Home About Network of subjects Linked subjects heatmap Book indices included Search by subject Search by reference Browse subjects Browse texts

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database



1568
Augustine, The City Of God, 14.5-14.6


nanThere is no need, therefore, that in our sins and vices we accuse the nature of the flesh to the injury of the Creator, for in its own kind and degree the flesh is good; but to desert the Creator good, and live according to the created good, is not good, whether a man choose to live according to the flesh, or according to the soul, or according to the whole human nature, which is composed of flesh and soul, and which is therefore spoken of either by the name flesh alone, or by the name soul alone. For he who extols the nature of the soul as the chief good, and condemns the nature of the flesh as if it were evil, assuredly is fleshly both in his love of the soul and hatred of the flesh; for these his feelings arise from human fancy, not from divine truth. The Platonists, indeed, are not so foolish as, with the Manich ans, to detest our present bodies as an evil nature; for they attribute all the elements of which this visible and tangible world is compacted, with all their qualities, to God their Creator. Nevertheless, from the death-infected members and earthly construction of the body they believe the soul is so affected, that there are thus originated in it the diseases of desires, and fears, and joy, and sorrow, under which four perturbations, as Cicero calls them, or passions, as most prefer to name them with the Greeks, is included the whole viciousness of human life. But if this be so, how is it that Æneas in Virgil, when he had heard from his father in Hades that the souls should return to bodies, expresses surprise at this declaration, and exclaims: O father! And can thought conceive That happy souls this realm would leave, And seek the upper sky, With sluggish clay to reunite? This direful longing for the light, Whence comes it, say, and why? This direful longing, then, does it still exist even in that boasted purity of the disembodied spirits, and does it still proceed from the death-infected members and earthly limbs? Does he not assert that, when they begin to long to return to the body, they have already been delivered from all these so-called pestilences of the body? From which we gather that, were this endlessly alternating purification and defilement of departing and returning souls as true as it is most certainly false, yet it could not be averred that all culpable and vicious motions of the soul originate in the earthly body; for, on their own showing, this direful longing, to use the words of their noble exponent, is so extraneous to the body, that it moves the soul that is purged of all bodily taint, and is existing apart from any body whatever, and moves it, moreover, to be embodied again. So that even they themselves acknowledge that the soul is not only moved to desire, fear, joy, sorrow, by the flesh, but that it can also be agitated with these emotions at its own instance.


nanBut the character of the human will is of moment; because, if it is wrong, these motions of the soul will be wrong, but if it is right, they will be not merely blameless, but even praiseworthy. For the will is in them all; yea, none of them is anything else than will. For what are desire and joy but a volition of consent to the things we wish? And what are fear and sadness but a volition of aversion from the things which we do not wish? But when consent takes the form of seeking to possess the things we wish, this is called desire; and when consent takes the form of enjoying the things we wish, this is called joy. In like manner, when we turn with aversion from that which we do not wish to happen, this volition is termed fear; and when we turn away from that which has happened against our will, this act of will is called sorrow. And generally in respect of all that we seek or shun, as a man's will is attracted or repelled, so it is changed and turned into these different affections. Wherefore the man who lives according to God, and not according to man, ought to be a lover of good, and therefore a hater of evil. And since no one is evil by nature, but whoever is evil is evil by vice, he who lives according to God ought to cherish towards evil men a perfect hatred, so that he shall neither hate the man because of his vice, nor love the vice because of the man, but hate the vice and love the man. For the vice being cursed, all that ought to be loved, and nothing that ought to be hated, will remain.


Intertexts (texts cited often on the same page as the searched text):

24 results
1. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 1.26, 3.7, 46.27 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

1.26. וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ וְיִרְדּוּ בִדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם וּבַבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל־הָאָרֶץ וּבְכָל־הָרֶמֶשׂ הָרֹמֵשׂ עַל־הָאָרֶץ׃ 3.7. וַתִּפָּקַחְנָה עֵינֵי שְׁנֵיהֶם וַיֵּדְעוּ כִּי עֵירֻמִּם הֵם וַיִּתְפְּרוּ עֲלֵה תְאֵנָה וַיַּעֲשׂוּ לָהֶם חֲגֹרֹת׃ 1.26. And God said: ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.’" 3.7. And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves girdles."
2. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 144.4 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)

144.4. אָדָם לַהֶבֶל דָּמָה יָמָיו כְּצֵל עוֹבֵר׃ 144.4. Man is like unto a breath; His days are as a shadow that passeth away."
3. Cicero, On The Ends of Good And Evil, 1.9, 3.9 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)

1.9. quem quidem locum comit comit Se. c o N cum ABERV cf. ad p. 5,10; 23,1; 26,12; 44,8; 46,15; 160,31 multa venustate et omni sale idem Lucilius, apud quem praeclare Scaevola: Graecum te, Albuci, quam Romanum atque Sabinum, municipem Ponti, Ponti edd. pontii (pontu BE) Tritani, Tritani Bai. tritanii A 2 RV tiranii A 1 tritanu BE centurionum, praeclarorum hominum ac primorum signiferumque, maluisti dici. Graece ergo praetor Athenis, id quod maluisti, te, cum ad me accedis, saluto: 'chaere,' chaere care BE inquam, Tite! lictores, turma omnis chorusque: chorusque cohorsque 'primus quantum video Man.' Mdv. 'chaere, Tite!' hinc hic A 1 BERV mi BEV; om. in ras. A; m R; mi in fine versus N 1, add. itii ( ut sit mutii) N 2 hostis mi Albucius, hinc inimicus. Sed iure Mucius. 3.9. Praeclare, inquit, facis, cum cum quod Wes. apud Mdv. et eorum memoriam tenes, quorum uterque tibi testamento liberos suos testamento libros suos tibi BE commendavit, et puerum diligis. quod autem meum munus dicis non equidem recuso, sed te adiungo socium. addo etiam illud, multa iam mihi dare signa puerum et pudoris et ingenii, sed aetatem vides. Video equidem, inquam, sed tamen iam infici debet iis artibus, quas si, dum est tener, conbiberit, ad maiora veniet paratior. veniet paratior sit et quidem A venerit (in E incert.) paratior sit et quidem BE veniet paratior sit. Equidem R cu ul si venerit paratior sit Et quidem N 1 veniet paratior sit quidem N 2 veniet paratior sic equidem V Sic, et quidem diligentius saepiusque ista loquemur inter nos agemusque communiter. sed residamus, inquit, si placet. Itaque fecimus. 3.9.  "I commend you," rejoined Cato, "for your loyalty to the memory of men who both bequeathed their children to your care, as well as for your affectionate interest in the lad. My own responsibility, as you call it, I by no means disown, but I enlist you to share it with me. Moreover I may say that the youth already seems to me to show many signs both of modesty and talent; but you know how young he is." "I do," said I, "but all the same it is time for him to receive a tincture of studies which, if allowed to soak in at this impressionable age, will render him better equipped when he comes to the business of life." "True, and we will discuss this matter again several times more fully and take common action. But let us sit down," he said, "shall we?" So we sat down.
4. Cicero, On Duties, 1.9, 3.9 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)

1.9. Triplex igitur est, ut Panaetio videtur, consilii capiendi deliberatio. Nam aut honestumne factu sit an turpe dubitant id, quod in deliberationem cadit; in quo considerando saepe animi in contraries sententias distrahuntur. Tum autem aut anquirunt aut consultant, ad vitae commoditatem iucunditatemque, ad facultates rerum atque copias, ad opes, ad potentiam, quibus et se possint iuvare et suos, conducat id necne, de quo deliberant; quae deliberatio omnis in rationem utilitatis cadit. Tertium dubitandi genus est, cum pugnare videtur cum honesto id, quod videtur esse utile; cum enim utilitas ad se rapere, honestas contra revocare ad se videtur, fit ut distrahatur in deliberando animus afferatque ancipitem curam cogitandi. 3.9. Minime vero assentior iis, qui negant eum locum a Panaetio praetermissum, sed consulto relictum, nec omnino scribendum fuisse, quia numquam posset utilitas cum honestate pugnare. De quo alterum potest habere dubitationem, adhibendumne fuerit hoc genus, quod in divisione Panaeti tertium est, an plane omittendum, alterum dubitari non potest, quin a Panaetio susceptum sit, sed relictum. Nam qui e divisione tripertita duas partes absolverit, huic necesse est restare tertiam; praeterea in extremo libro tertio de hac parte pollicetur se deinceps esse dicturum. 3.9.  Now, I cannot possibly accept the view of those who say that that point was not overlooked but purposely omitted by Panaetius, and that it was not one that ever needed discussion, because there never can be such a thing as a conflict between expediency and moral rectitude. But with regard to this assertion, the one point may admit of doubt — whether that question which is third in Panaetius's classification ought to have been included or omitted altogether; but the other point is not open to debate — that it was included in Panaetius's plan but left unwritten. For, if a writer has finished two divisions of a threefold subject, the third must necessarily remain for him to do. Besides, he promises at the close of the third book that he will discuss this division also in its proper turn.
5. Cicero, Lucullus, 106 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)

