, unjust judgments, violences, robberies, and whatever of such evils does not come into mind and yet does not depart from this life of men?

Verum haec hominum sunt malorum, ab illa tamen erroris et peruersi amoris radice uenientia, cum qua omnis filius Adam nascitur. Nam quis ignorat cum quanta ignorantia ueritatis, quae iam in infantibus manifesta est, et cum quanta abundantia uanae cupiditatis, quae in pueris incipit apparere, homo ueniat in hanc uitam, ita ut, si dimittatur uiuere ut uelit et facere quidquid uelit, in haec facinora et flagitia, quae commemoraui et quae commemorare non potui, uel cuncta uel multa perueniat?

But these are the evils of men, yet coming from that root of error and perverse love with which every son of Adam is born. For who is ignorant with how great an ignorance of truth—already manifest in infants—and with how great an abundance of vain cupidity—which begins to appear in children—man comes into this life, so that, if he be let alone to live as he wills and to do whatever he wills, he arrives at these crimes and flagitious deeds, which I have commemorated and which I was not able to commemorate, either all or many?

Sed diuina gubernatione non omni modo deserente damnatos et Deo non continente in ira sua miserationes suas in ipsis sensibus generis humani prohibitio et eruditio contra istas, cum quibus nascimur, tenebras uigilant et contra hos impetus opponuntur, plenae tamen etiam ipsae laborum et dolorum. Quid enim sibi uolunt multimodae formidines, quae cohibendis paruulorum uanitatibus adhibentur? Quid paedagogi, quid magistri, quid ferulae, quid lora, quid uirgae, quid disciplina illa, qua scriptura sancta dicit dilecti filii latera esse tundenda, ne crescat indomitus domarique iam durus aut uix possit aut fortasse nec possit?

But with divine governance not in every way deserting the condemned, and with God not withholding, in his wrath, his compassions, in the very senses of the human race prohibition and erudition keep vigil against those darknesses with which we are born and are opposed against these impulses, yet they themselves also are full of labors and pains. For what do the multiform fears mean, which are applied to restraining the vanities of the very little ones? What of pedagogues, what of masters, what of ferules, what of straps, what of rods, what of that discipline whereby Holy Scripture says the sides of the beloved son are to be beaten, lest he grow up untamed and, once hardened to being tamed, either can scarcely be subdued, or perhaps cannot be subdued at all?

Quid agitur his poenis omnibus, nisi ut debelletur inperitia et praua cupiditas infrenetur, cum quibus malis in hoc saeculum uenimus? Quid est enim, quod cum labore meminimus, sine labore obliuiscimur; cum labore discimus, sine labore nescimus; cum labore strenui, sine labore inertes sumus? Nonne hinc apparet, in quid uelut pondere suo procliuis et prona sit uitiosa natura et quanta ope, ut hinc liberetur, indigeat?

What is effected by all these punishments, except that inexperience be thoroughly vanquished and depraved desire be bridled, with which evils we have come into this age? For what is this, that with labor we remember, without labor we forget; with labor we learn, without labor we do not know; with labor we are strenuous, without labor we are inert? Does it not from this appear to what, as if by its own weight, the vicious nature is inclined and prone, and how great an aid it needs, in order to be freed from this?

Desidia segnitia, pigritia neglegentia uitia sunt utique quibus labor fugitur, cum labor ipse, etiam qui est utilis, poena sit.

Idleness, sluggishness, sloth, negligence are assuredly vices by which labor is fled, since labor itself, even that which is useful, is a penalty.

Sed praeter pueriles poenas, sine quibus disci non potest quod maiores uolunt, qui uix aliquid utiliter uolunt, quot et quantis poenis genus agitetur humanum, quae non ad malitiam nequitiamque iniquorum, sed ad condicionem pertinent miseriamque communem, quis ullo sermone digerit? quis ulla cogitatione conprehendit? Quantus est metus, quanta calamitas ab orbitatibus atque luctu, a damnis et damnationibus, a deceptionibus et mendaciis hominum, a suspicionibus falsis, ab omnibus uiolentis facinoribus et sceleribus alienis!

But besides the puerile penalties, without which what the elders want cannot be learned—elders who scarcely want anything usefully—by how many and how great penalties is the human race agitated, which pertain not to the malice and iniquity of the unjust, but to the common condition and misery—who sets them forth in any discourse? who comprehends them in any thought? How great is the fear, how great the calamity from bereavements and mourning, from losses and condemnations, from the deceptions and lies of men, from false suspicions, from all the violent deeds and crimes of others!

quando quidem ab eis et depraedatio et captiuitas, et uincla et carceres, et exilia et cruciatus, et amputatio membrorum et priuatio sensuum, et oppressio corporis ad obscenam libidinem opprimentis explendam et alia multa horrenda saepe contingunt. Quid? ab innumeris casibus quae forinsecus corpori formidantur, aestibus et frigoribus, tempestatibus imbribus adluuionibus, coruscatione tonitru, grandine fulmine, motibus hiatibusque terrarum, oppressionibus ruinarum, ab offensionibus et pauore uel etiam malitia iumentorum, a tot uenenis fruticum aquarum, aurarum bestiarum, a ferarum uel tantummodo molestis uel etiam mortiferis morsibus, a rabie quae contingit ex rabido cane, ut etiam blanda et amica suo domino bestia nonnumquam uehementius et amarius quam leones draconesque metuatur faciatque hominem, quem forte adtaminauerit, contagione pestifera ita rabiosum, ut a parentibus coniuge filiis peius omni bestia formidetur!

since indeed from them there often befall both depredation and captivity, and bonds and prisons, and exiles and tortures, and amputation of members and privation of senses, and the oppression of the body to fulfill the obscene libido of the oppressor, and many other horrenda. What? from the innumerable mishaps which from without are feared for the body—heats and colds, tempests, rains, inundations, coruscation and thunder, hail and lightning-bolt, the motions and yawning chasms of the earth, crushings by collapses, stumblings and the fright or even malice of beasts of burden, from so many venoms of shrubs, of waters, of airs, of beasts, from the bites of wild creatures either merely troublesome or even death-bringing, from the rabies which happens from a rabid dog—so that even a beast coaxing and friendly to its own master is sometimes feared more vehemently and bitterly than lions and dragons, and makes the man whom perchance it has contaminated by pestiferous contagion so rabid that by parents, spouse, and children he is dreaded worse than any beast!

Quae mala patiuntur nauigantes! quae terrena itinera gradientes! Quis ambulat ubicumque non inopinatis subiacens casibus?

What evils do seafarers endure! What evils do those treading terrestrial journeys endure! Who walks anywhere without being subject to unexpected contingencies?

De foro quidam rediens domum sanis pedibus suis cecidit, pedem fregit et ex illo uulnere finiuit hanc uitam. Quid uidetur sedente securius? De sella, in qua sedebat, cecidit Heli sacerdos et mortuus est.

Someone returning home from the forum, with his feet sound, fell, broke his foot, and from that wound finished this life. What seems safer than sitting? From the seat on which he was sitting, the priest Eli fell and died.

Agricolae, immo uero omnes homines, quot et quantos a caelo et terra uel a perniciosis animalibus casus metuunt agrorum fructibus! Solent tamen de frumentis tandem collectis et reconditis esse securi. Sed quibusdam, quod nouimus, prouentum optimum frumentorum fluuius inprouisus fugientibus hominibus de horreis eiecit atque abstulit.

Farmers—nay indeed all humans—how many and how great mishaps they fear from sky and earth, or from pernicious animals, for the fruits of the fields! Yet they are wont to be secure about the grain once at last gathered and stored away. But for certain people, as we know, an unforeseen river, while the people were fleeing, cast out from the granaries and carried off the very best yield of grains.

Contra milleformes daemonum incursus quis innocentia sua fidit? quando quidem, ne quis fideret, etiam paruulos baptizatos, quibus certe nihil est innocentius, aliquando sic uexant, ut in eis maxime Deo ista sinente monstretur huius uitae flenda calamitas et alterius desideranda felicitas. Iam uero de ipso corpore tot existunt morborum mala, ut nec libris medicorum cuncta conprehensa sint; in quorum pluribus ac paene omnibus etiam ipsa adiumenta et medicamenta tormenta sunt, ut homines a poenarum exitio poenali eruantur auxilio.

Against the thousand-formed incursions of demons, who trusts in his own innocence? Since indeed, lest anyone trust, they even at times so vex baptized little ones, than whom surely nothing is more innocent, that in them especially, God permitting these things, there is shown the lamentable calamity of this life and the desirable felicity of the other. Now indeed, from the body itself there arise so many evils of diseases that not even in the books of the physicians are all comprehended; in very many of which, and almost in all, even the very assistances and medicaments are torments, in order that men may be rescued from the deadly issue of pains by a penal aid.

Nonne ad hoc perduxit sitientes homines ardor inmanis, ut urinam quoque humanam uel etiam suam biberent? nonne ad hoc fames, ut a carnibus hominum se abstinere non possent nec inuentos homines mortuos, sed propter hoc a se occisos, nec quoslibet alienos, uerum etiam filios matres incredibili crudelitate, quam rabida esuries faciebat, absumerent? Ipse postremo somnus, qui proprie quietis nomen accepit, quis uerbis explicet, saepe somniorum uisis quam sit inquietus et quam magnis, licet falsarum rerum, terroribus, quas ita exhibet et quodam modo exprimit, ut a ueris eas discernere nequeamus, animam miseram sensusque perturbet?

Did not a monstrous ardor drive thirsty human beings to this point, that they drank human urine, even their own? did not hunger to this, that they could not abstain from the flesh of humans—and not men found dead, but slain by themselves for this very purpose—and not just any strangers, but even mothers, with incredible cruelty which rabid hunger produced, consume their sons? Sleep itself, finally, which has properly received the name of rest—who can explain in words how often, by the visions of dreams, it is unquiet, and with how great terrors, albeit of false things, which it so exhibits and in a certain manner expresses that we cannot discern them from true ones, it perturbs the wretched soul and the senses?

Qua falsitate uisorum etiam uigilantes in quibusdam morbis et uenenis miserabilius agitantur; quamuis multimoda uarietate fallaciae homines etiam sanos maligni daemones nonnumquam decipiant talibus uisis, ut, etiamsi eos per haec ad sua traducere non potuerint, sensus tamen eorum solo appetitu qualitercumque persuadendae falsitatis inludant.

By the falsity of visions even those awake, in certain diseases and poisons, are agitated more miserably; although by a multiform variety of fallacy malign demons sometimes deceive even healthy men by such visions, so that, even if they cannot by these means lead them over to their own side, nevertheless they illude their senses by the mere appetite for a falsehood to be persuaded in whatever way.

Ab huius tam miserae quasi quibusdam inferis uitae non liberat nisi gratia Saluatoris Christi, Dei ac Domini nostri (hoc enim nomen est ipse Iesus; interpretatur quippe Saluator), maxime ne post hanc miserior ac sempiterna suscipiat, non uita, sed mors. Nam in ista quamuis sint per sancta et sanctos curationum magna solacia, tamen ideo non semper etiam ipsa beneficia tribuuntur petentibus, ne propter hoc religio quaeratur, quae propter aliam magis uitam, ubi mala non erunt omnino ulla, quaerenda est; et ad hoc meliores quosque in his malis adiuuat gratia, ut quanto fideliore, tanto fortiore corde tolerentur. Ad quam rem etiam philosophiam prodesse dicunt docti huius saeculi, quam dii quibusdam paucis, ait Tullius, ueram dederunt; nec hominibus, inquit, ab his aut datum est donum maius aut potuit ullum dari.

From this life so miserable, as it were certain infernal regions, none frees save the grace of the Savior Christ, God and our Lord (for this is the very name Jesus; it is interpreted, to wit, Savior), chiefly lest after this he should receive a more wretched and everlasting—not life, but death. For in this life, although through holy things and holy persons there are great consolations of cures, nevertheless for this reason even these benefactions are not always granted to petitioners, lest on account of this religion be sought, which rather for another life—where there will be absolutely no evils—is to be sought; and to this end grace helps each of the better sort amid these evils, that the more faithful, by so much with the stronger heart they may be borne. To which matter the learned of this age also say that philosophy profits, which the gods, says Tullius, have given in true form to certain few; nor to men, he says, has a greater gift by these been given, nor could any have been given.

Vsque adeo et ipsi, contra quos agimus, quoquo modo compulsi sunt in habenda non quacumque, sed uera philosophia diuinam gratiam confiteri. Porro si paucis diuinitus datum est uerae philosophiae contra miserias huius uitae unicum auxilium, satis et hinc apparet humanum genus ad luendas miseriarum poenas esse damnatum. Sicut autem hoc, ut fatentur, nullum diuinum maius est donum, sic a nullo deo dari credendum est, nisi ab illo, quo et ipsi qui multos deos colunt nullum dicunt esse maiorem.

To such an extent even those themselves, against whom we contend, have somehow been compelled, in holding not just any but true philosophy, to confess divine grace. Moreover, if to a few there has been divinely given, as the unique aid of true philosophy against the miseries of this life, then from this it sufficiently appears that the human race is condemned to pay the penalties of miseries. And as this, as they admit, is no greater divine gift, so it is to be believed that it is given by no god except by that one than whom even they who worship many gods say none is greater.

[XXIII] Praeter haec autem mala huius uitae bonis malisque communia habent in ea iusti etiam proprios quosdam labores suos, quibus aduersus uitia militant et in talium proeliorum temptationibus periculisque uersantur. Aliquando enim concitatius, aliquando remissius, non tamen desinit caro concupiscere aduersus spiritum et spiritus aduersus carnem, ut non ea quae uolumus faciamus, omnem malam concupiscentiam consumendo, sed eam nobis, quantum diuinitus adiuti possumus, non ei consentiendo subdamus, uigiliis continuis excubantes, ne opinio ueri similis fallat, ne decipiat sermo uersutus, ne se tenebrae alicuius erroris offundant, ne quod bonum est malum aut quod malum est bonum esse credatur, ne ab his quae agenda sunt metus reuocet, ne in ea quae agenda non sunt cupido praecipitet, ne super iracundiam sol occidat, ne inimicitiae prouocent ad retributionem mali pro malo, ne absorbeat inhonesta uel inmoderata tristitia, ne inpertiendorum beneficiorum ingerat mens ingrata torporem, ne maledicis rumoribus bona conscientia fatigetur, ne temeraria (de alio) suspicio nostra decipiat, ne aliena de nobis falsa nos frangat, ne regnet peccatum in nostro mortali corpore ad oboediendum desideriis eius, ne membra nostra exhibeantur iniquitatis arma peccato, ne oculus sequatur concupiscentiam, ne uindicandi cupiditas uincat, ne in eo quod male delectat uel uisio uel cogitatio remoretur, ne inprobum aut indecens uerbum libenter audiatur, ne fiat quod non licet etiamsi libet, ne in hoc bello laborum periculorumque plenissimo uel de uiribus nostris speretur facienda uictoria uel uiribus nostris facta tribuatur, sed eius gratiae, de quo ait apostolus: Gratias autem Deo, qui dat nobis uictoriam per Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum; qui et alio loco: In his, inquit, omnibus superuincimus per eum qui dilexit nos — sciamus tamen, quantalibet uirtute proeliandi uitiis repugnemus uel etiam uitia superemus et subiugemus, quamdiu sumus in hoc corpore, nobis deesse non posse unde dicamus Deo: Dimitte nobis debita nostra. In illo autem regno, ubi semper cum corporibus inmortalibus erimus, nec proelia nobis erunt ulla nec debita; quae nusquam et numquam essent, si natura nostra, sicut recta creata est, permaneret.

[23] Besides these evils of this life, common to good and to bad, the just also have in it certain proper labors of their own, by which they soldier against vices and are engaged in the temptations and perils of such battles. For at times more stirred, at times more relaxed, yet the flesh does not cease to concupisce against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh, so that we do not do the things that we will by consuming every evil concupiscence, but we subject it to ourselves, so far as, divinely aided, we are able, by not consenting to it, keeping watch with continual vigils, lest a plausible opinion deceive, lest a wily speech beguile, lest the darkness of some error pour itself in, lest what is good be believed to be evil or what is evil to be good, lest fear call us back from those things that must be done, lest desire hurl headlong into those things that must not be done, lest the sun go down upon anger, lest enmities provoke to a retribution of evil for evil, lest dishonorable or immoderate sadness swallow up, lest an ungrateful mind inject torpor in the imparting of benefits, lest a good conscience be wearied by slanderous rumors, lest a rash suspicion (about another) deceive us, lest others’ falsehoods about us break us, lest sin reign in our mortal body so as to obey its desires, lest our members be presented as weapons of iniquity to sin, lest the eye follow concupiscence, lest the lust of avenging prevail, lest either the gaze or the thought linger on that which ill delights, lest a wicked or indecent word be willingly listened to, lest what is not lawful be done even if it pleases, lest in this war most full of labors and perils either the victory to be achieved be hoped for from our own forces or, once achieved, be attributed to our own forces, but to his grace, of whom the Apostle says: “But thanks to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ”; who also in another place: “In all these things,” he says, “we more-than-conquer through him who loved us”—let us know, however, that, with however great a virtue of fighting we resist vices or even overcome and subdue vices, so long as we are in this body, it cannot be lacking to us to say to God: “Forgive us our debts.” But in that kingdom, where we shall always be with immortal bodies, there will be for us neither any battles nor debts; which would be nowhere and never, if our nature, just as it was created right, had remained.

Ac per hoc etiam noster iste conflictus, in quo periclitamur et de quo nos uictoria nouissima cupimus liberari, ad uitae huius mala pertinet, quam tot tantorumque testimonio malorum probamus esse damnatam.

And through this, therefore, even this our conflict, in which we are imperiled and from which we desire to be freed by the final victory, pertains to the evils of this life, which we prove to be condemned by the testimony of so many and so great evils.

[XXIV] Iam nunc considerandum est, hanc ipsam miseriam generis humani, in qua laudatur iustitia punientis, qualibus et quam multis impleuerit bonis eiusdem bonitas cuncta quae creauit administrantis. Primum benedictionem illam, quam protulerat ante peccatum dicens: Crescite et multiplicamini et implete terram, nec post peccatum uoluit inhibere mansitque in stirpe damnata donata fecunditas; nec illam uim mirabilem seminum, immo etiam mirabiliorem qua efficiuntur et semina, inditam corporibus humanis et quodam modo intextam peccati uitium potuit auferre, quo nobis inpacta est etiam necessitas mortis; sed utrumque simul currit isto quasi fluuio atque torrente generis humani, malum quod a parente trahitur, et bonum quod a creante tribuitur. In originali malo duo sunt, peccatum atque supplicium; in originali bono alia duo, propagatio et conformatio.

[XXIV] Now at this point it must be considered, how this very misery of the human race, in which the justice of the Punisher is praised, the goodness of that same One, administering all things which He created, has filled with what sorts and how many goods. First, that benediction which He had uttered before the sin, saying: Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth, He did not wish to inhibit even after the sin, and in the condemned stock the gifted fecundity remained; nor could the vice of sin take away that marvelous power of seeds, nay even more marvelous, by which even the seeds themselves are produced, implanted in human bodies and, in a certain manner, woven-in, by which there has been struck upon us also the necessity of death; but both run together in this, as it were, river and torrent of the human race, the evil which is drawn from the parent, and the good which is granted by the Creator. In the original evil there are two things, sin and punishment; in the original good another two, propagation and conformation.

Sed quantum ad praesentem pertinet intentionem nostram, de malis, quorum unum de nostra uenit audacia, id est peccatum, alterum .de iudicio Dei, id est supplicium, iam satis diximus. Nunc de bonis Dei, quae ipsi quoque uitiatae damnataeque naturae contulit siue usque nunc confert, dicere institui. Neque enim damnando aut totum abstulit quod dederat, alioquin nec esset omnino; aut eam remouit a sua potestate, etiam cum diabolo poenaliter subdidit, cum nec ipsum diabolum a suo alienarit imperio; quando quidem, ut ipsius quoque diaboli natura subsistat, ille facit qui summe est et facit esse quidquid aliquo modo est.

Sed as far as our present intention is concerned, about the evils—of which the one comes from our audacity, that is, sin, the other from the judgment of God, that is, punishment—we have now said enough. Now I have undertaken to speak about the good things of God, which He has bestowed even upon, and even up to now bestows upon, the vitiated and condemned nature itself. For by condemning He has neither taken away entirely what He had given—otherwise it would not exist at all—nor has He removed it from His power even when He subjected it to the devil as a penalty, since He has not alienated even the devil himself from His dominion; since indeed, in order that even the nature of the devil may subsist, He it is who supremely is and makes to be whatever in any way is.

Duorum igitur illorum, quae diximus bona etiam in naturam peccato uitiatam supplicioque damnatam de bonitatis eius quodam ueluti fonte manare, propagationem in primis mundi operibus benedictione largitus est, a quibus operibus die septimo requieuit; conformatio uero in illo eius est opere, quo usque nunc operatur. Efficacem quippe potentiam suam si rebus subtrahat, nec progredi poterunt et suis dimensis motibus peragere tempora nec prorsus in eo quod creatae sunt aliquatenus permanebunt. Sic ergo creauit hominem Deus, ut ei adderet fertilitatem quandam, qua homines alios propageret, congenerans eis etiam ipsam propagandi possibilitatem, non necessitatem: quibus tamen uoluit hominibus abstulit eam Deus, et steriles fuerunt; non tamen generi humano abstulit semel datam primis duobus coniugibus benedictione generali.

Duorum therefore of those two goods which we said flow, even into a nature vitiated by sin and condemned with punishment, from, as it were, a certain fountain of His goodness, He bestowed propagation in the first works of the world by a benediction, from which works He rested on the seventh day; conformation, however, is in that work of His in which He works even up to now. For if He were to withdraw His efficacious power from things, they could neither advance and, with their measured motions, accomplish their times, nor at all remain, even in some measure, in that in which they were created. Thus therefore God created man, so that He added to him a certain fertility, by which he might propagate other humans, co-generating for them also the very possibility of propagating, not a necessity: yet from such humans as He willed God took it away, and they were sterile; nevertheless He did not take away from the human race the blessing once given by a general benediction to the first two spouses.

Haec ergo propagatio quamuis peccato non fuerit ablata, non tamen etiam ipsa talis est, qualis fuisset, si nemo peccasset. Ex quo enim homo in honore positus, postea quam deliquit, comparatus est pecoribus, similiter generat; non in eo tamen penitus extincta est quaedam uelut scintilla rationis, in qua factus est ad imaginem Dei. Huic autem propagationi si conformatio non adhiberetur, nec ipsa in sui generis formas modosque procederet.

Therefore this propagation, although it was not removed by sin, nevertheless is not itself such as it would have been, if no one had sinned. For from the time that man, placed in honor, after he transgressed, was compared to cattle, he generates similarly; yet in him there has not been utterly extinguished a certain, as it were, scintilla of reason, in which he was made to the image of God. But to this propagation, if conformation were not applied, neither would it proceed into the forms and modes of its own kind.

Si enim non concubuissent homines et nihilo minus Deus uellet implere terras hominibus: quo modo creauit unum sine commixtione maris et feminae, sic posset omnes; concumbentes uero nisi illo creante generantes esse non possunt. Sicut ergo ait apostolus de institutione spiritali, qua homo ad pietatem iustitiamque formatur: Neque qui plantat, est aliquid, neque qui rigat, sed qui incrementum dat Deus: ita etiam hic dici potest: "Nec qui concumbit nec qui seminat, est aliquid, sed qui format Deus; nec mater, quae conceptum portat et partum nutrit, est aliquid, sed qui incrementum dat Deus." Ipse namque operatione, qua usque nunc operatur, facit ut numeros suos explicent semina et a quibusdam latentibus atque inuisibilibus inuolucris in formas uisibiles huius quod aspicimus decoris euoluant; ipse incorpoream corporeamque naturam, illam praepositam, istam subiectam, miris modis copulans et conectens animantem facit. Quod opus eius tam magnum et mirabile est, ut non solum in homine, quod est animal rationale et ex hoc cunctis terrenis animantibus excellentius atque praestantius, sed in qualibet minutissima muscula bene consideranti stuporem mentis ingerat laudemque pariat Creatoris.

For if men had not lain together and nonetheless God were willing to fill the lands with human beings: just as he created one without commixture of male and female, so could he create all; yet those who do lie together cannot be begetters unless by him creating. Therefore, as the apostle says about spiritual institution, whereby a man is formed unto piety and justice: Neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase: so also here it can be said: “Neither he who lies together nor he who sows is anything, but God who forms; nor is the mother, who bears the conceived and nourishes the offspring, anything, but God who gives the increase.” For he by that operation whereby he works even until now, causes the seeds to unfold their proper numbers and, from certain hidden and invisible coverings, to unroll into visible forms of this beauty which we behold; he, coupling and connecting in wondrous ways the incorporeal and the corporeal nature—the former set over, the latter subjected—makes a living being. Which work of his is so great and marvelous, that not only in man, who is a rational animal and on this account more excellent and outstanding than all earthly living things, but even in any most minute little muscle, it brings upon the one who considers well an amazement of mind and begets praise of the Creator.

Ipse itaque animae humanae mentem dedit, ubi ratio et intellegentia in infante sopita est quodam modo, quasi nulla sit, excitanda scilicet atque exerenda aetatis accessu, qua sit scientiae capax atque doctrinae et habilis perceptioni ueritatis et amoris boni; qua capacitate hauriat sapientiam uirtutibusque sit praedita, quibus prudenter, fortiter, temperanter et iuste aduersus errores et cetera ingenerata uitia dimicet eaque nullius rei desiderio nisi boni illius summi atque inmutabilis uincat. Quod etsi non faciat, ipsa talium bonorum capacitas in natura rationali diuinitus instituta quantum sit boni, quam mirabile. Omnipotentis opus, quis competenter effatur aut cogitat?