6. Cicero, Tusculan Disputations, 3.36-3.51, 4.11, 4.13 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)

3.36. quid iaces aut quid maeres aut cur succumbis cedisque fortunae? quae quae om. G 1 pervellere te forsitan potuerit et pungere, non potuit certe vires frangere. magna vis est in virtutibus; eas excita, si forte dormiunt. iam tibi aderit princeps fortitudo, quae te animo tanto esse coget, ut omnia, quae possint homini evenire, contemnas et pro nihilo putes. aderit temperantia, quae est eadem moderatio, a me quidem paulo ante appellata frugalitas, quae te turpiter et nequiter facere nihil patietur. patiatur X ( cf. coget 21 dicet 28) quid est autem nequius aut turpius ecfeminato eff. G 1 e corr. R 2 V rec viro? ne iustitia quidem sinet te ista facere, cui minimum esse videtur in hac causa loci; loqui X corr. V c? quae tamen ita dicet dupliciter esse te iniustum, cum et alienum adpetas, appetas V 2 qui mortalis natus condicionem conditionem GKV postules inmortalium et graviter feras te, quod utendum acceperis, reddidisse. 3.37. prudentiae vero quid quod R 1 respondebis docenti virtutem sese esse contentam, quo modo ad bene vivendum, sic etiam ad beate? quae si extrinsecus religata pendeat et non et oriatur et ante oriatur om. KR a se et rursus ad se revertatur et omnia sua complexa nihil quaerat aliunde, non intellego, cur aut verbis tam vehementer orda aut re tantopere expetenda videatur —ad haec bona me me V ( eras. si) si revocas, Epicure, pareo, sequor, utor te ipso duce, obliviscor etiam malorum, ut iubes, eoque facilius, quod ea ne in malis quidem ponenda censeo. sed traducis cogitationes meas ad voluptates. quas? corporis, credo, aut quae propter corpus vel recordatione vel spe cogitentur. num quid est aliud? rectene interpretor interprecor K 1 V sententiam tuam? solent enim isti negare nos intellegere, quid dicat Epicurus. 3.38. hoc dicit, et hoc ille acriculus agriculus X corr. V c me audiente Athenis senex Zeno, istorum acutissimus, contendere et magna voce dicere solebat: eum esse Epic. fr. 446 beatum, qui praesentibus voluptatibus frueretur confideretque se fruiturum aut in omni aut in magna parte vitae dolore non interveniente, aut si interveniret, si summus foret, futurum brevem, sin productior, plus habiturum iucundi quam mali; haec cogitantem fore beatum, praesertim cum cum add. V c si s R 2 ( ft. rectius, sed cf. fin. 1, 41 ad ea cum accedit) om. X et ante perceptis bonis contentus esset et nec mortem nec deos extimesceret. add. Hei. habes formam Epicuri vitae beatae verbis Zenonis expressam, nihil ut possit negari. Quid ergo? 3.39. huiusne vitae propositio et cogitatio aut Thyestem levare poterit aut Aeetam, aetam X ( ex aetem K 1 ) oetam K 2 R c? cf. p. 331,3 de quo paulo ante dixi, aut Telamonem pulsum patria exulantem atque egentem? in quo haec admiratio fiebat: Hi/cine hicine BR 2 haecine X est ille Te/lamon, Telamo Turn. sed cf. Str. p. 64 modo quem glo/ria ad caelum e/xtulit, Quem a/spectabant, cui/us ob os Grai Graii s Graj La. Lucr. 3, 374. cf. epist. 9, 26 o/ra obverteba/nt sua? Trag. inc. 93 3.40. quodsi cui, ut ait idem, simul animus cum re concidit animus rem condidit X corr. V c s , a gravibus illis antiquis philosophis petenda medicina est, non est non V est si non X ab his voluptariis. quam enim isti bonorum copiam dicunt? fac sane esse summum bonum non dolere—quamquam id non vocatur voluptas, sed non necesse est nunc omnia—: idne est, quo traducti luctum levemus? sit sane summum malum dolere: dolore in dolere corr. G 2 K 2 V 2 in eo igitur qui non est, si malo careat, continuone fruitur summo bono? 3.41. Quid tergiversamur, Epicure, nec fatemur eam nos dicere voluptatem, quam tu idem, cum os perfricuisti, soles dicere? sunt haec tua verba necne? in eo quidem libro, qui continet Epic. p. te/lous fr. 67 p. 119, 16 omnem disciplinam tuam,—fungar enim iam interpretis munere, ne quis me putet fingere—dicis haec: nec equidem habeo, quod intellegam bonum illud, detrahens eas voluptates quae sapore percipiuntur, detrahens eas quae rebus percipiuntur veneriis, detrahens eas quae rebus percipiuntur venereis detrahens add. in mg. V c om. rell. cf. praef. et locos ab Usenero ad fr. 67 congestos eas quae auditu e e Sor. et ( cf. 23 ex formis) cantibus, detrahens eas etiam quae ex formis percipiuntur oculis detrahens eas supra oculis add. K 2 suavis motiones, sive quae aliae voluptates in toto homine gignuntur quolibet quelibet V 1 quodlibet K 1 sensu. nec vero ita dici potest, mentis laetitiam solam esse in bonis. laetantem enim mentem ita novi: spe eorum omnium, quae supra dixi, fore forte G 1 K 1 ut natura is natura is naturalis X natura iis s potiens dolore careat. 3.42. atque haec quidem his verbis, quivis ut intellegat, quam voluptatem norit Epicurus. deinde paulo infra: saepe quaesivi inquit Epic. ib. fr. 69 ex is qui appellabantur sapientes, quid haberent quod in bonis quid in boni GV (quod V 2 ) R 1 (in exp. 1 ) quidboni K 1 quid in bonis K 2 B quod in bono Gr. relinquerent, si illa detraxissent, nisi si vellent voces iis fundere: nihil ab is potui cognoscere. qui si virtutes ebullire volent et sapientias, sapientiam V 2 nihil aliud dicent nisi eam viam, vi am K viam V ( exp. 2 ) vim quae fiant ureae vol. Non. quae G qua efficiantur eae eae haec K voluptates quas supra dixi. qui si ... 7 dixi Non. 26, 19 quae secuntur, sequuntur GR in eadem sententia sunt, totusque liber, qui est alt. est om. X add. V 2 de summo bono, refertus est et verbis et sententiis talibus. 3.43. ad hancine igitur vitam Telamonem illum revocabis, ut leves aegritudinem, et si quem tuorum adflictum maerore videris, videbis R 1 huic ut huic V tu huic Str. p. 58 ( non male, sed v. 10 ut pro et Non. C A D A ) acipenserem accipenserem X ( cf. fat. fr. 5 ) accipienserem Non. V 2 ( pen) (acup. fin. 2,91 cf. 24. 5 ) potius quam aliquem Socraticum libellum dabis? et si... 12 dabis Non. 550, 18 hydrauli h gD PA l l fere X hydraulis V 2 hortabere ut audiat voces potius quam Platonis? expones, exponens X corr. V 2 quae spectet, spectat K florida et varia? fasciculum ad naris admovebis? incendes odores et sertis redimiri iubebis et rosa? si vero aliquid etiam—, tum plane luctum omnem absterseris. 3.44. haec Epicuro confitenda sunt aut ea, quae modo expressa ad verbum dixi, tollenda de libro vel totus liber potius abiciundus; est enim confertus voluptatibus. Quaerendum igitur, quem ad modum aegritudine privemus privemur X corr. K 2 R 2 V 3 eum qui ita dicat: Pol mi/hi fortuna ma/gis nunc defit qua/m quam quod G 1 genus. Enn. Thyest. sc. 354 Na/mque namque neque K regnum su/ppetebat mi, mihi X corr. Grotius u/t scias, quanto e/ loco, Qua/ntis opibus, qui/bus de rebus la/psa fortuna a/ccidat. occidat Ribb. sed cf. Th. l. l. I p. 290 quid? huic calix mulsi impingendus est, ut plorare desinat, quid? plorare se desinat Non. 545, 20 aut aliquid eius modi? ecce tibi ex altera parte ab eodem poëta; ex opibus summis opis egens, Hector, haector X tuae —huic subvenire debemus; quaerit enim auxilium: Qui/d petam prae/sidi praesidii X aut e/xequar quo/ve nunc Ennius Andr. sc. 85. 6 Au/xilio e/xili exilii X (exillii K 1 ) de hiatu cf. Plaut. Aul. 142 al. ( Jacobsohn, Quaest. Plaut. Gött. 1904 p. 21 ) au/t fugae fugae s Bentl. fuga fre/ta sim? A/rce et urbe o/rba sum. quo a/ccidam? accedam X (accedam' K) corr. s quo a/pplicem? Cui/ nec arae pa/triae domi stant, fra/ctae et disiectae/ iacent, Fa/na flamma de/flagrata, to/sti alti alii X corr. M 2 s stant pa/rietes De/formati atque a/biete crispa— scitis quae sequantur, et illa in primis: ilium primis X corr. Tr. illud in primis V c s cf. p. 260, 26 O pa/ter, o patria, o Pri/ami domus, Saeptum a/ltisono cardi/ne templum! Vidi e/go te adstante dstantem X ( def. Va. ) sed m eras. in V astante p. 260, 22 ope ba/rbarica Tecti/s caelatis la/queatis, Auro e/bore instructam re/gifice. regificem X sed m exp. K 1 B 3.45. o poëtam egregium! quamquam ab his cantoribus Euphorionis Euphorioneis V ei in r. 1autc contemnitur. sentit omnia repentina et necopinata esse graviora; exaggeratis igitur regiis regis X corr. s opibus, quae videbantur sempiternae fore, quid adiungit? Haec o/mnia vidi infla/mmari, Enn. ib. 92.97 cf. p.260, 22 sqq. Priamo/ vi vitam evi/tari, Iovis a/ram sanguine sanguine KR c Non. sanguinem GR 1 V tu/rpari. Iovis... turpari Non. 181, 1 3.46. praeclarum carmen! est enim et rebus et verbis et modis lugubre. Eripiamus huic aegritudinem. quo modo? conlocemus in culcita plumea, psaltriam adducamus, eripiamus ... 341, 1 adducamus Non. 542, 17 aducamus G 1 R 1 V 1 ( corr. G 2 R c V 2 ) demus damus X supra a scr. V c aut 1 hedycrum, hedrycrum G 1 R 1 V 1 aut c hedrycum R 1 V 1 aedricrum G od. add. Po. psaltriam adducamus, hedychri incendamus scut. Mdv., sed he- dychrum unguentum est non suffimentum, Diosc, 1.58 al. nihil add. Se neque G. Dittmann qui litteris ad me datis scutellam idem esse statuit atque scutram Plaut. Persa 89 Cato agr. 157, 11; sed cf. p. 339, 15; 431, 27 odorum incendamus scutellam, dulciculae potionis aliquid videamus dulciculae videamus Prisc. GL. II p. 105, 21 Anon. Class. auct. ed. Mai 8, 165 et cibi? haec tandem bona sunt, quibus aegritudines gravissumae detrahantur? tu enim paulo ante ne intellegere interrogandi signa pos. Po. cf. § 43. 4 quidem te te quidem, W corr. Lb. We. cl. v. 24, ac. 2, 140. fin. 2, 7. 20. 30. nat. deor. 1, 111 alia ulla ulla V 2 W multa X dicebas. revocari igitur oportere a oportere a s oportet ea X (o. eum a V 3 ) maerore ad cogitationem bonorum conveniret mihi cum Epicuro, si, quid esset bonum, conveniret. Dicet aliquis: quid ergo? tu Epicurum existimas Epic. fr. 440 existimas s existimabas ista voluisse, aut libidinosas eius fuisse sententias? ego vero minime; video enim ab eo dici multa severe, multa praeclare. itaque, ut saepe dixi, de acumine agitur eius, non de moribus; quamvis spernat spert X (sperant G 1 ) corr. V c aut 1 voluptates eas quas modo laudavit, ego tamen meminero quod quid G videatur ei summum bonum. non enim verbo solum posuit voluptatem, sed explanavit quid diceret: saporem inquit et corporum complexum et ludos Epic. fr. 67 atque cantus et formas eas quibus oculi iucunde moveantur. num fingo, num mentior? cupio refelli. quid enim laboro nisi ut veritas in omni quaestione explicetur? 3.47. 'at at ad V idem ait non crescere voluptatem dolore fr. 419 detracto, detractos G 1 V 1 esse V c s om. X summamque esse voluptatem nihil dolere. dolore V 1 ' paucis verbis tria magna peccata: unum, quod secum ipse pugnat. modo enim ne suspicari quidem se quicquam bonum, nisi sensus quasi titillarentur titilarentur R 1 VG 2 ( ex titul.) voluptate; nunc autem summam voluptatem esse dolore carere: potestne magis secum ipse pugnare? alterum peccatum, quod, cum in natura tria sint, sunt G 1 unum gaudere, alterum dolere, tertium nec gaudere prius gaudere om. K 1 nec dolere, hic primum et tertium putat idem esse nec distinguit a non dolendo voluptatem. tertium peccatum commune cum quibusdam, quod, cum virtus maxime expetatur maxime expetatur in r. V c eiusque adipiscendae causa philosophia quaesita sit, ille a a om. G 1 virtute summum bonum separavit. 3.48. 'at at ac R 1 laudat Epic. fr. 507 saepe virtutem'. et quidem C. Gracchus, sqq. grachus G 1 (gracchi 23) K cum largitiones maximas fecisset et effudisset effundisset X corr. K 1 V 1 aerarium, verbis tamen defendebat aerarium. quid verba audiam, cum facta videam? L. L. add. V c om. X ( ut p. 223, 13 M. ante Crassum) cf. Verr. 4, 195 Piso ille Frugi semper contra legem frumentariam dixerat. is lege lata consularis ad frumentum accipiundum accipiendum G 1 K venerat. animum animam X corr. R 1? K 2 advertit Gracchus in contione Pisonem stantem; quaerit audiente p. R., qui sibi constet, cum ea lege frumentum petat, quam dissuaserit. dissuas serat G 1 nolim inquit mea bona, Gracche, tibi viritim dividere libeat, sed, si facias, facies K partem petam. parumne parumne satis ss. V 2 declaravit vir gravis et sapiens lege Sempronia patrimonium publicum dissupari? lege orationes Gracchi, patronum aerarii esse dices. 3.49. negat Epicurus sqq. Epic. fr. 506. 584. 459 iucunde posse vivi, nisi cum virtute vivatur, negat ullam in sapientem vim esse fortunae, tenuem victum antefert copioso, negat ullum esse tempus, quo sapiens non beatus sit. omnia philosopho digna, sed cum voluptate pugtia. non istam dicit voluptatem . dicat quamlibet; nempe eam dicit, in qua virtutis nulla pars insit. age, si voluptatem non intellegimus, ne dolorem quidem? nego igitur eius eius om. R 1 esse, qui quid X d del. in RV dolore dolorem X corr. s autem illi summum malum metiatur, mentionem facere virtutis. 3.50. Et queruntur quidam Epicurei, viri optimi—nam nullum genus est minus malitiosum—, me studiose dicere contra Epicurum. ita credo, de honore aut de dignitate contendimus. mihi summum in animo bonum videtur, illi autem in corpore, videtur in corp. K 1 mihi in virtute, illi in voluptate. et illi pugt, et quidem vicinorum fidem implorant—multi autem sunt, qui statim convolent —; ego sum is qui dicam me non laborare, actum habiturum, quod egerint. 3.51. quid enim? de bello Punico agitur? de quo ipso cum aliud M. Catoni, aliud L. Lentulo videretur, nulla inter eos concertatio concertatio er in r. V concertio K umquam fuit. hi nimis iracunde agunt, praesertim cum ab is non sane animosa defendatur sententia, pro qua non in senatu, non in contione, contentione R 1 non apud exercitum neque ad ad apud V 2 censores dicere audeant. sed cum istis alias, et eo quidem animo, nullum ut certamen instituam, verum dicentibus facile cedam; tantum admonebo, si maxime verum sit ad corpus omnia referre sapientem sive, ut honestius dicam, nihil facere nisi quod expediat, sive omnia referre ad utilitatem suam, quoniam haec plausibilia non sunt, ut in sinu in sinu insignum vel in signum RG 1 K 1 in sinum K 1 e corr. G 2 V gaudeant, gloriose loqui desit. Otto, Sprichw. 1656 Cyrenaicorum restat sententia; 4.11. sit igitur hic hic K 1 fons; utamur tamen in his perturbationibus describendis discrib. Mue. sed cf. Th. l. l. 5, 663 Stoicorum definitionibus et partitionibus, parti cipationibus R 1 particionibus GVH qui mihi videntur in hac quaestione versari acutissime. Est igitur Zenonis haec definitio, ut perturbatio Zeno fr. 205 sit, quod pa/qos pat OC K patos R ( p ex ) PL T w C H ille dicit, aversa a a om. V 1 ( add. c ) recta ratione contra naturam animi commotio. quidam brevius perturbationem esse adpetitum vehementiorem, sed vehementiorem eum volunt esse, qui longius discesserit a naturae constantia. partes autem perturbationum volunt ex duobus opinatis bonis nasci et ex duobus opinatis malis; ita esse quattuor, ex bonis libidinem et laetitiam, ut sit laetitia praesentium bonorum, libido futurorum, ex malis metum et aegritudinem nasci censent, metum futuris, aegritudinem praesentibus; quae enim venientia metuuntur, eadem adficiunt aegritudine aegritudinem K ( corr. 2 ) RH instantia. 4.13. itemque cum ita ita om. H movemur, ut in bono simus aliquo, dupliciter id contingit. nam cum ratione curatione K 1 (ũ 2 ) animus movetur placide atque constanter, tum illud gaudium dicitur; cum autem iiter et effuse animus exultat, tum illa laetitia gestiens vel nimia dici potest, quam ita definiunt: sine ratione animi elationem. quoniamque, quoniam quae X praeter K 1 (quae del. V rec ) ut bona natura adpetimus, app. KR 2? (H 367, 24) sic a malis natura declinamus, quae declinatio si cum del. Bentl. ratione fiet, cautio appelletur, appellatur K 1 V rec s eaque intellegatur in solo esse sapiente; quae autem sine ratione et cum exanimatione humili atque fracta, nominetur metus; est igitur metus a a Gr.(?) s om. X ratione aversa cautio. cautio Cic. dicere debebat: declinatio
7. Septuagint, Wisdom of Solomon, 9.15 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)