He himself, then, gave to the human soul the mind, wherein reason and intelligence in the infant are in a certain manner lulled, as though they were none, to be awakened and exercised by the access of age, whereby it may be capable of knowledge and doctrine and apt for the perception of truth and the love of the good; by which capacity it may draw in wisdom and be endowed with virtues, by which it may contend prudently, bravely, temperately, and justly against errors and the other ingenerate vices, and conquer them with desire for nothing except that supreme and immutable good. And even if it does not do this, the very capacity for such goods, divinely instituted in rational nature—how much of good it is, how marvelous. The work of the Omnipotent—who speaks it fittingly or conceives it?

Praeter enim artes bene uiuendi et ad inmortalem perueniendi felicitatem, quae uirtutes uocantur et sola Dei gratia, quae in Christo est, filiis promissionis regnique donantur, nonne humano ingenio tot tantaeque artes sunt inuentae et exercitae, partim necessariae partim uoluptariae, ut tam excellens uis mentis atque rationis in his etiam rebus, quas superfluas, immo et periculosas perniciosasque appetit, quantum bonum habeat in natura, unde ista potuit uel inuenire uel discere uel exercere, testetur? Vestimentorum et aedificiorum ad opera quam mirabilia, quam stupenda industria humana peruenerit; quo in agricultura, quo in nauigatione profecerit; quae in fabricatione quorumque uasorum uel etiam statuarum et picturarum uarietate excogitauerit et impleuerit; quae in theatris mirabilia spectantibus, audientibus incredibilia facienda et exhibenda molita sit; in capiendis occidendis domandis inrationabilibus animantibus quae et quanta reppererit; aduersus ipsos homines tot genera uenenorum, tot armorum, tot machinamentorum, et pro salute mortali tuenda atque reparanda quot medicamenta atque adiumenta conprehenderit; pro uoluptate faucium quot condimenta et gulae inritamenta reppererit; ad indicandas et suadendas cogitationes quam multitudinem uarietatemque signorum, ubi praecipuum locum uerba et litterae tenent; ad delectandos animos quos elocutionis ornatus, quam diuersorum carminum copiam; ad mulcendas aures quot organa musica, quos cantilenae modos excogitauerit; quantam peritiam dimensionum atque numerorum, meatusque et ordines siderum quanta sagacitate conprehenderit; quam multa rerum mundanarum cognitione se impleuerit, quis possit eloqui, maxime si uelimus non aceruatim cuncta congerere, sed in singulis inmorari? In ipsis postremo erroribus et falsitatibus defendendis quam magna claruerint ingenia philosophorum atque haereticorum, quis aestimare sufficiat?

For besides the arts of living well and of arriving at immortal felicity, which are called virtues and are bestowed by the grace of God alone, which is in Christ, upon the sons of the promise and of the kingdom, have not so many and so great arts been discovered and practiced by human ingenuity, partly necessary, partly pleasurable, that so excellent a force of mind and reason, even in those things too which it desires though superfluous, nay, even dangerous and pernicious, bears witness how much good it has in its nature, whence it was able either to discover or to learn or to exercise these things? To the works of clothing and of buildings, to what marvelous, what astounding achievements human industry has attained; how far it has advanced in agriculture, how far in navigation; what in the fabrication of all sorts of vessels, and even in the variety of statues and paintings, it has devised and fulfilled; what in theaters—marvels for those who look, things incredible for those who listen—to be done and exhibited it has contrived; in capturing, killing, taming irrational living creatures what and how great things it has discovered; against men themselves so many kinds of poisons, so many of arms, so many of machinations; and for guarding and restoring mortal health how many medicaments and aids it has comprehended; for the pleasure of the palate how many condiments and provocatives of the gullet it has discovered; for indicating and persuading thoughts what a multitude and variety of signs, wherein words and letters hold the chief place; for delighting minds what ornaments of elocution, what abundance of diverse songs; for soothing ears how many musical organs, what modes of chant it has devised; what great expertise of dimensions and of numbers, and with what sagacity it has comprehended the courses and orders of the stars; with how much knowledge of worldly things it has filled itself, who can express, especially if we should wish not to heap up everything in a pile, but to linger over the individual points? Finally, in defending errors and falsities themselves, how greatly the wits of philosophers and heretics have shone forth, who is sufficient to estimate?

Loquimur enim nunc de natura mentis humanae, qua ista uita mortalis ornatur, non de fide atque itinere ueritatis, qua illa inmortalis adquiritur. Huius tantae naturae conditor cum sit utique Deus uerus et summus, ipso cuncta quae fecit administrante et summam potestatem summamque habente iustitiam numquam profecto in has miserias decidisset atque ex his praeter eos solos qui liberabuntur in aeternas esset itura, nisi nimis grande peccatum in homine primo, de quo ceteri exorti sunt, praecessisset.

For we speak now about the nature of the human mind, by which this mortal life is adorned, not about the faith and the itinerary of truth, by which that immortal one is acquired. Since the founder of so great a nature is assuredly the true and highest God—he himself administering all the things that he made and possessing the highest power and the highest justice—surely it would never have fallen into these miseries and, from these, would be on its way into eternal ones, except for those alone who will be liberated, unless an exceedingly great sin had gone before in the first man, from whom the others have sprung.

Iam uero in ipso corpore, quamuis nobis sit cum beluis mortalitate commune multisque earum reperiatur infirmius, quanta Dei bonitas, quanta prouidentia tanti Creatoris apparet! Nonne ita sunt in eo loca sensuum et cetera membra disposita speciesque ipsa ac figura et statura totius corporis ita modificata, ut ad ministerium animae rationalis se indicet factum? Non enim ut animalia rationis expertia prona esse uidemus in terram, ita creatus est homo; sed erecta in caelum corporis forma admonet eum quae sursum sunt sapere.

Now indeed in the body itself, although mortality is common to us with the beasts and it is found weaker than many of them, how great the goodness of God, how great the providence of so great a Creator appears! Are not the places of the senses and the other members in it so disposed, and the very aspect and the figure and stature of the whole body so proportioned, that it shows itself to have been made for the ministry of the rational soul? For man was not created as we see the animals devoid of reason to be prone toward the earth; but the form of the body erected toward heaven admonishes him to be wise about the things that are above.

Porro mira mobilitas, quae linguae ac manibus adtributa est, ad loquendum et scribendum apta atque conueniens et ad opera artium plurimarum officiorumque complenda, nonne satis ostendit, quali animae ut seruiret tale sit corpus adiunctum? quamquam et detractis necessitatibus operandi ita omnium partium congruentia numerosa sit et pulchra sibi parilitate respondeat, ut nescias utrum in eo condendo maior sit utilitatis habita ratio quam decoris. Certe enim nihil uidemus creatum in corpore utilitatis causa, quod non habeat etiam decoris locum.

Moreover, the wondrous mobility which has been attributed to the tongue and the hands, apt and convenient for speaking and writing and for completing the works of very many arts and offices, does it not sufficiently show that such a body has been adjoined so as to serve a soul of such a kind? Although, even with the necessities of working subtracted, the congruence of all the parts is so well measured and so fair, answering to itself by a symmetry, that you do not know whether, in its being constructed, greater account was taken of utility than of decor. For certainly we see nothing created in the body for the sake of utility that does not also have a place of beauty.

Plus autem nobis id appareret, si numeros mensurarum, quibus inter se cuncta conexa sunt et coaptata, nossemus; quos forsitan data opera in his, quae foris eminent, humana posset uestigare sollertia; quae uero tecta sunt atque a nostris remota conspectibus, sicuti est tanta perplexitas uenarum atque neruorum et uiscerum, secreta uitalium, inuenire nullus potest. Quia etsi medicorum diligentia nonnulla crudelis, quos anatomicos appellant, laniauit corpora mortuorum siue etiam inter manus secantis perscrutantisque morientium atque in carnibus humanis satis inhumane abdita cuncta rimata est, ut quid et quo modo quibus locis curandum esset addisceret: numeros tamen de quibus loquor, quibus coaptatio, quae *a(rmoni/a Graece dicitur, tamquam cuiusdam organi, extrinsecus atque intrinsecus totius corporis constat, quid dicam, nemo ualuit inuenire, quos nemo ausus est quaerere? qui si noti esse potuissent, in interioribus quoque uisceribus, quae nullum ostentant decus, ita delectaret pulchritudo rationis, ut omni formae apparenti, quae oculis placet, ipsius mentis, quae oculis utitur, praeferretur arbitrio.

But that would appear to us more, if we knew the numbers of measures by which all things are interconnected and coapted among themselves; which perhaps, with labor applied, human ingenuity could track out in those things that project outward; but as for the things that are covered and removed from our sight—such as the great intricacy of veins and nerves and viscera, the secrets of the vital parts—no one can discover them. For although, by the diligence of certain physicians—cruel ones, whom they call anatomists—the bodies of the dead have been torn, and even, under the hands of the cutter and inquirer, those of the dying; and in quite inhuman fashion all hidden things in human flesh have been pried into, in order to learn what, and in what manner, and in which places, must be treated: yet the numbers of which I speak, by which the coaptation—called *a(rmoni/a* in Greek—of the whole body, as of a certain organ, both outwardly and inwardly consists—what shall I say?—no one has been able to find, since no one has dared to seek them. Which, if they could have been known, then even in the inner viscera, which display no adornment, the beauty of reason would so delight that, by the judgment of the very mind which uses the eyes, it would be preferred to every apparent form that pleases the eyes.

Sunt uero quaedam ita posita in corpore, ut tantummodo decorem habeant, non et usum; sicut habet pectus uirile mamillas, sicut facies barbam, quam non esse munimento, sed uirili ornamento indicant purae facies feminarum, quas utique infirmiores muniri tutius conueniret. Si ergo nullum membrum, in his quidem conspicuis (unde ambigit nemo), quod ita sit alicui operi accommodatum, ut non etiam sit decorum; sunt autem nonnulla, quorum solum decus et nullus est usus: puto facile intellegi in conditione corporis dignitatem necessitati fuisse praelatam. Transitura est quippe necessitas tempusque uenturum, quando sola inuicem pulchritudine sine ulla libidine perfruamur; quod maxime ad laudem referendum est Conditoris, cui dicitur in psalmo: Confessionem et decorem induisti.

There are indeed certain things so positioned in the body that they have decor only, not also use; just as a male chest has nipples, just as the face has a beard, which the pure faces of women indicate to be not a muniment but a manly ornament—women who, being assuredly weaker, it would be safer to have been fortified. If, therefore, among these conspicuous parts (about which no one doubts) there is no member that is so accommodated to some work as not also to be decorous; and yet there are some whose sole decor and no use exists: I think it is easily understood that in the constitution of the body dignity has been preferred to necessity. For necessity will pass away, and the time will come when we shall mutually enjoy beauty alone without any lust; which is most of all to be referred to the praise of the Creator, to whom it is said in the psalm: “You have put on confession and beauty.”

Iam cetera pulchritudo et utilitas creaturae, quae homini, licet in istos labores miseriasque proiecto atque damnato, spectanda atque sumenda diuina largitate concessa est, quo sermone terminari potest? in caeli et terrae et maris multimoda et uaria pulchritudine, in ipsius lucis tanta copia tamque mirabili specie, in sole ac luna et sideribus, in opacitatibus nemorum, in coloribus et odoribus florum, in diuersitate ac multitudine uolucrum garrularum atque pictarum, in multiformi specie tot tantarumque animantium, quarum illae plus habent admirationis, quae molis minimum (plus enim formicularum et apicularum opera stupemus quam inmensa corpora ballaenarum), in ipsius quoque maris tam grandi spectaculo, cum sese diuersis coloribus uelut uestibus induit et aliquando uiride atque hoc multis modis, aliquando purpureum, aliquando caeruleum est. Quam porro delectabiliter spectatur etiam quandocumque turbatur, et fit inde maior suauitas, quia sic demulcet intuentem, ut non iactet et quatiat nauigantem!

Now as for the rest of the beauty and utility of creation, which to man—though cast forth and condemned into these labors and miseries—has been granted by divine largesse to be looked upon and to be enjoyed, by what discourse can it be brought to a conclusion? in the multiform and various beauty of heaven and earth and sea, in the very abundance of light and so marvelous an aspect, in the sun and moon and stars, in the shadowiness of groves, in the colors and odors of flowers, in the diversity and multitude of birds, chattering and painted, in the multiform aspect of so many and such great living beings, of which those have more of admiration that have the least of bulk (for we are more astonished at the works of ants and bees than at the immense bodies of whales), and in the very sea too, so grand a spectacle, when it clothes itself with diverse colors as if with garments and is sometimes green—and this in many modes—sometimes purple, sometimes cerulean. How moreover is it delightfully beheld even whenever it is troubled, and thence there arises a greater suavity, because thus it so soothes the onlooker, that it does not toss and shake the one sailing!

Quid ciborum usquequaque copia contra famem? quid saporum diuersitas contra fastidium, naturae diffusa diuitiis, non coquorum arte ac labore quaesita? quid in tam multis rebus tuendae aut recipiendae salutis auxilia!

What of the abundance of foods everywhere against famine? what of the diversity of savors against distaste, diffused by nature in riches, not sought by the art and labor of cooks? what aids in so many matters for the preserving or the recovering of health!

Quam grata uicissitudo diei alternantis et noctis! Aurarum quam blanda temperies! In fruticibus et pecoribus indumentorum conficiendorum quanta materies!

How welcome the vicissitude of alternating day and night! How charming the temperateness of the breezes! In shrubs and in flocks, what material for the making of garments!

Omnia commemorare quis possit? Haec autem sola, quae a me uelut in quendam sunt aggerem coartata, si uellem uelut conligata inuolucra soluere atque discutere, quanta mihi mora esset in singulis, quibus plurima continentur! Et haec omnia miserorum sunt damnatorumque solacia, non praemia beatorum.

Who could commemorate everything? But these alone, which by me have been, as it were, compressed into a kind of embankment, if I wished to unloose and discuss them as though they were bound wrappings, what delay there would be for me in each single one, in which very many things are contained! And all these are the solaces of the wretched and the condemned, not the rewards of the blessed.

Quae igitur illa sunt, si tot et talia ac tanta sunt ista? Quid d a bit eis quos praedestinauit ad uitam, qui haec dedit etiam eis quos praedestinauit ad mortem? Quae bona in illa beata uita faciet eo, sumere, pro quibus in hac misera unigenitum suum filium uoluit usque ad mortem mala tanta perferre?

What then are those things, if these are so many, such, and so great? What will he give to those whom he predestined to life, who gave even these to those whom he predestined to death? What goods in that blessed life will he cause them to receive, for the sake of which in this wretched one he willed his only-begotten Son to endure so great evils even unto death?

Vnde apostolus de ipsis in illud regnum praedestinatis loquens: Qui proprio, inquit, filio non pepercit, sed pro nobis omnibus tradidit eum, quo modo non et cum illo omnia nobis donabit? Cum haec promissio complebitur, quid erimus! quales erimus!

Whence the apostle, speaking about those predestined into that kingdom: “He who did not spare his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how will he not also, with him, bestow all things upon us?” When this promise is fulfilled, what shall we be! what sort shall we be!

Quae bona in illo regno accepturi sumus, quando quidem Christo moriente pro nobis tale iam pignus accepimus! Qualis erit spiritus hominis nullum omnino habens uitium, nec sub quo iaceat, nec cui cedat, nec contra quod saltem laudabiliter dimicet, pacatissima uirtute perfectus! Rerum ibi omnium quanta, quam speciosa, quam certa scientia, sine errore aliquo uel labore, ubi Dei sapientia de ipso suo fonte potabitur, cum summa felicitate, sine ulla difficultate!

What good things in that kingdom shall we receive, since indeed, with Christ dying for us, we have already received such a pledge! What will the spirit of man be like, having no vice at all—neither under which it lies, nor to which it yields, nor against which it even commendably contends—perfected by most peaceable virtue! There, of all things, how great, how splendid, how certain a knowledge, without any error or toil, where the wisdom of God will be drunk from its very own fount, with highest felicity, without any difficulty!

Quale erit corpus, quod omni modo spiritui subditum et eo sufficienter uiuificatum nullis alimoniis indigebit! Non enim animale, sed spiritale erit,habens quidem carnis,sed sine ulla carnali corruptione substantiam.

What will the body be like, which, in every way subjected to the spirit and sufficiently vivified by it, will need no nourishment at all! For it will not be animal, but spiritual, having indeed the substance of flesh, but without any carnal corruption.

[XXV] Verum de animi bonis, quibus post hanc uitam beatissimus perfruetur, non a nobis dissentiunt philosophi nobiles: de carnis resurrectione contendunt, hanc quantum possunt negant. Sed credentes multi negantes paucissimos reliquerunt et ad Christum, qui hoc quod istis uidetur absurdum in sua resurrectione monstrauit, fideli corde conuersi sunt, docti et indocti, sapientes mundi et insipientes. Hoc enim credidit mundus, quod praedixit Deus, qui etiam hoc praedixit, quod hanc rem mundus fuerat crediturus.

[25] But concerning the goods of the soul, with which after this life the most blessed will fully enjoy, the noble philosophers do not dissent from us: concerning the resurrection of the flesh they contend, they deny it as much as they can. But the believers, being many, have left the deniers very few, and they have been converted with faithful heart to Christ, who in his own resurrection demonstrated this which seems absurd to them—both the learned and the unlearned, the wise of the world and the unwise. For the world has believed this which God foretold, who also foretold this, that the world was going to believe this matter.

Neque enim Petri maleficiis ea cum laude credentium tanto ante praenuntiare compulsus est. Ille est enim Deus, quem (sicut iam dixi aliquotiens, nec commonere me piget) confitente Porphyrio atque id oraculis deorum suorum probare cupiente ipsa numina perhorrescunt; quem sic laudauit, ut eum et Deum patrem et regem uocaret. Absit enim, ut sic intellegenda sint quae praedixit, quo modo uolunt hi, qui hoc cum mundo non crediderunt, quod mundum crediturum esse praedixit.

For neither was he compelled by the malefic arts of Peter to foretell those things with such praise of believers so long beforehand. For he is that God, whom (as I have already said several times, nor am I loath to remind) Porphyry confessing, and being eager to prove this by the oracles of his own gods, the very numina shudder at; whom he so praised that he called him both God the Father and King. Far be it that the things he predicted should be understood in the way that those wish, who did not believe this with the world, which he predicted the world would believe.

Cur enim non potius ita, sicut crediturus tanto ante praedictus est mundus, non sicut paucissimi garriunt, qui hoc cum mundo, quod crediturus praedictus est, credere noluerunt? Si enim propterea dicunt alio modo esse credenda, ne, si dixerint uana esse conscripta, iniuriam faciant illi Deo, qui tam magnum perhibent testimonium: tantam prorsus ei uel etiam grauiorem faciunt iniuriam, si aliter dicunt esse intellegenda, non sicut mundus ea credidit, quem crediturum ipse laudauit, ipse promisit, ipse compleuit. Vtrum enim non potest facere ut resurgat caro et uiuat in aeternum, an propterea credendum non est id eum esse facturum, quia malum est atque indignum Deo?

For why not rather thus, just as the world was so long before foretold as about to believe, not as the very few gabble, who were unwilling to believe this along with the world which was foretold as going to believe? For if on that account they say that these things are to be believed in another mode, lest, if they should say that what has been written is vain, they do an injury to that God to whom they bear so great a testimony: they do to him just as great an injury, or even a graver one, if they say that they are to be understood otherwise, not as the world believed them, which he himself praised as going to believe, he himself promised, he himself fulfilled. For is it that he cannot bring it about that the flesh rise again and live unto eternity, or is it for this reason not to be believed that he is going to do this, because it is evil and unworthy of God?

Sed de omnipotentia eius, qua tot et tanta facit incredibilia, iam multa diximus. Si uolunt inuenire quod omnipotens non potest, habent prorsus, ego dicam: mentiri non potest. Credamus ergo quod potest non credendo quod non potest.

But concerning his omnipotence, by which he does so many and so great incredible things, we have already said much. If they wish to find something which the Omnipotent cannot do, they have it indeed—I'll say it: he cannot lie. Let us therefore believe what he can, by not believing what he cannot.

Non itaque credentes quod mentiri possit credant esse facturum quod se facturum esse promisit, et sic credant, sicuti credidit mundus, quem crediturum esse praedixit, quem crediturum esse laudauit, quem crediturum esse promisit, quem credidisse iam ostendit. Hoc autem malum esse unde demonstrant? Non erit illic ulla corruptio, quod est corporis malum.

Therefore, let not those who believe that he can lie believe that he will do what he has promised to do; rather let them believe thus, just as the world believed, which he predicted would believe, which he lauded as going to believe, which he promised would believe, which he has already shown to have believed. But whence do they demonstrate that this is an evil? There will be no corruption there, which is an evil of the body.

De ordine elementorum iam disputauimus; de aliis hominum coniecturis satis diximus; quanta sit futura in corpore incorruptibili facilitas motus, de praesentis bonae ualetudinis temperamento, quae utique nullo modo illi comparanda est inmortalitati, in libro tertio decimo satis, ut opinor, ostendimus. Legant superiora operis huius, qui uel non legerunt uel uolunt recolere quod legerunt.

About the order of the elements we have already discussed; about other human conjectures we have said enough; how great the facility of motion will be in an incorruptible body, and about the temperament of present good health—which, assuredly, is in no way to be compared with that immortality—we have, as I think, shown sufficiently in the 13th book. Let them read the earlier portions of this work, who either have not read, or wish to recollect what they have read.

[XXVI] Sed Porphyrius ait, inquiunt, ut beata sit anima, corpus esse omne fugiendum. Nihil ergo prode est, quia incorruptibile diximus futurum corpus, si anima beata non erit, nisi omne corpus effugerit. Sed iam et hinc in libro memorato quantum oportuit disputaui; uerum hic unum inde tantum commemorabo.

[26] But, they say, Porphyry asserts that, in order that the soul be blessed, every body must be fled. Therefore nothing profits from our having said that the body will be incorruptible, if the soul will not be blessed unless it shall have fled every body. But already on this too, in the aforementioned book, I have disputed as much as was fitting; yet here I will commemorate only one thing from there.

Emendet libros suos istorum omnium magister Plato et dicat eorum deos, ut beati sint, sua corpora fugituros, id est esse morituros, quos in caelestibus corporibus dixit inclusos; quibus tamen Deus, a quo facti sunt, quo possent esse securi, inmortalitatem, id est in eisdem corporibus aeternam permansionem, non eorum natura id habente, sed suo consilio praeualente, promisit. Vbi etiam illud euertit quod dicunt, quoniam est inpossibilis, ideo resurrectionem carnis non esse credendam. Apertissime quippe iuxta eundem philosophum, ubi diis a se factis promisit Deus non factus inmortalitatem, quod inpossibile est se dixit esse facturum.

Let Plato, the master of all those men, emend his books and say that their gods, so that they may be blessed, are going to flee their bodies—that is, to die—those whom he said were enclosed in celestial bodies; yet to these God, by whom they were made, in order that they might be secure, promised immortality, that is, eternal permanence in the same bodies—not their nature having that, but his counsel prevailing. Here he also overturns that assertion which they make, that because it is impossible, therefore the resurrection of the flesh is not to be believed. For most plainly, according to that same philosopher, when the God not made promised immortality to the gods made by himself, he said that he would do what is impossible.

Sic enim eum locutum narrat Plato: "Quoniam estis orti, inquit, inmortales esse et indissolubiles non potestis; non tamen dissoluemini neque uos ulla mortis fata periment nec erunt ualentiora quam consifium meum, quod maius est uinculum ad perpetuitatem uestram quam illa quibus estis conligati." Si non solum absurdi, sed surdi non sunt qui haec audiunt, non utique dubitant diis factis ab illo Deo qui eos fecit secundum Platonem quod est inpossibile fuisse promissum. Qui enim dicit: "Vos quidem inmortales esse non potestis, sed mea uoluntate inmortales eritis," quid aliud dicit quam "id quod fieri non potest me faciente tamen eritis"? Ille igitur carnem incorruptibilem, inmortalem, spiritalem resuscitabit, qui iuxta Platonem id quod inpossibile est se facturum esse promisit. Quid adhuc, quod promisit Deus, quod Deo promittenti credidit mundus, qui etiam ipse promissus est crediturus, esse inpossibile clamant, quando quidem nos Deum, qui etiam secundum Platonem facit inpossibilia, id facturum esse clamamus?

For thus Plato relates him to have spoken: “Since you are born,” he says, “you are not able to be immortal and indissoluble; yet you will not be dissolved, nor shall any fates of death destroy you, nor shall they be stronger than my counsel, which is a greater bond for your perpetuity than those by which you are bound.” If those who hear these things are not deaf, not merely absurd, they surely do not doubt that to the gods made by that God who made them—according to Plato—there was promised what is impossible. For he who says, “You indeed cannot be immortal, but by my will you will be immortal,” what else does he say than, “that which cannot be done, by me doing it, nevertheless you will be”? He therefore will raise the flesh incorruptible, immortal, spiritual, who, according to Plato, promised that he would do what is impossible. Why do they still cry out that what God has promised—what the world believed the God who promised, which very world itself was promised that it would believe—is impossible, since indeed we proclaim that God, who even according to Plato does impossibilities, will do this?