9.15. for a perishable body weighs down the soul,and this earthy tent burdens the thoughtful mind.
8. Vergil, Aeneis, 6.719-6.721, 6.733 (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)

6.719. Hence groans are heard, fierce cracks of lash and scourge 6.720. Loud-clanking iron links and trailing chains. 6.721. Aeneas motionless with horror stood 6.733. of mortals who, exulting in vain guile
9. New Testament, 1 Corinthians, 2.11, 3.1, 3.3-3.4, 15.39 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

2.11. For whoamong men knows the things of a man, except the spirit of the man,which is in him? Even so, no one knows the things of God, except God'sSpirit. 3.1. Brothers, I couldn't speak to you as to spiritual, but as tofleshly, as to babies in Christ. 3.3. for you are still fleshly. For insofar as there is jealousy,strife, and factions among you, aren't you fleshly, and don't you walkin the ways of men? 3.4. For when one says, "I follow Paul," andanother, "I follow Apollos," aren't you fleshly? 15.39. All flesh is not the same flesh, butthere is one flesh of men, another flesh of animals, another of fish,and another of birds.
10. New Testament, 1 Timothy, 2.7 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

2.7. to which I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth in Christ, not lying), a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.
11. New Testament, 2 Corinthians, 4.16, 5.1 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

12. New Testament, 2 Timothy, 3.2 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

3.2. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy
13. New Testament, Acts, 17.16-17.34 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

17.16. Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was provoked within him as he saw the city full of idols. 17.17. So he reasoned in the synagogue with Jews and the devout persons, and in the marketplace every day with those who met him. 17.18. Some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers also encountered him. Some said, "What does this babbler want to say?"Others said, "He seems to be advocating foreign demons," because he preached Jesus and the resurrection. 17.19. They took hold of him, and brought him to the Areopagus, saying, "May we know what this new teaching is, which is spoken by you? 17.20. For you bring certain strange things to our ears. We want to know therefore what these things mean. 17.21. Now all the Athenians and the strangers living there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell or to hear some new thing. 17.22. Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus, and said, "You men of Athens, I perceive that you are very religious in all things. 17.23. For as I passed along, and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription: 'TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.' What therefore you worship in ignorance, this I announce to you. 17.24. The God who made the world and all things in it, he, being Lord of heaven and earth, dwells not in temples made with hands 17.25. neither is he served by men's hands, as though he needed anything, seeing he himself gives to all life and breath, and all things. 17.26. He made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the surface of the earth, having determined appointed seasons, and the bounds of their habitation 17.27. that they should seek the Lord, if perhaps they might reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 17.28. 'For in him we live, and move, and have our being.' As some of your own poets have said, 'For we are also his offspring.' 17.29. Being then the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold, or silver, or stone, engraved by art and device of man. 17.30. The times of ignorance therefore God overlooked. But now he commands that all men everywhere should repent 17.31. because he has appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness by the man whom he has ordained; whereof he has given assurance to all men, in that he has raised him from the dead. 17.32. Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked; but others said, "We want to hear you yet again concerning this. 17.33. Thus Paul went out from among them. 17.34. But certain men joined with him, and believed, among whom also was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them.
14. New Testament, Apocalypse, 2.11, 20.6, 21.8 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

2.11. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the assemblies. He who overcomes won't be harmed by the second death. 20.6. Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over these, the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and will reign with him one thousand years. 21.8. But for the cowardly, unbelieving, sinners, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their part is in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.
15. New Testament, James, 1.2 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

1.2. Count it all joy, my brothers, when you fall into various temptations
16. New Testament, Galatians, 2.16, 3.11, 4.23, 5.17-5.23, 6.1 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

2.16. yet knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law butthrough the faith of Jesus Christ, even we believed in Christ Jesus,that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works ofthe law, because no flesh will be justified by the works of the law. 3.11. Now that no man is justified by the law before God isevident, for, "The righteous will live by faith. 4.23. However, the son by thehandmaid was born according to the flesh, but the son by the free womanwas born through promise. 5.17. For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and theSpirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one other, that youmay not do the things that you desire. 5.18. But if you are led by theSpirit, you are not under the law. 5.19. Now the works of the fleshare obvious, which are: adultery, sexual immorality, uncleanness,lustfulness 5.20. idolatry, sorcery, hatred, strife, jealousies,outbursts of anger, rivalries, divisions, heresies 5.21. envyings,murders, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these; of which Iforewarn you, even as I also forewarned you, that those who practicesuch things will not inherit the Kingdom of God. 5.22. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience,kindness, goodness, faithfulness 5.23. gentleness, and self-control.Against such things there is no law. 6.1. Brothers, even if a man is caught in some fault, you who arespiritual must restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; looking toyourself so that you also aren't tempted.
17. New Testament, Romans, 1.25, 3.7, 3.20, 3.28, 5.12, 7.8, 7.16, 7.23-7.25 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

1.25. who exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 3.7. For if the truth of God through my lie abounded to his glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? 3.20. Because by the works of the law, no flesh will be justified in his sight. For through the law comes the knowledge of sin. 3.28. We maintain therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. 5.12. Therefore, as sin entered into the world through one man, and death through sin; and so death passed to all men, because all sinned. 7.8. But sin, finding occasion through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of coveting. For apart from the law, sin is dead. 7.16. But if what I don't desire, that I do, I consent to the law that it is good. 7.23. but I see a different law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity under the law of sin which is in my members. 7.24. What a wretched man I am! Who will deliver me out of the body of this death? 7.25. I thank God through Jesus Christ, our Lord! So then with the mind, I myself serve God's law, but with the flesh, the sin's law.
18. New Testament, John, 1.14, 8.36, 8.44, 14.6, 20.13 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

1.14. The Word became flesh, and lived among us. We saw his glory, such glory as of the one and only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth. 8.36. If therefore the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed. 8.44. You are of your Father, the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and doesn't stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks on his own; for he is a liar, and the father of it. 14.6. Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father, except through me. 20.13. They told her, "Woman, why are you weeping?"She said to them, "Because they have taken away my Lord, and I don't know where they have laid him.
19. New Testament, Matthew, 6.12 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)

6.12. Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors.
20. Augustine, Confessions, 7.13, 7.16 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)

21. Augustine, Reply To Faustus, 22.18 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)

22. Augustine, Against Fortunatus, 21 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)

23. Augustine, The City of God, 1.35, 8.10, 8.17, 9.4-9.5, 10.1, 10.30, 10.32, 11.1, 14.1-14.4, 14.6-14.24, 14.26-14.28, 15.1, 19.23, 19.28, 22.23 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)