Non ergo, ut beatae sint animae, corpus est omne fugiendum, sed corpus incorruptibile recipiendum. Et in quo conuenientius incorruptibili corpore laetabuntur, quam in quo corruptibili gemuerunt? Sic enim non in eis erit illa dira cupiditas, quam posuit ex Platone Vergilius, ubi ait:

Therefore, in order that souls may be blessed, it is not that every body is to be fled from, but that an incorruptible body is to be received. And in what will they more fittingly rejoice in an incorruptible body than in that in which, being corruptible, they groaned? For thus there will not be in them that dire cupidity which Vergil, drawing from Plato, set forth, where he says:

Rursus et incipiant in corpora uelle reuerti;

And again they begin to will to revert into bodies;

sic, inquam, cupiditatem reuertendi ad corpora non habebunt, cum corpora, in quae reuerti cupiunt, secum habebunt et sic habebunt, ut numquam non habeant, numquam ea prorsus uel ad exiguum quamlibet tempus ulla morte deponant.

thus, I say, they will not have the desire of returning to bodies, since the bodies to which they wish to return they will have with themselves; and they will have them in such wise that they will never be without them, never absolutely lay them aside by any death, even for however brief a time.

[XXVII] Singuli quaedam dixerunt Plato atque Porphyrius, quae si inter se communicare potuissent, facti essent fortasse Christiani. Plato dixit sine corporibus animas in aeternum esse non posse. Ideo enim dixit etiam sapientum animas post quamlibet longum tempus, tamen ad corpora redituras.

[27] Plato and Porphyry each said certain things which, if they had been able to communicate among themselves, perhaps they would have become Christians. Plato said that souls cannot exist forever without bodies. For this reason he said that even the souls of the wise, after however long a time, would nevertheless return to bodies.

Porphyrius autem dixit animam purgatissimam, cum redierit ad Patrem, ad haec mala mundi numquam esse redituram. Ac per hoc, quod uerum uidit Plato, si dedisset Porphyrio, etiam iustorum atque sapientum purgatissimas animas ad humana corpora redituras; rursus quod uerum uidit Porphyrius, dedisset Platoni, numquam redituras ad miserias corruptibils corporis animas sanctas; ut non singuli haec singula, sed ambo et singuli utrumque dicerent: puto quod uiderent esse iam consequens, ut et redirent animae ad corpora et talia reciperent corpora, in quibus beate atque inmortaliter uiuerent. Quoniam secundum Platonem etiam sanctae animae ad humana corpora redibunt; secundum Porphyrium ad mala mundi huius sanctae animae non redibunt.

Porphyry, however, said that the most purified soul, when it has returned to the Father, will never return to these evils of the world. And by this, if he had granted to Porphyry what Plato saw to be true, even the most purified souls of the just and the wise would return to human bodies; in turn, if he had granted to Plato what Porphyry saw to be true, that holy souls would never return to the miseries of a corruptible body; so that not each one these things singly, but both and each would say both: I think that they would see it to be now a consequent, that both souls would return to bodies and would receive such bodies in which they might live blessedly and immortally. For according to Plato even holy souls will return to human bodies; according to Porphyry holy souls will not return to the evils of this world.

Dicat itaque cum Platone Porphyrius: "Redibunt ad corpora"; dicat Plato cum Porphyrio: "Non redibunt ad mala": et ad ea corpora redire consentient, in quibus nulla patiantur mala. Haec itaque non erunt nisi illa quae promittit Deus, beatas animas in aeternum cum sua aeterna carne uicturas. Hoc enim, quantum existimo, iam facile nobis concederent ambo, ut, qui faterentur ad inmortalia corpora redituras animas esse sanctorum, ad sua illas redire permitterent, in quibus mala huius saeculi pertulerunt, in quibus Deum, ut his malis carerent, pie fideliterque coluerunt.

Let Porphyry, then, say along with Plato: "They will return to bodies"; let Plato say along with Porphyry: "They will not return to evils": and let them consent that they return to those bodies in which they suffer no evils. These, therefore, will be none other than those which God promises, that blessed souls will live forever with their own eternal flesh. For this, as far as I suppose, both would now easily grant us: that, since they confess that the souls of the saints are to return to immortal bodies, they would permit those souls to return to their own, in which they bore the evils of this age, in which they piously and faithfully worshiped God, in order that they might be without these evils.

[XXVIII] Nonnulli nostri propter quoddam praeclarissimum loquendi genus et propter nonnulla, quae ueraciter sensit, amantes Platonem dicunt eum aliquid simile nobis etiam de mortuorum resurrectione sensisse. Quod quidem sic tangit in libris de re publica Tullius, ut eum lusisse potius quam quod id uerum esse adfirmet dicere uoluisse. Inducit enim hominem reuixisse et narrasse quaedam, quae Platonicis disputationibus congruebant.

[28] Some of our own people, because of a certain most illustrious manner of speaking and because of certain things which he veraciously perceived, being lovers of Plato, say that he too held something akin to us even about the resurrection of the dead. Cicero touches on this, in the books On the Republic, in such a way that he makes it seem he was playing rather than that he wished to say he affirms it to be true. For he introduces a man who had revived and had narrated certain things which were congruent with Platonic disputations.

Labeo etiam duos dicit uno die fuisse defunctos et occurrisse inuicem in quodam compito, deinde ad corpora sua iussos fuisse remeare et constituisse inter se amicos se esse uicturos, atque ita esse factum, donec postea morerentur. Sed isti auctores talem resurrectionem corporis factam fuisse narrarunt, quales fuerunt eorum, quos resurrexisse nouimus et huic quidem redditos uitae, sed non eo modo ut non morerentur ulterius. Mirabilius autem quiddam Marcus Varro ponit in libris, quos conscripsit de gente populi Romani, cuius putaui uerba ipsa ponenda.

Labeo also says that two had been defunct on one and the same day and met one another at a certain crossroads, then were ordered to return to their bodies and had agreed among themselves that they would live as friends, and thus it was done until afterward they died. But those authors narrated that such a resurrection of the body had happened as were the cases of those whom we know to have risen and to have been restored to this life, yet not in such a mode that they would not die thereafter. More marvelous, however, Marcus Varro sets forth something in the books which he composed concerning the gens of the Roman people, whose very words I thought should be set down.

"Genethliaci quidam scripserunt, inquit, esse in renascendis hominibus quam appellant *paliggenesi/an Graeci; hac scripserunt confici in annis num ero quadringentis quadraginta, ut idem corpus et eadem anima, quae fuerint coniuncta in homine aliquando, eadem rursus redeant in coniunctionem." Iste Varro quidem siue illi genethliaci nescio qui (non enim nomina eorum prodidit, quorum commemorauit sententiam) aliquid dixerunt, quod licet falsum sit (cum enim semel ad eadem corpora quae gesserunt animae redierint, numquam ea sunt postea relicturae), tamen multa illius inpossibilitatis, qua contra nos isti garriunt, argumenta conuellit et destruit. Qui enim hoc sentiunt siue senserunt, non eis uisum est fieri non posse, ut dilapsa cadauera in auras in puluerem, in cinerem in umores, in corpora uescentium bestiarum uel ipsorum quoque hominum ad id rursus redeant, quod fuerunt. Quapropter Plato et Porphyrius, uel potius quicumque illos diligunt et adhuc uiuunt, si nobis consentiunt etiam sanctas animas ad corpora redituras, sicut ait Plato, nec tamen ad mala ulla redituras, sicut ait Porphyrius, ut ex his fiat consequens, quod fides praedicat Christiana, talia corpora recepturas, in quibus sine ullo malo in aeternum feliciter uiuant, adsumant etiam hoc de Varrone, ut ad eadem corpora redeant, in quibus antea fuerunt, et apud eos tota quaestio de carnis in aeternum resurrectione soluetur.

"Certain Genethliacs have written," he says, "that there is, in humans being reborn, what the Greeks call *paliggenesi/an*; by this they have written that it is completed in a number of 440 years, so that the same body and the same soul, which at some time were conjoined in a human being, return again into the same conjunction." This Varro indeed, or those I-know-not-which Genethliacs (for he did not divulge the names of those whose opinion he recounted), said something which, although it is false (for when once souls shall have returned to the same bodies which they have borne, they will never afterwards leave them), nevertheless tears up and destroys many arguments of that supposed impossibility with which these people babble against us. For those who feel or have felt this did not judge it impossible that corpses, dissolved into airs, into dust, into ashes, into fluids, into the bodies of feeding beasts or even of human beings themselves, should return again to what they were. Wherefore Plato and Porphyry—or rather whoever love them and are still alive—if they agree with us that even holy souls are going to return to bodies, as Plato says, and yet that they will not return to any evils, as Porphyry says, so that from these it follows, as the Christian faith proclaims, that they will receive such bodies in which, without any evil, they may live happily forever, let them also take this from Varro: that they return to the same bodies in which they were before; and with them the whole question concerning the resurrection of the flesh forever will be resolved.

[XXIX] Nunc iam quid acturi sint in corporibus inmortalibus atque spiritalibus sancti, non adhuc eorum carne carnaliter, sed spiritaliter iam uiuente, quantum Dominus dignatur adiuuare uideamus. Et illa quidem actio uel potius quies atque otium quale futurum sit, si uerum uelim dicere, nescio. Non enim hoc umquam per sensus corporis uidi.

[29] Now at last what the saints are going to do in immortal and spiritual bodies, their flesh no longer living carnally but already living spiritually, let us see, so far as the Lord deigns to aid. And as for that action, or rather rest and leisure, of what sort it will be, if I should wish to speak truly, I do not know. For I have never seen this through the senses of the body.

Si autem mente, id est intellegentia, uidisse me dicam, quantum est aut quid est nostra intellegentia ad illam excellentiam? Ibi est enim pax Dei, quae, sicut dicit apostolus, superat omnem intellectum; quem nisi nostrum, aut fortasse etiam sanctorum angelorum? non enim et Dei.

But if I should say that I have seen by the mind, that is, by intelligence, how great is, or what is, our intelligence in comparison with that excellence? For there is the peace of God, which, as the Apostle says, surpasses every intellect; whose, unless ours, or perhaps even that of the holy angels? for not that of God.

Si ergo sancti in Dei pace uicturi sunt, profecto in ea pace uicturi sunt, quae superat omnem intellectum. Quoniam nostrum quidem superat, non est dubium; si autem superat et angelorum, ut nec ipsos excepisse uideatur, qui ait omnem intellectum: secundum hoc dictum esse debemus accipere, quia pacem Dei, qua Deus ipse pacatus est, sicut Deus nouit, non eam nos sic possumus nosse nec ulli angeli. Superat itaque omnem intellectum, non dubium quod praeter suum.

If therefore the saints are going to live in the peace of God, assuredly they will live in that peace which surpasses every intellect. For that it surpasses ours, there is no doubt; but if it also surpasses the angels’, so that he who says “every intellect” may seem not to have excepted even them, we ought to take the saying accordingly, that the peace of God, with which God Himself is at peace, as God knows it, neither we nor any angels can know thus. Therefore it surpasses every intellect—no doubt, all save His own.

Sed quia et nos pro modo nostro.pacis eius participes facti scimus summam in nobis atque inter nos et cum ipso pacem, quantum nostrum summum est: isto modo pro suo modo sciunt eam sancti angeli; homines autem nunc longe infra, quantumlibet prouectu mentis excellant. Considerandum est enim quantus uir dicebat: Ex parte scimus et ex parte prophetamus, donec ueniat quod perfectum est; et: Videmus nunc per speculum in aenigmate, tunc autem faciem ad faciem. Sic iam uident sancti angeli, qui etiam nostri angeli dicti sunt, quia eruti de potestate tenebrarum et accepto spiritus pignore translati ad regnum Christi ad eos angelos iam coepimus pertinere, cum quibus nobis erit sancta atque dulcissima, de qua iam tot libros scripsimus, Dei ciuitas ipsa communis.

But since we too, according to our mode, having been made participants of that peace, know the highest peace in ourselves and among ourselves and with himself, insofar as what is highest for us permits: in this manner, according to their own mode, the holy angels know it; but humans now are far beneath, no matter how much they may excel by progress of mind. For we must consider what a great man said: “In part we know and in part we prophesy, until there comes what is perfect”; and: “We see now through a mirror in an enigma, but then face to face.” Thus already do the holy angels see, who are also called our angels, because, rescued from the power of darkness and, the pledge of the Spirit having been received, transferred into the kingdom of Christ, we have already begun to belong to those angels, with whom for us there will be the holy and most sweet—about which we have already written so many books—the City of God herself in common.

Sic sunt ergo angeli nostri qui sunt angeli Dei, quem ad modum Christus Dei Christus est noster. Dei sunt, ia Deum non reliquerunt; nostri sunt, quia suos ciues nos habere coeperunt. Dixit autem Dominus Iesus: Videte ne contemnatis unum de pusillis istis.

Thus our angels, who are the angels of God, are so, just as the Christ of God is our Christ. They are God’s, because they have not left God; they are ours, because they have begun to have us as their fellow-citizens. But the Lord Jesus said: See that you do not despise one of these little ones.

Dico enim uobis, quia angeli eorum in caelis semper uident faciem patris mei, qui in caelis est. Sicut ergo illi uident, ita et nos uisuri sumus; sed nondum ita uidemus. Propter quod ait apostolus, quod paulo ante dixi: Videmus nunc per speculum in aenigmate, tunc autem faciem ad faciem.