1.35. Let these and similar answers (if any fuller and fitter answers can be found) be given to their enemies by the redeemed family of the Lord Christ, and by the pilgrim city of King Christ. But let this city bear in mind, that among her enemies lie hidden those who are destined to be fellow citizens, that she may not think it a fruitless labor to bear what they inflict as enemies until they become confessors of the faith. So, too, as long as she is a stranger in the world, the city of God has in her communion, and bound to her by the sacraments, some who shall not eternally dwell in the lot of the saints. of these, some are not now recognized; others declare themselves, and do not hesitate to make common cause with our enemies in murmuring against God, whose sacramental badge they wear. These men you may today see thronging the churches with us, tomorrow crowding the theatres with the godless. But we have the less reason to despair of the reclamation even of such persons, if among our most declared enemies there are now some, unknown to themselves, who are destined to become our friends. In truth, these two cities are entangled together in this world, and intermixed until the last judgment effects their separation. I now proceed to speak, as God shall help me, of the rise, progress, and end of these two cities; and what I write, I write for the glory of the city of God, that, being placed in comparison with the other, it may shine with a brighter lustre. 8.10. For although a Christian man instructed only in ecclesiastical literature may perhaps be ignorant of the very name of Platonists, and may not even know that there have existed two schools of philosophers speaking the Greek tongue, to wit, the Ionic and Italic, he is nevertheless not so deaf with respect to human affairs, as not to know that philosophers profess the study, and even the possession, of wisdom. He is on his guard, however, with respect to those who philosophize according to the elements of this world, not according to God, by whom the world itself was made; for he is warned by the precept of the apostle, and faithfully hears what has been said, Beware that no one deceive you through philosophy and vain deceit, according to the elements of the world. Colossians 2:8 Then, that he may not suppose that all philosophers are such as do this, he hears the same apostle say concerning certain of them, Because that which is known of God is manifest among them, for God has manifested it to them. For His invisible things from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things which are made, also His eternal power and Godhead. Romans 1:19-20 And, when speaking to the Athenians, after having spoken a mighty thing concerning God, which few are able to understand, In Him we live, and move, and have our being, Acts 17:28 he goes on to say, As certain also of your own have said. He knows well, too, to be on his guard against even these philosophers in their errors. For where it has been said by him, that God has manifested to them by those things which are made His invisible things, that they might be seen by the understanding, there it has also been said that they did not rightly worship God Himself, because they paid divine honors, which are due to Him alone, to other things also to which they ought not to have paid them -because, knowing God, they glorified Him not as God: neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of corruptible man, and of birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things; Romans 1:21-23 - where the apostle would have us understand him as meaning the Romans, and Greeks, and Egyptians, who gloried in the name of wisdom; but concerning this we will dispute with them afterwards. With respect, however, to that wherein they agree with us we prefer them to all others namely, concerning the one God, the author of this universe, who is not only above every body, being incorporeal, but also above all souls, being incorruptible - our principle, our light, our good. And though the Christian man, being ignorant of their writings, does not use in disputation words which he has not learned - not calling that part of philosophy natural (which is the Latin term), or physical (which is the Greek one), which treats of the investigation of nature; or that part rational, or logical, which deals with the question how truth may be discovered; or that part moral, or ethical, which concerns morals, and shows how good is to be sought, and evil to be shunned - he is not, therefore, ignorant that it is from the one true and supremely good God that we have that nature in which we are made in the image of God, and that doctrine by which we know Him and ourselves, and that grace through which, by cleaving to Him, we are blessed. This, therefore, is the cause why we prefer these to all the others, because, while other philosophers have worn out their minds and powers in seeking the causes of things, and endeavoring to discover the right mode of learning and of living, these, by knowing God, have found where resides the cause by which the universe has been constituted, and the light by which truth is to be discovered, and the fountain at which felicity is to be drunk. All philosophers, then, who have had these thoughts concerning God, whether Platonists or others, agree with us. But we have thought it better to plead our cause with the Platonists, because their writings are better known. For the Greeks, whose tongue holds the highest place among the languages of the Gentiles, are loud in their praises of these writings; and the Latins, taken with their excellence, or their renown, have studied them more heartily than other writings, and, by translating them into our tongue, have given them greater celebrity and notoriety. 8.17. Wherefore, to omit other things, and confine our attention to that which he says is common to the demons with us, let us ask this question: If all the four elements are full of their own animals, the fire and the air of immortal, and the water and the earth of mortal ones, why are the souls of demons agitated by the whirlwinds and tempests of passions?- for the Greek word παθος means perturbation, whence he chose to call the demons passive in soul, because the word passion, which is derived from πάθος, signified a commotion of the mind contrary to reason. Why, then, are these things in the minds of demons which are not in beasts? For if anything of this kind appears in beasts, it is not perturbation, because it is not contrary to reason, of which they are devoid. Now it is foolishness or misery which is the cause of these perturbations in the case of men, for we are not yet blessed in the possession of that perfection of wisdom which is promised to us at last, when we shall be set free from our present mortality. But the gods, they say, are free from these perturbations, because they are not only eternal, but also blessed; for they also have the same kind of rational souls, but most pure from all spot and plague. Wherefore, if the gods are free from perturbation because they are blessed, not miserable animals, and the beasts are free from them because they are animals which are capable neither of blessedness nor misery, it remains that the demons, like men, are subject to perturbations because they are not blessed but miserable animals. What folly, therefore, or rather what madness, to submit ourselves through any sentiment of religion to demons, when it belongs to the true religion to deliver us from that depravity which makes us like to them! For Apuleius himself, although he is very sparing toward them, and thinks they are worthy of divine honors, is nevertheless compelled to confess that they are subject to anger; and the true religion commands us not to be moved with anger, but rather to resist it. The demons are won over by gifts; and the true religion commands us to favor no one on account of gifts received. The demons are flattered by honors; but the true religion commands us by no means to be moved by such things. The demons are haters of some men and lovers of others, not in consequence of a prudent and calm judgment, but because of what he calls their passive soul; whereas the true religion commands us to love even our enemies. Lastly, the true religion commands us to put away all disquietude of heart and agitation of mind, and also all commotions and tempests of the soul, which Apuleius asserts to be continually swelling and surging in the souls of demons. Why, therefore, except through foolishness and miserable error should you humble yourself to worship a being to whom you desire to be unlike in your life? And why should you pay religious homage to him whom you are unwilling to imitate, when it is the highest duty of religion to imitate Him whom you worship? 9.4. Among the philosophers there are two opinions about these mental emotions, which the Greeks call παθη, while some of our own writers, as Cicero, call them perturbations, some affections, and some, to render the Greek word more accurately, passions. Some say that even the wise man is subject to these perturbations, though moderated and controlled by reason, which imposes laws upon them, and so restrains them within necessary bounds. This is the opinion of the Platonists and Aristotelians; for Aristotle was Plato's disciple, and the founder of the Peripatetic school. But others, as the Stoics, are of opinion that the wise man is not subject to these perturbations. But Cicero, in his book De Finibus, shows that the Stoics are here at variance with the Platonists and Peripatetics rather in words than in reality; for the Stoics decline to apply the term goods to external and bodily advantages, because they reckon that the only good is virtue, the art of living well, and this exists only in the mind. The other philosophers, again, use the simple and customary phraseology, and do not scruple to call these things goods, though in comparison of virtue, which guides our life, they are little and of small esteem. And thus it is obvious that, whether these outward things are called goods or advantages, they are held in the same estimation by both parties, and that in this matter the Stoics are pleasing themselves merely with a novel phraseology. It seems, then, to me that in this question, whether the wise man is subject to mental passions, or wholly free from them, the controversy is one of words rather than of things; for I think that, if the reality and not the mere sound of the words is considered, the Stoics hold precisely the same opinion as the Platonists and Peripatetics. For, omitting for brevity's sake other proofs which I might adduce in support of this opinion, I will state but one which I consider conclusive. Aulus Gellius, a man of extensive erudition, and gifted with an eloquent and graceful style, relates, in his work entitled Noctes Attic that he once made a voyage with an eminent Stoic philosopher; and he goes on to relate fully and with gusto what I shall barely state, that when the ship was tossed and in danger from a violent storm, the philosopher grew pale with terror. This was noticed by those on board, who, though themselves threatened with death, were curious to see whether a philosopher would be agitated like other men. When the tempest had passed over, and as soon as their security gave them freedom to resume their talk, one of the passengers, a rich and luxurious Asiatic, begins to banter the philosopher, and rally him because he had even become pale with fear, while he himself had been unmoved by the impending destruction. But the philosopher availed himself of the reply of Aristippus the Socratic, who, on finding himself similarly bantered by a man of the same character, answered, You had no cause for anxiety for the soul of a profligate debauchee, but I had reason to be alarmed for the soul of Aristippus. The rich man being thus disposed of, Aulus Gellius asked the philosopher, in the interests of science and not to annoy him, what was the reason of his fear? And he willing to instruct a man so zealous in the pursuit of knowledge, at once took from his wallet a book of Epictetus the Stoic, in which doctrines were advanced which precisely harmonized with those of Zeno and Chrysippus, the founders of the Stoical school. Aulus Gellius says that he read in this book that the Stoics maintain that there are certain impressions made on the soul by external objects which they call phantasi, and that it is not in the power of the soul to determine whether or when it shall be invaded by these. When these impressions are made by alarming and formidable objects, it must needs be that they move the soul even of the wise man, so that for a little he trembles with fear, or is depressed by sadness, these impressions anticipating the work of reason and self-control; but this does not imply that the mind accepts these evil impressions, or approves or consents to them. For this consent is, they think, in a man's power; there being this difference between the mind of the wise man and that of the fool, that the fool's mind yields to these passions and consents to them, while that of the wise man, though it cannot help being invaded by them, yet retains with unshaken firmness a true and steady persuasion of those things which it ought rationally to desire or avoid. This account of what Aulus Gellius relates that he read in the book of Epictetus about the sentiments and doctrines of the Stoics I have given as well as I could, not, perhaps, with his choice language, but with greater brevity, and, I think, with greater clearness. And if this be true, then there is no difference, or next to none, between the opinion of the Stoics and that of the other philosophers regarding mental passions and perturbations, for both parties agree in maintaining that the mind and reason of the wise man are not subject to these. And perhaps what the Stoics mean by asserting this, is that the wisdom which characterizes the wise man is clouded by no error and sullied by no taint, but, with this reservation that his wisdom remains undisturbed, he is exposed to the impressions which the goods and ills of this life (or, as they prefer to call them, the advantages or disadvantages) make upon them. For we need not say that if that philosopher had thought nothing of those things which he thought he was immediately to lose, life and bodily safety, he would not have been so terrified by his danger as to betray his fear by the pallor of his cheek. Nevertheless, he might suffer this mental disturbance, and yet maintain the fixed persuasion that life and bodily safety, which the violence of the tempest threatened to destroy, are not those good things which make their possessors good, as the possession of righteousness does. But in so far as they persist that we must call them not goods but advantages, they quarrel about words and neglect things. For what difference does it make whether goods or advantages be the better name, while the Stoic no less than the Peripatetic is alarmed at the prospect of losing them, and while, though they name them differently, they hold them in like esteem? Both parties assure us that, if urged to the commission of some immorality or crime by the threatened loss of these goods or advantages, they would prefer to lose such things as preserve bodily comfort and security rather than commit such things as violate righteousness. And thus the mind in which this resolution is well grounded suffers no perturbations to prevail with it in opposition to reason, even though they assail the weaker parts of the soul; and not only so, but it rules over them, and, while it refuses its consent and resists them, administers a reign of virtue. Such a character is ascribed to Æneas by Virgil when he says, He stands immovable by tears, Nor tenderest words with pity hears. 9.5. We need not at present give a careful and copious exposition of the doctrine of Scripture, the sum of Christian knowledge, regarding these passions. It subjects the mind itself to God, that He may rule and aid it, and the passions, again, to the mind, to moderate and bridle them, and turn them to righteous uses. In our ethics, we do not so much inquire whether a pious soul is angry, as why he is angry; not whether he is sad, but what is the cause of his sadness; not whether he fears, but what he fears. For I am not aware that any right thinking person would find fault with anger at a wrongdoer which seeks his amendment, or with sadness which intends relief to the suffering, or with fear lest one in danger be destroyed. The Stoics, indeed, are accustomed to condemn compassion. But how much more honorable had it been in that Stoic we have been telling of, had he been disturbed by compassion prompting him to relieve a fellow-creature, than to be disturbed by the fear of shipwreck! Far better and more humane, and more consot with pious sentiments, are the words of Cicero in praise of C sar, when he says, Among your virtues none is more admirable and agreeable than your compassion. And what is compassion but a fellow-feeling for another's misery, which prompts us to help him if we can? And this emotion is obedient to reason, when compassion is shown without violating right, as when the poor are relieved, or the penitent forgiven. Cicero, who knew how to use language, did not hesitate to call this a virtue, which the Stoics are not ashamed to reckon among the vices, although, as the book of the eminent Stoic, Epictetus, quoting the opinions of Zeno and Chrysippus, the founders of the school, has taught us, they admit that passions of this kind invade the soul of the wise man, whom they would have to be free from all vice. Whence it follows that these very passions are not judged by them to be vices, since they assail the wise man without forcing him to act against reason and virtue; and that, therefore, the opinion of the Peripatetics or Platonists and of the Stoics is one and the same. But, as Cicero says, mere logomachy is the bane of these pitiful Greeks, who thirst for contention rather than for truth. However, it may justly be asked, whether our subjection to these affections, even while we follow virtue, is a part of the infirmity of this life? For the holy angels feel no anger while they punish those whom the eternal law of God consigns to punishment, no fellow-feeling with misery while they relieve the miserable, no fear while they aid those who are in danger; and yet ordinary language ascribes to them also these mental emotions, because, though they have none of our weakness, their acts resemble the actions to which these emotions move us; and thus even God Himself is said in Scripture to be angry, and yet without any perturbation. For this word is used of the effect of His vengeance, not of the disturbing mental affection. 10.1. It is the decided opinion of all who use their brains, that all men desire to be happy. But who are happy, or how they become so, these are questions about which the weakness of human understanding stirs endless and angry controversies, in which philosophers have wasted their strength and expended their leisure. To adduce and discuss their various opinions would be tedious, and is unnecessary. The reader may remember what we said in the eighth book, while making a selection of the philosophers with whom we might discuss the question regarding the future life of happiness, whether we can reach it by paying divine honors to the one true God, the Creator of all gods, or by worshipping many gods, and he will not expect us to repeat here the same argument, especially as, even if he has forgotten it, he may refresh his memory by reperusal. For we made selection of the Platonists, justly esteemed the noblest of the philosophers, because they had the wit to perceive that the human soul, immortal and rational, or intellectual, as it is, cannot be happy except by partaking of the light of that God by whom both itself and the world were made; and also that the happy life which all men desire cannot be reached by any who does not cleave with a pure and holy love to that one supreme good, the unchangeable God. But as even these philosophers, whether accommodating to the folly and ignorance of the people, or, as the apostle says, becoming vain in their imaginations, Romans 1:21 supposed or allowed others to suppose that many gods should be worshipped, so that some of them considered that divine honor by worship and sacrifice should be rendered even to the demons (an error I have already exploded), we must now, by God's help, ascertain what is thought about our religious worship and piety by those immortal and blessed spirits, who dwell in the heavenly places among dominations, principalities, powers, whom the Platonists call gods, and some either good demons, or, like us, angels - that is to say, to put it more plainly, whether the angels desire us to offer sacrifice and worship, and to consecrate our possessions and ourselves, to them or only to God, theirs and ours. For this is the worship which is due to the Divinity, or, to speak more accurately, to the Deity; and, to express this worship in a single word as there does not occur to me any Latin term sufficiently exact, I shall avail myself, whenever necessary, of a Greek word. Λατρεία, whenever it occurs in Scripture, is rendered by the word service. But that service which is due to men, and in reference to which the apostle writes that servants must be subject to their own masters, Ephesians 6:5 is usually designated by another word in Greek, whereas the service which is paid to God alone by worship, is always, or almost always, called λατρεία in the usage of those who wrote from the divine oracles. This cannot so well be called simply cultus, for in that case it would not seem to be due exclusively to God; for the same word is applied to the respect we pay either to the memory or the living presence of men. From it, too, we derive the words agriculture, colonist, and others. And the heathen call their gods cœlicol, not because they worship heaven, but because they dwell in it, and as it were colonize it - not in the sense in which we call those colonists who are attached to their native soil to cultivate it under the rule of the owners, but in the sense in which the great master of the Latin language says, There was an ancient city inhabited by Tyrian colonists. He called them colonists, not because they cultivated the soil, but because they inhabited the city. So, too, cities that have hived off from larger cities are called colonies. Consequently, while it is quite true that, using the word in a special sense, cult can be rendered to none but God, yet, as the word is applied to other things besides, the cult due to God cannot in Latin be expressed by this word alone. The word religion might seem to express more definitely the worship due to God alone, and therefore Latin translators have used this word to represent θρησκεία; yet, as not only the uneducated, but also the best instructed, use the word religion to express human ties, and relationships, and affinities, it would inevitably introduce ambiguity to use this word in discussing the worship of God, unable as we are to say that religion is nothing else than the worship of God, without contradicting the common usage which applies this word to the observance of social relationships. Piety, again, or, as the Greeks say, εὐσέβεια, is commonly understood as the proper designation of the worship of God. Yet this word also is used of dutifulness to parents. The common people, too, use it of works of charity, which, I suppose, arises from the circumstance that God enjoins the performance of such works, and declares that He is pleased with them instead of, or in preference to sacrifices. From this usage it has also come to pass that God Himself is called pious, in which sense the Greeks never use εὐσεβεῖν, though εὐσέβεια is applied to works of charity by their common people also. In some passages of Scripture, therefore, they have sought to preserve the distinction by using not εὐσέβεια, the more general word, but θεοσέβεια, which literally denotes the worship of God. We, on the other hand, cannot express either of these ideas by one word. This worship, then, which in Greek is called λατρεία, and in Latin servitus [service], but the service due to God only; this worship, which in Greek is called θρησκεία, and in Latin religio, but the religion by which we are bound to God only; this worship, which they call θεοσέβεια, but which we cannot express in one word, but call it the worship of God - this, we say, belongs only to that God who is the true God, and who makes His worshippers gods. And therefore, whoever these immortal and blessed inhabitants of heaven be, if they do not love us, and wish us to be blessed, then we ought not to worship them; and if they do love us and desire our happiness, they cannot wish us to be made happy by any other means than they themselves have enjoyed - for how could they wish our blessedness to flow from one source, theirs from another? 10.30. If it is considered unseemly to emend anything which Plato has touched, why did Porphyry himself make emendations, and these not a few? For it is very certain that Plato wrote that the souls of men return after death to the bodies of beasts. Plotinus also, Porphyry's teacher, held this opinion; yet Porphyry justly rejected it. He was of opinion that human souls return indeed into human bodies, but not into the bodies they had left, but other new bodies. He shrank from the other opinion, lest a woman who had returned into a mule might possibly carry her own son on her back. He did not shrink, however, from a theory which admitted the possibility of a mother coming back into a girl and marrying her own son. How much more honorable a creed is that which was taught by the holy and truthful angels, uttered by the prophets who were moved by God's Spirit, preached by Him who was foretold as the coming Saviour by His forerunning heralds, and by the apostles whom He sent forth, and who filled the whole world with the gospel, - how much more honorable, I say, is the belief that souls return once for all to their own bodies, than that they return again and again to various bodies? Nevertheless Porphyry, as I have said, did considerably improve upon this opinion, in so far, at least, as he maintained that human souls could transmigrate only into human bodies, and made no scruple about demolishing the bestial prisons into which Plato had wished to cast them. He says, too, that God put the soul into the world that it might recognize the evils of matter, and return to the Father, and be for ever emancipated from the polluting contact of matter. And although here is some inappropriate thinking (for the soul is rather given to the body that it may do good; for it would not learn evil unless it did it), yet he corrects the opinion of other Platonists, and that on a point of no small importance, inasmuch as he avows that the soul, which is purged from all evil and received to the Father's presence, shall never again suffer the ills of this life. By this opinion he quite subverted the favorite Platonic dogma, that as dead men are made out of living ones, so living men are made out of dead ones; and he exploded the idea which Virgil seems to have adopted from Plato, that the purified souls which have been sent into the Elysian fields (the poetic name for the joys of the blessed) are summoned to the river Lethe, that is, to the oblivion of the past, That earthward they may pass once more, Remembering not the things before, And with a blind propension yearn To fleshly bodies to return. This found no favor with Porphyry, and very justly; for it is indeed foolish to believe that souls should desire to return from that life, which cannot be very blessed unless by the assurance of its permanence, and to come back into this life, and to the pollution of corruptible bodies, as if the result of perfect purification were only to make defilement desirable. For if perfect purification effects the oblivion of all evils, and the oblivion of evils creates a desire for a body in which the soul may again be entangled with evils, then the supreme felicity will be the cause of infelicity, and the perfection of wisdom the cause of foolishness, and the purest cleansing the cause of defilement. And, however long the blessedness of the soul last, it cannot be founded on truth, if, in order to be blessed, it must be deceived. For it cannot be blessed unless it be free from fear. But, to be free from fear, it must be under the false impression that it shall be always blessed, - the false impression, for it is destined to be also at some time miserable. How, then, shall the soul rejoice in truth, whose joy is founded on falsehood? Porphyry saw this, and therefore said that the purified soul returns to the Father, that it may never more be entangled in the polluting contact with evil. The opinion, therefore, of some Platonists, that there is a necessary revolution carrying souls away and bringing them round again to the same things, is false. But, were it true, what were the advantage of knowing it? Would the Platonists presume to allege their superiority to us, because we were in this life ignorant of what they themselves were doomed to be ignorant of when perfected in purity and wisdom in another and better life, and which they must be ignorant of if they are to be blessed? If it were most absurd and foolish to say so, then certainly we must prefer Porphyry's opinion to the idea of a circulation of souls through constantly alternating happiness and misery. And if this is just, here is a Platonist emending Plato, here is a man who saw what Plato did not see, and who did not shrink from correcting so illustrious a master, but preferred truth to Plato. 