For I say to you, that their angels in the heavens always see the face of my Father, who is in the heavens. Just as therefore they see, so also we shall see; but we do not yet see thus. Wherefore the apostle says, as I said a little before: We see now through a mirror in an enigma, but then face to face.

Praemium itaque fidei nobis uisio ista seruatur, de qua et Iohannes apostolus loquens: Cum apparuerit, inquit, similes ei erimus, quoniam uidebimus eum sicuti est. Facies autem Dei manifestatio eius intellegenda est, non aliquod tale membrum, quale nos habemus in corpore atque isto nomine nuncupamus. Quapropter cum ex me quaeritur, quid acturi sint sancti in illo corpore spiritali, non dico quod iam uideo, sed dico quod credo, secundum illud quod in psalmo lego: Credidi, propter quod <et> locutus sum.

Therefore the reward of faith is kept for us—this vision—about which also the apostle John speaks: “When he shall appear,” he says, “we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is.” But the face of God is to be understood as his manifestation, not some such member as we have in the body and call by this name. Wherefore, when it is asked of me what the saints will be doing in that spiritual body, I do not say what I already see, but I say what I believe, according to that which I read in the psalm: “I believed, and therefore I have spoken.”

uico itaque: Visuri sunt Deum in ipso corpore; sed utrum per ipsum, sicut per corpus nunc uidemus solem, lunam, stellas, mare ac terram et quae sunt in ea, non parua quaestio est. Durum est enim dicere, quod sancti talia corpora tunc habebunt, ut non possint oculos claudere atque aperire cum uolent; durius autem, quod ibi Deum, quisquis oculos clauserit, non uidebit. Si enim propheta Helisaeus puerum suum Giezi absens corpore uidit accipientem munera, quae dedit ei Naeman Syrus, quem propheta memoratus a leprae deformitate liberauerat, quod seruus nequam domino suo non uidente latenter se fecisse putauerat: quanto magis in illo corpore spiritali uidebunt sancti omnia, non solum si oculos claudant, uerum etiam unde sunt corpore absentes!

i say therefore: They will-be-to-see God in that very body; but whether through it, just as through the body we now see the sun, the moon, the stars, the sea and the earth and the things that are in it, is no small question. For it is hard to say that the saints will then have such bodies that they cannot close and open their eyes when they wish; harder still, that there, whoever has closed his eyes will not see God. For if the prophet Helisaeus, being absent in body, saw his boy Giezi receiving the gifts which Naaman the Syrian gave him—whom the aforesaid prophet had freed from the deformity of leprosy—which the wicked servant supposed he had done secretly, his master not seeing: how much more in that spiritual body will the saints see all things, not only if they close their eyes, but even from where they are absent in body!

Tunc enim erit perfectum illud, de quo loquens apostolus: Ex parte, inquit, scimus et ex parte prophetamus; cum autem uenerit quod perfectum est, quod ex parte est euacuabitur. Deinde ut quo modo posset aliqua similitudine ostenderet, quantum ab illa quae futura est distet haec uita, non qualiumcumque hominum, uerum etiam qui praecipua hic sanctitate sunt praediti: Cum essem, inquit, paruulus, quasi paruulus sapiebam, quasi paruulus loquebar, quasi paruulus cogitabam; cum autem factus sum uir, euacuaui ea quae paruuli erant. Videmus nunc per speculum in aenigmate, tunc autem faciem ad faciem.

Then indeed that perfection will be, about which the apostle, speaking, says: In part, he says, we know and in part we prophesy; but when that which is perfect shall have come, that which is in part will be abolished. Then, in order that he might show by some similitude how far this life differs from that which is to come, not of just any men, but even of those who here are endowed with preeminent sanctity: When I was, he says, a little child, as a little child I used to be wise, as a little child I used to speak, as a little child I used to think; but when I became a man, I abolished the things which were of a little child. We see now through a mirror, in an enigma, but then face to face.

Nunc scio ex parte, tunc autem cognoscam sicut et cognitus sum. Si ergo in hac uita, ubi hominum mirabilium prophetia ita comparanda est illi uitae, quasi paruuli ad iuuenem, uidit tamen Helisaeus accipientem munera seruum suum, ubi ipse non erat: itane cum uenerit quod perfectum est nec iam corpus corruptibile adgrauabit animam, sed incorruptibile nihil impediet, illi sancti ad ea, quae uidenda sunt, oculis corporeis, quibus Helisaeus absens ad seruum suum uidendum non indiguit, indigebunt? Nam secundum interpretes septuaginta ista sunt ad Giezi uerba prophetae: Nonne cor meum iit tecum, quando conuersus est uir de curru in obuiam tibi et accepisti pecuniam?

Now I know in part, but then I shall know even as I have been known. If therefore in this life, where the prophecy of wondrous men is to be compared with that life as little children to a youth, yet Helisaeus saw his servant receiving gifts where he himself was not: is it, then, that when what is perfect shall have come and the corruptible body will no longer weigh down the soul, but the incorruptible will hinder nothing, those saints will need, for the things that are to be seen, bodily eyes—which Helisaeus, being absent, did not need in order to see his servant? For according to the interpreters of the Seventy these are the prophet’s words to Giezi: “Did not my heart go with you, when the man turned from his chariot to meet you and you received money?”

et cetera; sicut autem ex Hebraeo interpretatus est presbyter Hieronymus: Nonne cor meum, inquit, in praesenti erat, quando reuersus est homo de curru suo in occursum tui? Corde suo ergo se dixit hoc uidisse propheta, adiuto quidem mirabiliter nullo dubitante diuinitus. Sed quanto amplius tunc omnes munere isto abundabunt, cum Deus erit omnia in omnibus!

and so forth; just as, moreover, the presbyter Jerome translated from the Hebrew: Was not my heart, he says, present, when the man turned back from his chariot to meet you? With his heart, therefore, the prophet said that he saw this, aided indeed wondrously—no one doubting—divinely. But how much more then will all abound with this munus, when God will be all in all!

Habebunt tamen etiam illi oculi corporei officium suum et in loco suo erunt, uteturque illis spiritus per spiritale corpus. Neque enim et ille propheta, quia non eis indiguit ut uideret absentem, non eis usus est ad uidenda praesentia; quae tamen spiritu uidere posset, etiamsi illos clauderet, sicut uidit absentia, ubi cum eis ipse non erat. Absit ergo, ut dicamus illos sanctos in illa uita Deum clausis oculis non uisuros, quem spiritu semper uidebunt.

Nevertheless those bodily eyes too will have their office and will be in their place, and the spirit will use them through the spiritual body. For not even that prophet, because he did not need them to see someone absent, failed to use them for seeing things present; which, however, he could see by the spirit, even if he were to close them, just as he saw things absent, when he himself was not with them. Far be it, therefore, that we should say that those saints in that life, with eyes closed, will not see God, whom they will always see with the spirit.

Sed utrum uidebunt et per oculos corporis cum eos apertos habebunt, inde quaestio est. Si enim tantum poterunt in corpore spiritali eo modo utique ipsi oculi etiam spiritales, quantum possunt isti quales nunc habemus: procul dubio per eos Deus uideri non poterit. Longe itaque alterius erunt potentiae, si per eos uidebitur incorporea illa natura, quae non continetur loco, sed ubique tota est.

But whether they will also see through the eyes of the body when they have them open, there is the question. For if in the spiritual body they will be able only in such a manner—the eyes themselves also spiritual—as much as these, such as we now have, can, then without doubt God will not be able to be seen through them. Therefore they will be of a far different potency, if through them that incorporeal nature will be seen, which is not contained by place, but is whole everywhere.

Non enim quia dicimus Deum et in caelo esse et in terra (ipse quippe ait per prophetam: Caelum et terram ego impleo), aliam partem dicturi sumus eum in caelo habere et in terra aliam; sed totus in caelo est, totus in terra, non alternis temporibus, sed utrumque simul, quod nulla natura corporalis potest. Vis itaque praepollentior oculorum erit illorum, non ut acrius uideant, quam quidam perhibentur uidere serpentes uel aquilae (quantalibet enim acrimonia cernendi eadem quoque animalia nihil aliud possunt uidere quam corpora), sed ut uideant et incorporalia. Et fortasse ista uirtus magna cernendi data fuerit ad horam etiam in isto mortali corpore ocmis sancti uiri Iob, quando ait ad Deum: In obauditu auris audiebam te prius, nunc autem oculus meus uidet te. propterea despexi memet ipsum et distabui et existimaui me terram et cinerem; quamuis nihil hic prohibeat oculum cordis intellegi, de quibus oculis ait apostolus: Inluminatos oculos habere cordis uestri.

For not because we say that God is both in heaven and on earth (for he himself says through the prophet: I fill heaven and earth) shall we say that he has one part in heaven and another on earth; but he is whole in heaven, whole on earth, not at alternate times, but both at once, which no corporeal nature can do. Therefore the power of those eyes will be more prepotent, not that they may see more keenly than certain serpents or eagles are reported to see (for with whatever keenness of discerning, those same animals can see nothing other than bodies), but that they may also see incorporeals. And perhaps this great virtue of discerning was given for an hour even in this mortal body to the eyes of the holy man Job, when he says to God: By the hearing of the ear I heard you before, but now my eye sees you. Therefore I despised myself and melted away, and I reckoned myself earth and ashes; although nothing here prevents the eye of the heart from being understood, of which eyes the apostle says: to have the eyes of your heart enlightened.

Ipsis autem uideri Deum, cum uidebitur, Christianus ambigit nemo, qui fideliter accipit, quod ait Deus ille magister: Beati mundicordes, quoniam ipsi Deum uidebunt. Sed utrum etiam corporalibus ibi oculis uideatur, hoc in ista quaestione uersamus.

But that God will be seen by them, when He shall be seen, no Christian hesitates who faithfully accepts what that God the Teacher says: “Blessed the pure-in-heart, for they themselves shall see God.” But whether He is seen there also by bodily eyes, this we are turning over in the present question.

Illud enim quod scriptum est: Et uidebit omnis caro salutare Dei, sine ullius nodo difficultatis sic intellegi potest, ac si dictum fuerit: "Et uidebit omnis homo Christum Dei", qui utique in corpore uisus est et in corpore uidebitur, quando uiuos et mortuos iudicabit. Quod autem ipse sit salutare Dei, multa sunt et alia testimonia scripturarum; sed euidentius uenerandi illius senis Simeonis uerba declarant, qui, cum infantem Christum accepisset in manus suas: Nunc, inquit, dimittis, Domine, seruum tuum secundum uerbum tuum in pace, quoniam uiderunt oculi mei salutare tuum. Illud etiam, quod ait supra memoratus Iob, sicut in exemplaribus, quae ex Hebraeo sunt, inuenitur: Et in carne mea uideba Deum, resurrectionem quidem carnis sine dubio prophetauit, non tamen dixit: "Per carnem me m." Quod quidem si dixisset, posset Deus Christus intellegi, qui per carnem in carne uidebitur; nunc uero potest et sic accipi: In carne mea uidebo Deum, ac si dixisset: "In carne mea ero, cum uidebo Deum." Et illud, quod ait apostolus: Faciem ad faciem, non cogit ut Deum per hanc faciem corporalem, ubi sunt oculi corporales, nos uisuros esse credamus, quem spiritu sine intermissione uidebimus.

That which is written, “And all flesh shall see the salvation of God,” can be understood without any knot of difficulty thus, as if it had been said: “And every man will see the Christ of God,” who assuredly was seen in a body and will be seen in a body when he judges the living and the dead. Now that he himself is the salvation of God, there are many other testimonies of the Scriptures; but more evidently the words of that venerable old man Simeon declare it, who, when he had received the infant Christ into his hands, said: “Now, Lord, you dismiss your servant according to your word in peace, because my eyes have seen your salvation.” Also that which the aforementioned Job says, as is found in the exemplars which are from the Hebrew: “And in my flesh I will see God,” did without doubt prophesy the resurrection of the flesh; yet he did not say: “Through my flesh me m.” Which indeed, if he had said, Christ God could be understood, who through flesh will be seen in flesh; but now it can also be taken thus: “In my flesh I shall see God,” as if he had said: “I shall be in the flesh when I see God.” And that which the apostle says, “Face to face,” does not force us to believe that we shall see God through this corporal face, where the bodily eyes are, whom we shall see by the spirit without intermission.

Nisi enim esset etiam interioris hominis facies, non diceret idem apostolus: Nos autem reuelata facie gloriam Domini speculantes in eandem imaginem transformamur, de gloria in gloriam, tamquam a Domini spiritu; nec aliter intellegimus et quod in psalmo canitur: Accedite ad eum et inluminamini, et facies uestrae non erubescent. Fide quippe acceditur ad Deum, quam cordis constat esse, non corporis. Sed quia spiritale corpus nescimus quantos habebit accessus (de re quippe inexperta loquimur), ubi aliqua, quae aliter intellegi nequeat, diuinarum scripturarum non occurrit et succurrit auctoritas, necesse est ut contingat in nobis quod legitur in libro Sapientiae: Cogitationes mortalium timidae et incertae prouidentiae nostrae.