10.32. This is the religion which possesses the universal way for delivering the soul; for except by this way, none can be delivered. This is a kind of royal way, which alone leads to a kingdom which does not totter like all temporal dignities, but stands firm on eternal foundations. And when Porphyry says, towards the end of the first book De Regressu Animœ, that no system of doctrine which furnishes the universal way for delivering the soul has as yet been received, either from the truest philosophy, or from the ideas and practices of the Indians, or from the reasoning of the Chald ans, or from any source whatever, and that no historical reading had made him acquainted with that way, he manifestly acknowledges that there is such a way, but that as yet he was not acquainted with it. Nothing of all that he had so laboriously learned concerning the deliverance of the soul, nothing of all that he seemed to others, if not to himself, to know and believe, satisfied him. For he perceived that there was still wanting a commanding authority which it might be right to follow in a matter of such importance. And when he says that he had not learned from any truest philosophy a system which possessed the universal way of the soul's deliverance, he shows plainly enough, as it seems to me, either that the philosophy of which he was a disciple was not the truest, or that it did not comprehend such a way. And how can that be the truest philosophy which does not possess this way? For what else is the universal way of the soul's deliverance than that by which all souls universally are delivered, and without which, therefore, no soul is delivered? And when he says, in addition, or from the ideas and practices of the Indians, or from the reasoning of the Chald ans, or from any source whatever, he declares in the most unequivocal language that this universal way of the soul's deliverance was not embraced in what he had learned either from the Indians or the Chald ans; and yet he could not forbear stating that it was from the Chald ans he had derived these divine oracles of which he makes such frequent mention. What, therefore, does he mean by this universal way of the soul's deliverance, which had not yet been made known by any truest philosophy, or by the doctrinal systems of those nations which were considered to have great insight in things divine, because they indulged more freely in a curious and fanciful science and worship of angels? What is this universal way of which he acknowledges his ignorance, if not a way which does not belong to one nation as its special property, but is common to all, and divinely bestowed? Porphyry, a man of no mediocre abilities, does not question that such a way exists; for he believes that Divine Providence could not have left men destitute of this universal way of delivering the soul. For he does not say that this way does not exist, but that this great boon and assistance has not yet been discovered, and has not come to his knowledge. And no wonder; for Porphyry lived in an age when this universal way of the soul's deliverance - in other words, the Christian religion - was exposed to the persecutions of idolaters and demon-worshippers, and earthly rulers, that the number of martyrs or witnesses for the truth might be completed and consecrated, and that by them proof might be given that we must endure all bodily sufferings in the cause of the holy faith, and for the commendation of the truth. Porphyry, being a witness of these persecutions, concluded that this way was destined to a speedy extinction, and that it, therefore, was not the universal way of the soul's deliverance, and did not see that the very thing that thus moved him, and deterred him from becoming a Christian, contributed to the confirmation and more effectual commendation of our religion. This, then, is the universal way of the soul's deliverance, the way that is granted by the divine compassion to the nations universally. And no nation to which the knowledge of it has already come, or may hereafter come, ought to demand, Why so soon? Or, Why so late?- for the design of Him who sends it is impenetrable by human capacity. This was felt by Porphyry when he confined himself to saying that this gift of God was not yet received, and had not yet come to his knowledge. For though this was so, he did not on that account pronounce that the way it self had no existence. This, I say, is the universal way for the deliverance of believers, concerning which the faithful Abraham received the divine assurance, In your seed shall all nations be blessed. Genesis 22:18 He, indeed, was by birth a Chald an; but, that he might receive these great promises, and that there might be propagated from him a seed disposed by angels in the hand of a Mediator, Galatians 3:19 in whom this universal way, thrown open to all nations for the deliverance of the soul, might be found, he was ordered to leave his country, and kindred, and father's house. Then was he himself, first of all, delivered from the Chald an superstitions, and by his obedience worshipped the one true God, whose promises he faithfully trusted. This is the universal way, of which it is said in holy prophecy, God be merciful unto us, and bless us, and cause His face to shine upon us; that Your way may be known upon earth, Your saving health among all nations. And hence, when our Saviour, so long after, had taken flesh of the seed of Abraham, He says of Himself, I am the way, the truth, and the life. John 14:6 This is the universal way, of which so long before it had been predicted, And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths: for out of Sion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:2-3 This way, therefore, is not the property of one, but of all nations. The law and the word of the Lord did not remain in Zion and Jerusalem, but issued thence to be universally diffused. And therefore the Mediator Himself, after His resurrection, says to His alarmed disciples, These are the words which I spoke unto you while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me. Then opened He their understandings that they might understand the Scriptures, and said to them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. Luke 24:44-47 This is the universal way of the soul's deliverance, which the holy angels and the holy prophets formerly disclosed where they could among the few men who found the grace of God, and especially in the Hebrew nation, whose commonwealth was, as it were, consecrated to prefigure and fore-announce the city of God which was to be gathered from all nations, by their tabernacle, and temple, and priesthood, and sacrifices. In some explicit statements, and in many obscure foreshadowings, this way was declared; but latterly came the Mediator Himself in the flesh, and His blessed apostles, revealing how the grace of the New Testament more openly explained what had been obscurely hinted to preceding generations, in conformity with the relation of the ages of the human race, and as it pleased God in His wisdom to appoint, who also bore them witness with signs and miracles some of which I have cited above. For not only were there visions of angels, and words heard from those heavenly ministrants, but also men of God, armed with the word of simple piety, cast out unclean spirits from the bodies and senses of men, and healed deformities and sicknesses; the wild beasts of earth and sea, the birds of air, iimate things, the elements, the stars, obeyed their divine commands; the powers of hell gave way before them, the dead were restored to life. I say nothing of the miracles peculiar and proper to the Saviour's own person, especially the nativity and the resurrection; in the one of which He wrought only the mystery of a virgin maternity, while in the other He furnished an instance of the resurrection which all shall at last experience. This way purifies the whole man, and prepares the mortal in all his parts for immortality. For, to prevent us from seeking for one purgation for the part which Porphyry calls intellectual, and another for the part he calls spiritual, and another for the body itself, our most mighty and truthful Purifier and Saviour assumed the whole human nature. Except by this way, which has been present among men both during the period of the promises and of the proclamation of their fulfillment, no man has been delivered, no man is delivered, no man shall be delivered. As to Porphyry's statement that the universal way of the soul's deliverance had not yet come to his knowledge by any acquaintance he had with history, I would ask, what more remarkable history can be found than that which has taken possession of the whole world by its authoritative voice? Or what more trustworthy than that which narrates past events, and predicts the future with equal clearness, and in the unfulfilled predictions of which we are constrained to believe by those that are already fulfilled? For neither Porphyry nor any Platonists can despise divination and prediction, even of things that pertain to this life and earthly matters, though they justly despise ordinary soothsaying and the divination that is connected with magical arts. They deny that these are the predictions of great men, or are to be considered important, and they are right; for they are founded, either on the foresight of subsidiary causes, as to a professional eye much of the course of a disease is foreseen by certain pre-monitory symptoms, or the unclean demons predict what they have resolved to do, that they may thus work upon the thoughts and desires of the wicked with an appearance of authority, and incline human frailty to imitate their impure actions. It is not such things that the saints who walk in the universal way care to predict as important, although, for the purpose of commending the faith, they knew and often predicted even such things as could not be detected by human observation, nor be readily verified by experience. But there were other truly important and divine events which they predicted, in so far as it was given them to know the will of God. For the incarnation of Christ, and all those important marvels that were accomplished in Him, and done in His name; the repentance of men and the conversion of their wills to God; the remission of sins, the grace of righteousness, the faith of the pious, and the multitudes in all parts of the world who believe in the true divinity; the overthrow of idolatry and demon worship, and the testing of the faithful by trials; the purification of those who persevered, and their deliverance from all evil; the day of judgment, the resurrection of the dead, the eternal damnation of the community of the ungodly, and the eternal kingdom of the most glorious city of God, ever-blessed in the enjoyment of the vision of God - these things were predicted and promised in the Scriptures of this way; and of these we see so many fulfilled, that we justly and piously trust that the rest will also come to pass. As for those who do not believe, and consequently do not understand, that this is the way which leads straight to the vision of God and to eternal fellowship with Him, according to the true predictions and statements of the Holy Scriptures, they may storm at our position, but they cannot storm it. And therefore, in these ten books, though not meeting, I dare say, the expectation of some, yet I have, as the true God and Lord has vouchsafed to aid me, satisfied the desire of certain persons, by refuting the objections of the ungodly, who prefer their own gods to the Founder of the holy city, about which we undertook to speak. of these ten books, the first five were directed against those who think we should worship the gods for the sake of the blessings of this life, and the second five against those who think we should worship them for the sake of the life which is to be after death. And now, in fulfillment of the promise I made in the first book, I shall go on to say, as God shall aid me, what I think needs to be said regarding the origin, history, and deserved ends of the two cities, which, as already remarked, are in this world commingled and implicated with one another. 11.1. The city of God we speak of is the same to which testimony is borne by that Scripture, which excels all the writings of all nations by its divine authority, and has brought under its influence all kinds of minds, and this not by a casual intellectual movement, but obviously by an express providential arrangement. For there it is written, Glorious things are spoken of you, O city of God. And in another psalm we read, Great is the Lord, and greatly to be praised in the city of our God, in the mountain of His holiness, increasing the joy of the whole earth. And, a little after, in the same psalm, As we have heard, so have we seen in the city of the Lord of hosts, in the city of our God. God has established it forever. And in another, There is a river the streams whereof shall make glad the city of our God, the holy place of the tabernacles of the Most High. God is in the midst of her, she shall not be moved. From these and similar testimonies, all of which it were tedious to cite, we have learned that there is a city of God, and its Founder has inspired us with a love which makes us covet its citizenship. To this Founder of the holy city the citizens of the earthly city prefer their own gods, not knowing that He is the God of gods, not of false, i.e., of impious and proud gods, who, being deprived of His unchangeable and freely communicated light, and so reduced to a kind of poverty-stricken power, eagerly grasp at their own private privileges, and seek divine honors from their deluded subjects; but of the pious and holy gods, who are better pleased to submit themselves to one, than to subject many to themselves, and who would rather worship God than be worshipped as God. But to the enemies of this city we have replied in the ten preceding books, according to our ability and the help afforded by our Lord and King. Now, recognizing what is expected of me, and not unmindful of my promise, and relying, too, on the same succor, I will endeavor to treat of the origin, and progress, and deserved destinies of the two cities (the earthly and the heavenly, to wit), which, as we said, are in this present world commingled, and as it were entangled together. And, first, I will explain how the foundations of these two cities were originally laid, in the difference that arose among the angels. 14.1. We have already stated in the preceding books that God, desiring not only that the human race might be able by their similarity of nature to associate with one another, but also that they might be bound together in harmony and peace by the ties of relationship, was pleased to derive all men from one individual, and created man with such a nature that the members of the race should not have died, had not the two first (of whom the one was created out of nothing, and the other out of him) merited this by their disobedience; for by them so great a sin was committed, that by it the human nature was altered for the worse, and was transmitted also to their posterity, liable to sin and subject to death. And the kingdom of death so reigned over men, that the deserved penalty of sin would have hurled all headlong even into the second death, of which there is no end, had not the undeserved grace of God saved some therefrom. And thus it has come to pass, that though there are very many and great nations all over the earth, whose rites and customs, speech, arms, and dress, are distinguished by marked differences, yet there are no more than two kinds of human society, which we may justly call two cities, according to the language of our Scriptures. The one consists of those who wish to live after the flesh, the other of those who wish to live after the spirit; and when they severally achieve what they wish, they live in peace, each after their kind. 14.3. But if any one says that the flesh is the cause of all vices and ill conduct, inasmuch as the soul lives wickedly only because it is moved by the flesh, it is certain he has not carefully considered the whole nature of man. For the corruptible body, indeed, weighs down the soul. Wisdom 9:15 Whence, too, the apostle, speaking of this corruptible body, of which he had shortly before said, though our outward man perish, 2 Corinthians 4:16 says, We know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven: if so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked. For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up in life. 2 Corinthians 5:1-4 We are then burdened with this corruptible body; but knowing that the cause of this burdensomeness is not the nature and substance of the body, but its corruption, we do not desire to be deprived of the body, but to be clothed with its immortality. For then, also, there will be a body, but it shall no longer be a burden, being no longer corruptible. At present, then, the corruptible body presses down the soul, and the earthly tabernacle weighs down the mind that muses upon many things, nevertheless they are in error who suppose that all the evils of the soul proceed from the body. Virgil, indeed, seems to express the sentiments of Plato in the beautiful lines, where he says - A fiery strength inspires their lives, An essence that from heaven derives, Though clogged in part by limbs of clay And the dull 'vesture of decay;' but though he goes on to mention the four most common mental emotions - desire, fear, joy, sorrow - with the intention of showing that the body is the origin of all sins and vices, saying - Hence wild desires and grovelling fears, And human laughter, human tears, Immured in dungeon-seeming nights They look abroad, yet see no light, yet we believe quite otherwise. For the corruption of the body, which weighs down the soul, is not the cause but the punishment of the first sin; and it was not the corruptible flesh that made the soul sinful, but the sinful soul that made the flesh corruptible. And though from this corruption of the flesh there arise certain incitements to vice, and indeed vicious desires, yet we must not attribute to the flesh all the vices of a wicked life, in case we thereby clear the devil of all these, for he has no flesh. For though we cannot call the devil a fornicator or drunkard, or ascribe to him any sensual indulgence (though he is the secret instigator and prompter of those who sin in these ways), yet he is exceedingly proud and envious. And this viciousness has so possessed him, that on account of it he is reserved in chains of darkness to everlasting punishment. Now these vices, which have dominion over the devil, the apostle attributes to the flesh, which certainly the devil has not. For he says hatred, variance, emulations, strife, envying are the works of the flesh; and of all these evils pride is the origin and head, and it rules in the devil though he has no flesh. For who shows more hatred to the saints? Who is more at variance with them? Who more envious, bitter, and jealous? And since he exhibits all these works, though he has no flesh, how are they works of the flesh, unless because they are the works of man, who is, as I said, spoken of under the name of flesh? For it is not by having flesh, which the devil has not, but by living according to himself - that is, according to man - that man became like the devil. For the devil too, wished to live according to himself when he did not abide in the truth; so that when he lied, this was not of God, but of himself, who is not only a liar, but the father of lies, he being the first who lied, and the originator of lying as of sin. 14.6. But the character of the human will is of moment; because, if it is wrong, these motions of the soul will be wrong, but if it is right, they will be not merely blameless, but even praiseworthy. For the will is in them all; yea, none of them is anything else than will. For what are desire and joy but a volition of consent to the things we wish? And what are fear and sadness but a volition of aversion from the things which we do not wish? But when consent takes the form of seeking to possess the things we wish, this is called desire; and when consent takes the form of enjoying the things we wish, this is called joy. In like manner, when we turn with aversion from that which we do not wish to happen, this volition is termed fear; and when we turn away from that which has happened against our will, this act of will is called sorrow. And generally in respect of all that we seek or shun, as a man's will is attracted or repelled, so it is changed and turned into these different affections. Wherefore the man who lives according to God, and not according to man, ought to be a lover of good, and therefore a hater of evil. And since no one is evil by nature, but whoever is evil is evil by vice, he who lives according to God ought to cherish towards evil men a perfect hatred, so that he shall neither hate the man because of his vice, nor love the vice because of the man, but hate the vice and love the man. For the vice being cursed, all that ought to be loved, and nothing that ought to be hated, will remain. 14.8. Those emotions which the Greeks call εὐπαθείαι, and which Cicero calls constantiœ, the Stoics would restrict to three; and, instead of three perturbations in the soul of the wise man, they substituted severally, in place of desire, will; in place of joy, contentment; and for fear, caution; and as to sickness or pain, which we, to avoid ambiguity, preferred to call sorrow, they denied that it could exist in the mind of a wise man. Will, they say, seeks the good, for this the wise man does. Contentment has its object in good that is possessed, and this the wise man continually possesses. Caution avoids evil, and this the wise man ought to avoid. But sorrow arises from evil that has already happened; and as they suppose that no evil can happen to the wise man, there can be no representative of sorrow in his mind. According to them, therefore, none but the wise man wills, is contented, uses caution; and that the fool can do no more than desire, rejoice, fear, be sad. The former three affections Cicero calls constantiœ, the last four perturbationes. Many, however, calls these last passions; and, as I have said, the Greeks call the former εὐπαθείαι, and the latter πάθη . And when I made a careful examination of Scripture to find whether this terminology was sanctioned by it, I came upon this saying of the prophet: There is no contentment to the wicked, says the Lord; Isaiah 57:21 as if the wicked might more properly rejoice than be contented regarding evils, for contentment is the property of the good and godly. I found also that verse in the Gospel: Whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto them? Matthew 7:12 which seems to imply that evil or shameful things may be the object of desire, but not of will. Indeed, some interpreters have added good things, to make the expression more in conformity with customary usage, and have given this meaning, Whatsoever good deeds that you would that men should do unto you. For they thought that this would prevent any one from wishing other men to provide him with unseemly, not to say shameful gratifications - luxurious banquets, for example - on the supposition that if he returned the like to them he would be fulfilling this precept. In the Greek Gospel, however, from which the Latin is translated, good does not occur, but only, All things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto them, and, as I believe, because good is already included in the word would; for He does not say desire. Yet though we may sometimes avail ourselves of these precise proprieties of language, we are not to be always bridled by them; and when we read those writers against whose authority it is unlawful to reclaim, we must accept the meanings above mentioned in passages where a right sense can be educed by no other interpretation, as in those instances we adduced partly from the prophet, partly from the Gospel. For who does not know that the wicked exult with joy? Yet there is no contentment for the wicked, says the Lord. And how so, unless because contentment, when the word is used in its proper and distinctive significance, means something different from joy? In like manner, who would deny that it were wrong to enjoin upon men that whatever they desire others to do to them they should themselves do to others, lest they should mutually please one another by shameful and illicit pleasure? And yet the precept, Whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so to them, is very wholesome and just. And how is this, unless because the will is in this place used strictly, and signifies that will which cannot have evil for its object? But ordinary phraseology would not have allowed the saying, Be unwilling to make any manner of lie, Sirach 7:13 had there not been also an evil will, whose wickedness separates if from that which the angels celebrated, Peace on earth, of good will to men. Luke 2:14 For good is superfluous if there is no other kind of will but good will. And why should the apostle have mentioned it among the praises of charity as a great thing, that it rejoices not in iniquity, unless because wickedness does so rejoice? For even with secular writers these words are used indifferently. For Cicero, that most fertile of orators, says, I desire, conscript fathers, to be merciful. And who would be so pedantic as to say that he should have said I will rather than I desire, because the word is used in a good connection? Again, in Terence, the profligate youth, burning with wild lust, says, I will nothing else than Philumena. That this will was lust is sufficiently indicated by the answer of his old servant which is there introduced: How much better were it to try and banish that love from your heart, than to speak so as uselessly to inflame your passion still more! And that contentment was used by secular writers in a bad sense that verse of Virgil testifies, in which he most succinctly comprehends these four perturbations - Hence they fear and desire, grieve and are content The same author had also used the expression, the evil contentments of the mind. So that good and bad men alike will, are cautious, and contented; or, to say the same thing in other words, good and bad men alike desire, fear, rejoice, but the former in a good, the latter in a bad fashion, according as the will is right or wrong. Sorrow itself, too, which the Stoics would not allow to be represented in the mind of the wise man, is used in a good sense, and especially in our writings. For the apostle praises the Corinthians because they had a godly sorrow. But possibly some one may say that the apostle congratulated them because they were penitently sorry, and that such sorrow can exist only in those who have sinned. For these are his words: For I perceive that the same epistle has made you sorry, though it were but for a season. Now I rejoice, not that you were made sorry, but that you sorrowed to repentance; for you were made sorry after a godly manner, that you might receive damage by us in nothing. For godly sorrow works repentance to salvation not to be repented of, but the sorrow of the world works death. For, behold, this selfsame thing that you sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you! 2 Corinthians 7:8-11 Consequently the Stoics may defend themselves by replying, that sorrow is indeed useful for repentance of sin, but that this can have no place in the mind of the wise man, inasmuch as no sin attaches to him of which he could sorrowfully repent, nor any other evil the endurance or experience of which could make him sorrowful. For they say that Alcibiades (if my memory does not deceive me), who believed himself happy, shed tears when Socrates argued with him, and demonstrated that he was miserable because he was foolish. In his case, therefore, folly was the cause of this useful and desirable sorrow, wherewith a man mourns that he is what he ought not to be. But the Stoics maintain not that the fool, but that the wise man, cannot be sorrowful. 14.9. But so far as regards this question of mental perturbations, we have answered these philosophers in the ninth book of this work, showing that it is rather a verbal than a real dispute, and that they seek contention rather than truth. Among ourselves, according to the sacred Scriptures and sound doctrine, the citizens of the holy city of God, who live according to God in the pilgrimage of this life, both fear and desire, and grieve and rejoice. And because their love is rightly placed, all these affections of theirs are right. They fear eternal punishment, they desire eternal life; they grieve because they themselves groan within themselves, waiting for the adoption, the redemption of their body; Romans 8:23 they rejoice in hope, because there shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. 1 Corinthians 15:54 In like manner they fear to sin, they desire to persevere; they grieve in sin, they rejoice in good works. They fear to sin, because they hear that because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. Matthew 24:12 They desire to persevere, because they hear that it is written, He that endures to the end shall be saved. Matthew 10:22 They grieve for sin, hearing that If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 1 John 1:8 They rejoice in good works, because they hear that the Lord loves a cheerful giver. 