For unless there were also a face of the inner man, the same apostle would not say: But we, with an unveiled face, contemplating the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image, from glory into glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord; nor do we otherwise understand also that which is sung in the psalm: Draw near to him and be illuminated, and your faces will not be put to shame. By faith, to be sure, one draws near to God, which is known to belong to the heart, not to the body. But because we do not know how many approaches the spiritual body will have (for indeed we speak of a matter unexperienced), when there does not occur and come to our aid some authority of the divine Scriptures which cannot be understood otherwise, it must needs be that what is read in the Book of Wisdom befalls us: The thoughts of mortals are timid, and our providences are uncertain.

Ratiocinatio quippe illa philosophorum, qua disputant ita mentis aspectu intellegibilia uideri et sensu corporis sensibilia, id est corporalia, ut nec intellegibilia per corpus nec corporalia per se ipsam mens ualeat intueri, si posset nobis esse certissima, profecto certum esset per oculos corporis etiam spiritalis nullo modo posse uideri Deum. Sed istam ratiocinationem et uera ratio et prophetica inridet auctoritas. Quis enim ita sit auersus a uero, ut dicere audeat Deum corporalia ista nescire?

That ratiocination of the philosophers, by which they dispute that intelligibles are seen by the aspect of the mind and sensibles by the sense of the body, that is, corporeals, such that neither can intelligibles be beheld through the body nor can the mind by itself behold corporeals—if it could be most certain for us, assuredly it would be certain that through the eyes of the body, even of the spiritual body, God could in no way be seen. But both true reason and prophetic authority deride that ratiocination. For who is so averse from the truth as to dare to say that God is ignorant of these corporeal things?

Numquid ergo corpus habet, per cuius oculos ea possit addiscere? Deinde quod de propheta Helisaeo paulo ante diximus, nonne satis indicat etiam spiritu, non per corpus, corporalia posse cerni? Quando enim seruus ille munera accepit, utique corporaliter gestum est; quod tamen propheta non per corpus, sed per spiritum uidit.

Has he therefore a body, through the eyes of which he could learn these things? Then what we said a little before about the prophet Elisha, does it not sufficiently indicate that even by the spirit, not through the body, corporeal things can be discerned? For when that servant received the gifts, to be sure it was an act done corporally; yet the prophet saw it not through the body, but through the spirit.

Sicut ergo constat corpora uideri spiritu, quid si tanta erit potentia spiritalis corporis, ut corpore uideatur et spiritus? Spiritus enim est Deus. Deinde uitam quidem suam, qua nunc uiuit in corpore et haec terrena membra uegetat facitoque uiuentia, interiore sensu quisque, non per corporeos oculos nouit; aliorum uero uitas, cum sint inuisibiles, per corpus uidet.

As therefore it is established that bodies are seen by the spirit, what if the potency of the spiritual body will be so great that by the body even the spirit may be seen? For God is Spirit. Next, each one knows his own life, by which he now lives in the body and quickens and makes these earthly members living, by an interior sense, not through bodily eyes; but the lives of others, although they are invisible, he sees through the body.

Nam unde uiuentia discernimus a non uiuentibus corpora, nisi corpora simul uitasque uideamus, quas nisi per corpus uidere non possumus? Vitas autem sine corporibus corporeis oculis non uidemus.

For whence do we discern living bodies from non-living, unless we see bodies and lives together, which lives we cannot see except through the body? But lives without bodies we do not see with corporeal eyes.

Quam ob rem fieri potest ualdeque credibile est sic nos uisuros mundana tunc corpora caeli noui et terrae nouae, ut Deum ubique praesentem et uniuersa etiam corporalia gubernantem per corpora quae gestabimus et quae conspiciemus, quaqua uersum oculos duxerimus, clarissima perspicuitate uideamus, non sicut nunc inuisibilia Dei per ea, quae facta sunt, intellecta conspiciuntur per speculum in aenigmate <et> ex parte, ubi plus in nobis ualet fides, qua credimus, quam rerum corporalium species, quam per oculos cernimus corporales. Sed sicut homines, inter quos uiuentes motusque uitales exerentes uiuimus, mox ut aspicimus, non credimus uiuere, sed uidemus, cum eorum uitam sine corporibus uidere nequeamus, quam tamen in eis per corpora remota omni ambiguitate conspicimus: ita quaecumque spiritalia illa lumina corporum nostrorum circumferemus, incorporeum Deum omnia regentem etiam per corpora contuebimur. Aut ergo sic per illos oculos uidebitur Deus, ut aliquid habeant in tanta excellentia menti simile, quo et incorporea natura cernatur, quod ullis exemplis siue scripturarum testimoniis diuinarum uel difficile est uel inpossibile ostendere; aut, quod est ad intellegendum facilius, ita Deus nobis erit notus atque conspicuus, ut uideatur spiritu a singulis nobis in singulis nobis, uideatur ab altero in altero, uideatur in se ipso, uideatur in caelo nouo et terra noua atque in omni, quae tunc fuerit, creatura, uideatur et per corpora in omni corpore, quocumque fuerint spiritalis corporis oculi acie perueniente directi.

Therefore it can be and is highly credible that we shall then see the mundane bodies of the new heaven and the new earth in such a way that we may behold God, everywhere present and governing the universe—even the corporeal—through the bodies which we shall bear and which we shall behold, wherever we turn our eyes, with most crystal perspicuity; not as now the invisibles of God, understood through the things that have been made, are perceived through a mirror in an enigma and in part, where faith, by which we believe, has more force in us than the species of corporeal things which we discern by corporeal eyes. But just as, regarding the humans among whom we live, exercising vital motions—as soon as we look at them, we do not believe that they live, but see it—since we cannot see their life without bodies, yet in them we behold it through their bodies with all ambiguity removed: so, whatever spiritual lights those shall be of our bodies which we shall carry about, we shall gaze upon the incorporeal God, ruling all things, even through bodies. Either, then, God will be seen through those eyes in such a way that they have, in so great excellence, something similar to mind, whereby even an incorporeal nature is discerned—which it is either difficult or impossible to show by any examples or by testimonies of the divine Scriptures; or else, what is easier to understand, God will be known and conspicuous to us in such a way that he will be seen by the spirit by each of us in each of us, will be seen by one in another, will be seen in himself, will be seen in the new heaven and the new earth and in every creature that shall then exist, will be seen also through bodies in every body, whithersoever the edge of vision of the eyes of the spiritual body, when directed, shall reach.

Patebunt etiam cogitationes nostrae inuicem nobis. Tunc enim implebitur, quod apostolus, cum dixissa: Nolite ante tempus iudicare quicquam, mox addidit: Donec ueniat Dominus, et inluminabit abscondita tenebrarum et manifestabit cogitationes cordis, et tunc laus erit unicuique a Deo.

Our cogitations, too, will be open to one another. For then there will be fulfilled what the Apostle, when he had said, Do not judge anything before the time, straightway added: Until the Lord comes, and he will illuminate the hidden things of darkness and will manifest the cogitations of the heart, and then there will be praise for each from God.

[XXX] Quanta erit illa felicitas, ubi nullum erit malum, nullum latebit bonum, uacabitur Dei laudibus, qui erit omnia in omnibus! Nam quid aliud agatur, ubi neque ulla desidia cessabitur neque ulla indigentia laborabitur, nescio. Admoneor etiam sancto cantico, ubi lego uel audio: Beati, qui habitant in domo tua, in saecula saeculorum laudabunt te. Omnia membra et uiscera incorruptibilis corporis, quae nunc uidemus per usus necessitatis uarios distributa, quoniam tunc non erit ipsa necessitas, sed plena certa, secura sempiterna felicitas, proficient laudibus Dei.

[30] How great will that felicity be, where there will be no evil, no good will lie hidden, and there will be leisure for the praises of God, who will be all in all! For what else would be done there, where there will be no idling in sloth nor toiling in indigence, I do not know. I am also admonished by the holy canticle, where I read or hear: Blessed are they who dwell in your house; they will praise you unto ages of ages. All the members and the inward parts of the incorruptible body, which we now see distributed for various uses of necessity—since then there will not be that necessity itself, but full, sure, secure, everlasting felicity—will be employed in the praises of God.

Omnes quippe illi, de quibus iam sum locutus, qui nunc latent, harmoniae corporalis numeri non latebunt, intrinsecus et extrinsecus per corporis cuncta d(positi, et cum ceteris rebus, quae ibi magnae atque mirabiles uidebuntur, rationales mentes in tanti artificis laudem rationabilis pulchritudinis delectatione succendent. Qui motus illic talium corporum sint futuri, temere definire non audeo, quod excogitare non ualeo; tamen et motus et status, sicut ipsa species, decens erit, quicumque erit, ubi quod non decebit non erit. Certe ubi uolet spiritus, ibi erit protinus corpus; nec uolet aliquid spiritus, quod nec spiritum posset decere nec corpus.

For indeed all those of which I have already spoken, which now lie hidden, the numbers of bodily harmony will not lie hidden, disposed within and without through all the parts of the body, and, together with the other things which there will seem great and marvelous, they will kindle rational minds, by the delectation of rational beauty, to the praise of so great an artificer. What motions there of such bodies are going to be, I do not dare rashly to define, since I am not able to think it out; nevertheless both motion and state, just as the very species (appearance), will be seemly, whatever it will be, where what would not be seemly will not be. Surely, where the spirit will will, there the body will be at once; nor will the spirit will anything that could befit neither spirit nor body.

Vera ibi gloria erit, ubi laudantis nec errore quisquam nec adulatione laudabitur; uerus honor, qui nulli negabitur digno, nulli deferetur indigno; sed nec ad eum ambiet ullus indignus, ubi nullus permittetur esse nisi dignus; uera pax, ubi nihil aduersi nec a se ipso nec ab aliquo quisque patietur. Praemium uirtutis erit ipse, qui uirtutem dedit eique se ipsum, quo melius et maius nihil possit esse, promisit. Quid est enim aliuds quod per prophetam dixit: Ero illorum Deus, et ipsi erunt mihi plebs, nisi: "Ego ero unde satientur, ego ero quaecumque ab hominibus honeste desiderantur, et uita et salus et uictus et copia et gloria et honor et pax et omnia bona"? Sic enim et illud recte intellegitur, quod ait apostolus: Vt sit Deus omnia in omnibus.

There will be true glory there, where the one being praised will be praised neither by the error of the praiser nor by adulation; true honor, which will be denied to no one worthy, deferred to no one unworthy; and neither will any unworthy person angle for it, where no one will be permitted to be except one who is worthy; true peace, where no one will suffer anything adverse either from himself or from anyone else. The reward of virtue will be He himself, who gave virtue, and to it he promised Himself, than whom nothing better and greater can exist. For what else is that which he said through the prophet: I will be their God, and they shall be to me a people, unless: “I shall be that from which they are filled; I shall be whatever things are honorably desired by human beings—both life and salvation and victual and abundance and glory and honor and peace and all goods”? Thus also that saying of the Apostle is rightly understood: That God may be all in all.

Ipse finis erit desideriorum nostrorum, qui sine fine uidebitur, sine fastidio amabitur, sine fatigatione laudabitur. Hoc munus, hic affectus, hic actus profecto erit omnibus, sicut ipsa uita aeterna, communis.

He himself will be the end of our desires, who will be seen without end, will be loved without satiety, will be praised without fatigue. This gift, this affection, this act will indeed be common to all, just as eternal life itself is common.

Ceterum qui futuri sint pro meritis praemiorum etiam gradus honorum atque gloriarum, quis est idoneus cogitare, quanto magis dicere? Quod tamen futuri sint, non est ambigendum. Atque id etiam beata illa ciuitas magnum in se bonum uidebit, quod nulli superiori ullus inferior inuidebit, sicut nunc non inuident archangelis angeli ceteri; tamque nolet esse unusquisque quod non accepit, quamuis sit pacatissimo concordiae uinculo ei qui accepit obstrictus, quam nec in corpore uult oculus esse qui est digitus, cum membrum utrumque contineat totius corporis pacata compago.

Moreover, what the grades of honors and glories are going to be, in proportion to merits of rewards—who is fit to conceive it, much less to speak it? That, nevertheless, there will be such, is not to be doubted. And even this that blessed city will see as a great good in itself: that no inferior will envy any superior, just as now the other angels do not envy the archangels; and each will as little wish to be what he has not received—though bound by the most pacific bond of concord to him who has received—as in the body the one who is a finger does not wish to be an eye, while the peaceful framework of the whole body holds both members together.

Sic itaque habebit donum alius alio minus, ut hoc quoque donum habeat, ne uelit amplius.

Thus, accordingly, one will have a gift less than another, so that he may have this gift as well: that he should not wish for more.

Nec ideo liberum arbitrium non habebunt, quia peccata eos delectare non poterunt. Magis quippe erit liberum a delectatione peccandi usque ad delectationem non peccandi indeclinabilem liberatum. Nam primum liberum arbitrium, quod homini datum est, quando primo creatus est rectus, potuit non peccare, sed potuit et peccare; hoc autem nouissimum eo potentius erit, quo peccare non poterit; uerum hoc quoque Dei munere, non suae possibilitate naturae.

Nor, on that account, will they be without free will, because sins will not be able to delight them. For indeed it will be freer, having been liberated from the delectation of sinning unto an undeclinable delectation of not sinning. For the first free will, which was given to man when he was first created upright, was able not to sin, but was also able to sin; but this last will be the more potent, in that it will not be able to sin—yet this, too, by the gift of God, not by the possibility of its own nature.

Aliud est enim esse Deum, aliud participem Dei. Deus natura peccare non potest: particeps uero Dei ab illo accepit, ut peccare non possit. Seruandi autem gradus erant diuini muneris, ut primum daretur liberum arbitrium, quo non peccare homo posset, nouissimum, quo peccare non posset, atque illud ad comparandum meritum, hoc ad recipiendum praemium pertineret.

For it is one thing to be God, another to be a participant of God. God by nature cannot sin; but the participant of God has received from Him that he cannot sin. Moreover, the grades of the divine gift were to be preserved: that first free will be given, whereby a human might be able not to sin; the last, whereby he would not be able to sin; and that the former should pertain to acquiring merit, the latter to receiving the reward.

Sed quia peccauit ista natura cum peccare potuit, largiore gratia liberatur, ut ad eam perducatur libertatem, in qua peccare non possit. Sicut enim prima inmortalitas fuit, quam peccando Adam perdidit, posse non mori, nouissima erit non posse mori: ita primum liberum arbitrium posse non peccare, nouissimum non posse peccare. Sic enim erit inamissibilis uoluntas pietatis et aequitatis, quo modo est felicitatis.

But since this nature sinned when it was able to sin, by a more ample grace it is liberated, so that it may be brought to that liberty in which it cannot sin. For just as the first immortality, which Adam lost by sinning, was to be able not to die, the last will be not to be able to die; so the first free will was to be able not to sin, the last will be not to be able to sin. Thus there will be an indefectible will of piety and equity, in the same way as there is of felicity.

Nam utique peccando nec pietatem nec felicitatem tenuimus, uoluntatem uero felicitatis nec perdita felicitate perdidimus. Certe Deus ipse numquid, quoniam peccare non potest, ideo liberum arbitrium habere negandus est?

For assuredly, by sinning we have held neither piety nor felicity, but the will of felicity we did not lose, even with felicity lost. Surely God Himself—since He cannot sin—must He therefore be denied to have free will?

Erit ergo illius ciuitatis et una in omnibus et inseparabilis in singulis uoluntas libera, ab omni malo liberata et impleta omni bono, fruens indeficienter aeternorum iucunditate gaudiorum, oblita culparum, oblita poenarum; nec ideo tamen suae liberationis oblita, ut liberatori suo non sit ingrata: quantum ergo adtinet ad scientiam rationalem, memor praeteritorum etiam malorum suorum; quantum autem ad experientis sensum, prorsus immemor. Nam et peritissimus medicus, sicut arte sciuntur, omnes fere corporis morbos nouit; sicut autem corpore sentiuntur, plurimos nescit, quos ipse non passus est. Vt ergo scientiae malorum duae sunt; una, qua potentiam mentis non latent, altera, qua experientis sensibus inhaerent (aliter quippe sciuntur uitia omnia per sapientiae doctrinam, aliter per insipientis pessimam uitam): ita et obliuiones malorum duae sunt.

Therefore there will be for that City one will in all and, in individuals, inseparable—free, freed from every evil and filled with every good, enjoying without failing the pleasantness of eternal joys, forgetful of faults, forgetful of penalties; nor on that account, however, forgetful of its own liberation, so as not to be grateful to its liberator: so far, then, as pertains to rational knowledge, mindful even of its past evils; but so far as concerns the sense of one experiencing, utterly unmindful. For even a most skilled physician knows almost all the diseases of the body, as they are known by art; but as they are felt in the body, he is ignorant of very many which he himself has not suffered. Thus, therefore, there are two knowledges of evils: one, by which they do not lie hidden from the power of the mind; the other, by which they inhere in the senses of the experiencer (for in one way all vices are known through the doctrine of wisdom, in another through the very worst life of a fool): so also there are two oblivions of evils.

Aliter ea namque obliuiscitur eruditus et doctus, aliter expertus et passus; ille, si peritiam neglegat, iste, si miseria careat. Secundum hanc obliuionem, quam posteriore loco posui, non erunt memores sancti praeteritorum malorum; carebunt enim omnibus, ita ut penitus deleantur de sensibus eorum. Ea tamen potentia scientiae, quae magna in eis erit, non solum sua praeterita, sed etiam damnatorum eos sempiterna miseria non latebit.

For indeed the erudite and learned forget them in one way, the expert and the suffered-in-person in another; the former, if he neglects expertise, the latter, if he be without misery. According to this oblivion, which I set in the latter place, the saints will not be mindful of past evils; for they will lack them all, so that they are utterly blotted out from their senses. Yet by that potency of knowledge, which will be great in them, not only their own past, but also the sempiternal misery of the damned will not be hidden from them.

Alioquin si se fuisse miseros nescituri sunt, quo modo, sicut ait psalmus, misericordias Domini in aeternum cantabunt? Quo cantico in gloriam gratiae Christi, cuius sanguine liberati sumus, nihil erit profecto illi iucundius ciuitati. Ibi perficietur: Vacate et uidete quoniam ego sum Deus; quod erit uere maximum sabbatum non habens uesperam, quod commendauit Dominus in primis operibus mundi, ubi legitur: Et requieuit Deus die septimo ab omnibus operibus suis, quae fecit, et benedixit Deus diem septimum et sanctificauit eum, quia in eo requieuit ab omnibus operibus suis, quae inchoauit Deus facere.

Otherwise, if they are going to be unaware that they were wretched, how, as the psalm says, will they sing the mercies of the Lord forever? By which song, into the glory of the grace of Christ, by whose blood we have been liberated, nothing indeed will be more pleasant to that city. There will be perfected: “Be at leisure and see that I am God;” which will be truly the greatest sabbath not having evening, which the Lord commended in the first works of the world, where it is read: “And God rested on the seventh day from all his works which he made, and God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it he rested from all his works which God began to make.”

Dies enim septimus etiam nos ipsi erimus, quando eius fuerimus benedictione et sanctificatione pleni atque refecti. Ibi uacantes uidebimus quoniam ipse est Deus; quod nobis nos ipsi esse uoluimus, quando ab illo cecidimus, audientes a seductore: Eritis sicut dii et recedentes a uero Deo, quo faciente dii essemus eius participatione, non desertione. Quid enim sine illo fecimus, nisi quod in ira eius defecimus?

For the seventh day will be we ourselves also, when by his benediction and sanctification we shall be filled and refreshed. There, being at leisure, we shall see that he is God; that which we ourselves wished to be for ourselves, when we fell from him, hearing from the seducer: “You will be as gods,” and withdrawing from the true God, by whose making we would be gods by participation in him, not by desertion. For what did we do without him, except that in his ire we failed?

A quo refecti et gratia maiore perfecti uacabimus in aeternum, uidentes quia ipse est Deus, quo pleni erimus quando ipse erit omnia in omnibus. Nam et ipsa opera bona nostra, quando ipsius potius intelleguntur esse, non nostra, tunc nobis ad hoc sabbatum adipiscendum inputantur; quia si nobis ea tribuerimus, seruilia erunt, cum de sabbato dicatur: Omne opus seruile non facietis; propter quod et per Hiezechielem prophetam dicitur: Et sabbata mea dedi eis in signum inter me et inter eos, ut scirent quia ego Dominus, quo sanctifico eos. Hoc perfecte tunc sciemus, quando perfecte uacabimus, et perfecte uidebimus quia ipse est Deus.

By whom refreshed and perfected by greater grace we shall be at leisure forever, seeing that he is God, with whom we shall be filled when he himself will be all in all. For even our good works themselves, when they are understood to be his rather than ours, are then reckoned to us for attaining this sabbath; because if we ascribe them to ourselves, they will be servile, since it is said of the sabbath: "You shall not do any servile work;" wherefore also through the prophet Ezekiel it is said: "And my sabbaths I gave to them as a sign between me and between them, that they might know that I am the Lord, by whom I sanctify them." This we shall then know perfectly, when we shall perfectly be at leisure, and we shall perfectly see that he is God.

Ipse etiam numerus aetatum, ueluti dierum, si secundum eos articulos temporis computetur, qui scripturis uidentur expressi, iste sabbatismus euidentius apparebit, quoniam septimus inuenitur; ut prima aetas tamquam primus dies sit ab Adam usque ad diluuium, secunda inde usque ad Abraham, non aequalitate temporum, sed numero generationum; denas quippe habere reperiuntur. Hinc iam, sicut Matthaeus euangelista determinat, tres aetates usque ad Christi subsequuntur aduentum, quae singulae denis et quaternis generationibus explicantur: ab Abraham usque ad Dauid una, altera inde usque ad transmigrationem in Babyloniam, tertia inde usque ad Christi carnalem natiuitatem. Fiunt itaque omnes quinque.

Ipse even the number of ages, as of days, if it be computed according to those articulations of time which seem to be expressed in the Scriptures, this sabbatism will appear more evident, since a seventh is found; so that the first age, as the first day, is from Adam up to the Deluge, the second thence up to Abraham, not by equality of times, but by the number of generations; for they are found to have ten each. From here now, as Matthew the evangelist determines, three ages follow up to the advent of Christ, which are each unfolded by fourteen generations: from Abraham up to David one, another thence up to the transmigration into Babylonia, the third thence up to the carnal nativity of Christ. Thus they all amount to five.

Sexta nunc agitur nullo generationum numero metienda propter id quod dictum est: Non est uestrum scire tempora, quae Pater posuit in sua potestate. Post hanc tamquam in die septimo requiescet Deus, cum eundem diem septimum, quod nos erimus, in se ipso Deo faciet requiescere. De istis porro aetatibus singulis nunc diligenter longum est disputare; haec tamen septima erit sabbatum nostrum, cuius finis non erit uespera, sed dominicus dies uelut octauus aeternus, qui Christi resurrectione sacratus est, aeternam non solum spiritus, uerum etiam corporis requiem praefigurans.

The sixth is now underway, to be measured by no number of generations, on account of that which was said: “It is not for you to know the times which the Father has placed in his own power.” After this, as though on the seventh day, God will rest, when He will make that same seventh day—which we shall be—rest in Himself, God. Moreover, to discuss carefully each of these ages now is a long task; yet this seventh will be our sabbath, whose end will not be evening, but the Lord’s Day, as it were an eternal eighth, which has been consecrated by Christ’s resurrection, prefiguring eternal rest not only of the spirit but also of the body.

Ibi uacabimus et uidebimus, uidebimus et amabimus, amabimus et laudabimus. Ecce quod erit in fine sine fine. Nam quis alius noster est finis nisi peruenire ad regnum, cuius nullus est finis?

There we shall be at leisure and we shall see; we shall see and we shall love; we shall love and we shall praise. Behold what will be in the end without end. For what other is our end than to arrive at the kingdom, of which there is no end?

Videor mihi debitum ingentis huius operis adiuuante Domino reddidisse. Quibus parum uel quibus nimium est, mihi ignoscant; quibus autem satis est, non mihi, sed Deo mecum gratias congratulantes agant. Amen.

I seem to myself, with the Lord helping, to have repaid the debt of this immense work. For those to whom it is too little or to whom it is too much, let them pardon me; but for those to whom it is enough, let them give thanks, not to me, but to God, congratulating along with me. Amen.

Amen.

In hoc codice continentur libri sancti Augustini de ciuitate Dei contra paganos numero XXII. a primo libro usque ad V, disputatio contra eos qui propter bona uitae huius deos colendos putant. A libro VI usque ad X, disputatio aduersus eos qui cultum deorum propter uitam, quae post mortem futura est, seruandum existimant, simul et aduersum excellentissimos phylosophorum qui apud illos clari sunt et qui nobiscum multa sentiunt de animae immortalitate et quod Deus uerus mundum condiderit et de prouidentia eius qua uniuersa quae condidit regit.

In this codex are contained the books of Saint Augustine On the City of God against the pagans, in number 22. from the first book up to 5, a disputation against those who think the gods ought to be worshiped on account of the goods of this present life. From book 6 up to 10, a disputation against those who consider that the cult of the gods must be maintained on account of the life which will be after death, and at the same time against the most excellent philosophers who are renowned among them and who with us hold many things regarding the immortality of the soul and that the true God has created the world, and regarding his providence by which he rules all things that he has created.

a libro X usque ad XXII refutatis impiis contradictionibus disputatur et astruitur ciuitas Dei ueraque pietas et Dei cultus in quo ueraciter sempiterna beatitudo promittitur.

from book 10 up to 22, with impious contradictions refuted, the City of God, and true piety and the worship of God—in which sempiternal beatitude is truly promised—are argued and established.