2 Corinthians 9:7 In like manner, according as they are strong or weak, they fear or desire to be tempted, grieve or rejoice in temptation. They fear to be tempted, because they hear the injunction, If a man be overtaken in a fault, you which are spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering yourself, lest you also be tempted. Galatians 6:l They desire to be tempted, because they hear one of the heroes of the city of God saying, Examine me, O Lord, and tempt me: try my reins and my heart. They grieve in temptations, because they see Peter weeping; Matthew 26:75 they rejoice in temptations, because they hear James saying, My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various temptations. James 1:2 And not only on their own account do they experience these emotions, but also on account of those whose deliverance they desire and whose perdition they fear, and whose loss or salvation affects them with grief or with joy. For if we who have come into the Church from among the Gentiles may suitably instance that noble and mighty hero who glories in his infirmities, the teacher (doctor) of the nations in faith and truth, who also labored more than all his fellow apostles, and instructed the tribes of God's people by his epistles, which edified not only those of his own time, but all those who were to be gathered in - that hero, I say, and athlete of Christ, instructed by Him, anointed of His Spirit, crucified with Him, glorious in Him, lawfully maintaining a great conflict on the theatre of this world, and being made a spectacle to angels and men, 1 Corinthians 4:9 and pressing onwards for the prize of his high calling, Philippians 3:14 - very joyfully do we with the eyes of faith behold him rejoicing with them that rejoice, and weeping with them that weep; Romans 12:15 though hampered by fightings without and fears within; 2 Corinthians 7:5 desiring to depart and to be with Christ; Philippians 1:23 longing to see the Romans, that he might have some fruit among them as among other Gentiles; Romans 1:11-13 being jealous over the Corinthians, and fearing in that jealousy lest their minds should be corrupted from the chastity that is in Christ; 2 Corinthians 11:1-3 having great heaviness and continual sorrow of heart for the Israelites, Romans 9:2 because they, being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God; Romans 10:3 and expressing not only his sorrow, but bitter lamentation over some who had formally sinned and had not repented of their uncleanness and fornications. 2 Corinthians 12:21 If these emotions and affections, arising as they do from the love of what is good and from a holy charity, are to be called vices, then let us allow these emotions which are truly vices to pass under the name of virtues. But since these affections, when they are exercised in a becoming way, follow the guidance of right reason, who will dare to say that they are diseases or vicious passions? Wherefore even the Lord Himself, when He condescended to lead a human life in the form of a slave, had no sin whatever, and yet exercised these emotions where He judged they should be exercised. For as there was in Him a true human body and a true human soul, so was there also a true human emotion. When, therefore, we read in the Gospel that the hard-heartedness of the Jews moved Him to sorrowful indignation, Mark 3:5 that He said, I am glad for your sakes, to the intent you may believe, John 11:15 that when about to raise Lazarus He even shed tears, John 11:35 that He earnestly desired to eat the passover with His disciples, Luke 22:15 that as His passion drew near His soul was sorrowful, Matthew 26:38 these emotions are certainly not falsely ascribed to Him. But as He became man when it pleased Him, so, in the grace of His definite purpose, when it pleased Him He experienced those emotions in His human soul. But we must further make the admission, that even when these affections are well regulated, and according to God's will, they are peculiar to this life, not to that future life we look for, and that often we yield to them against our will. And thus sometimes we weep in spite of ourselves, being carried beyond ourselves, not indeed by culpable desire; but by praiseworthy charity. In us, therefore, these affections arise from human infirmity; but it was not so with the Lord Jesus, for even His infirmity was the consequence of His power. But so long as we wear the infirmity of this life, we are rather worse men than better if we have none of these emotions at all. For the apostle vituperated and abominated some who, as he said, were without natural affection. Romans 1:31 The sacred Psalmist also found fault with those of whom he said, I looked for some to lament with me, and there was none. For to be quite free from pain while we are in this place of misery is only purchased, as one of this world's literati perceived and remarked, at the price of blunted sensibilities both of mind and body. And therefore that which the Greeks call ἀπαθεια, and what the Latins would call, if their language would allow them, impassibilitas, if it be taken to mean an impassibility of spirit and not of body, or, in other words, a freedom from those emotions which are contrary to reason and disturb the mind, then it is obviously a good and most desirable quality, but it is not one which is attainable in this life. For the words of the apostle are the confession, not of the common herd, but of the eminently pious, just, and holy men: If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 1 John 1:8 When there shall be no sin in a man, then there shall be this απάθεια . At present it is enough if we live without crime; and he who thinks he lives without sin puts aside not sin, but pardon. And if that is to be called apathy, where the mind is the subject of no emotion, then who would not consider this insensibility to be worse than all vices? It may, indeed, reasonably be maintained that the perfect blessedness we hope for shall be free from all sting of fear or sadness; but who that is not quite lost to truth would say that neither love nor joy shall be experienced there? But if by apathy a condition be meant in which no fear terrifies nor any pain annoys, we must in this life renounce such a state if we would live according to God's will, but may hope to enjoy it in that blessedness which is promised as our eternal condition. For that fear of which the Apostle John says, There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear has torment. He that fears is not made perfect in love, 1 John 4:18 - that fear is not of the same kind as the Apostle Paul felt lest the Corinthians should be seduced by the subtlety of the serpent; for love is susceptible of this fear, yea, love alone is capable of it. But the fear which is not in love is of that kind of which Paul himself says, For you have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear. Romans 8:15 But as for that clean fear which endures for ever, if it is to exist in the world to come (and how else can it be said to endure for ever?), it is not a fear deterring us from evil which may happen, but preserving us in the good which cannot be lost. For where the love of acquired good is unchangeable, there certainly the fear that avoids evil is, if I may say so, free from anxiety. For under the name of clean fear David signifies that will by which we shall necessarily shrink from sin, and guard against it, not with the anxiety of weakness, which fears that we may strongly sin, but with the tranquillity of perfect love. Or if no kind of fear at all shall exist in that most imperturbable security of perpetual and blissful delights, then the expression, The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring for ever, must be taken in the same sense as that other, The patience of the poor shall not perish forever. For patience, which is necessary only where ills are to be borne, shall not be eternal, but that which patience leads us to will be eternal. So perhaps this clean fear is said to endure for ever, because that to which fear leads shall endure. And since this is so - since we must live a good life in order to attain to a blessed life, a good life has all these affections right, a bad life has them wrong. But in the blessed life eternal there will be love and joy, not only right, but also assured; but fear and grief there will be none. Whence it already appears in some sort what manner of persons the citizens of the city of God must be in this their pilgrimage, who live after the spirit, not after the flesh - that is to say, according to God, not according to man - and what manner of persons they shall be also in that immortality whither they are journeying. And the city or society of the wicked, who live not according to God, but according to man, and who accept the doctrines of men or devils in the worship of a false and contempt of the true divinity, is shaken with those wicked emotions as by diseases and disturbances. And if there be some of its citizens who seem to restrain and, as it were, temper those passions, they are so elated with ungodly pride, that their disease is as much greater as their pain is less. And if some, with a vanity monstrous in proportion to its rarity, have become enamored of themselves because they can be stimulated and excited by no emotion, moved or bent by no affection, such persons rather lose all humanity than obtain true tranquillity. For a thing is not necessarily right because it is inflexible, nor healthy because it is insensible. 14.10. But it is a fair question, whether our first parent or first parents (for there was a marriage of two), before they sinned, experienced in their animal body such emotions as we shall not experience in the spiritual body when sin has been purged and finally abolished. For if they did, then how were they blessed in that boasted place of bliss, Paradise? For who that is affected by fear or grief can be called absolutely blessed? And what could those persons fear or suffer in such affluence of blessings, where neither death nor ill-health was feared, and where nothing was wanting which a good will could desire, and nothing present which could interrupt man's mental or bodily enjoyment? Their love to God was unclouded, and their mutual affection was that of faithful and sincere marriage; and from this love flowed a wonderful delight, because they always enjoyed what was loved. Their avoidance of sin was tranquil; and, so long as it was maintained, no other ill at all could invade them and bring sorrow. Or did they perhaps desire to touch and eat the forbidden fruit, yet feared to die; and thus both fear and desire already, even in that blissful place, preyed upon those first of mankind? Away with the thought that such could be the case where there was no sin! And, indeed, this is already sin, to desire those things which the law of God forbids, and to abstain from them through fear of punishment, not through love of righteousness. Away, I say, with the thought, that before there was any sin, there should already have been committed regarding that fruit the very sin which our Lord warns us against regarding a woman: Whosoever looks on a woman to lust after her, has committed adultery with her already in his heart. Matthew 5:28 As happy, then, as were these our first parents, who were agitated by no mental perturbations, and annoyed by no bodily discomforts, so happy should the whole human race have been, had they not introduced that evil which they have transmitted to their posterity, and had none of their descendants committed iniquity worthy of damnation; but this original blessedness continuing until, in virtue of that benediction which said, Increase and multiply, Genesis 1:28 the number of the predestined saints should have been completed, there would then have been bestowed that higher felicity which is enjoyed by the most blessed angels - a blessedness in which there should have been a secure assurance that no one would sin, and no one die; and so should the saints have lived, after no taste of labor, pain, or death, as now they shall live in the resurrection, after they have endured all these things. 14.11. But because God foresaw all things, and was therefore not ignorant that man also would fall, we ought to consider this holy city in connection with what God foresaw and ordained, and not according to our own ideas, which do not embrace God's ordination. For man, by his sin, could not disturb the divine counsel, nor compel God to change what He had decreed; for God's foreknowledge had anticipated both - that is to say, both how evil the man whom He had created good should become, and what good He Himself should even thus derive from him. For though God is said to change His determinations (so that in a tropical sense the Holy Scripture says even that God repented ), this is said with reference to man's expectation, or the order of natural causes, and not with reference to that which the Almighty had foreknown that He would do. Accordingly God, as it is written, made man upright, Ecclesiastes 7:29 and consequently with a good will. For if he had not had a good will, he could not have been upright. The good will, then, is the work of God; for God created him with it. But the first evil will, which preceded all man's evil acts, was rather a kind of falling away from the work of God to its own works than any positive work. And therefore the acts resulting were evil, not having God, but the will itself for their end; so that the will or the man himself, so far as his will is bad, was as it were the evil tree bringing forth evil fruit. Moreover, the bad will, though it be not in harmony with, but opposed to nature, inasmuch as it is a vice or blemish, yet it is true of it as of all vice, that it cannot exist except in a nature, and only in a nature created out of nothing, and not in that which the Creator has begotten of Himself, as He begot the Word, by whom all things were made. For though God formed man of the dust of the earth, yet the earth itself, and every earthly material, is absolutely created out of nothing; and man's soul, too, God created out of nothing, and joined to the body, when He made man. But evils are so thoroughly overcome by good, that though they are permitted to exist, for the sake of demonstrating how the most righteous foresight of God can make a good use even of them, yet good can exist without evil, as in the true and supreme God Himself, and as in every invisible and visible celestial creature that exists above this murky atmosphere; but evil cannot exist without good, because the natures in which evil exists, in so far as they are natures, are good. And evil is removed, not by removing any nature, or part of a nature, which had been introduced by the evil, but by healing and correcting that which had been vitiated and depraved. The will, therefore, is then truly free, when it is not the slave of vices and sins. Such was it given us by God; and this being lost by its own fault, can only be restored by Him who was able at first to give it. And therefore the truth says, If the Son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed; 1 John 8:36 which is equivalent to saying, If the Son shall save you, you shall be saved indeed. For He is our Liberator, inasmuch as He is our Saviour. Man then lived with God for his rule in a paradise at once physical and spiritual. For neither was it a paradise only physical for the advantage of the body, and not also spiritual for the advantage of the mind; nor was it only spiritual to afford enjoyment to man by his internal sensations, and not also physical to afford him enjoyment through his external senses. But obviously it was both for both ends. But after that proud and therefore envious angel (of whose fall I have said as much as I was able in the eleventh and twelfth books of this work, as well as that of his fellows, who, from being God's angels, became his angels), preferring to rule with a kind of pomp of empire rather than to be another's subject, fell from the spiritual Paradise, and essaying to insinuate his persuasive guile into the mind of man, whose unfallen condition provoked him to envy now that himself was fallen, he chose the serpent as his mouthpiece in that bodily Paradise in which it and all the other earthly animals were living with those two human beings, the man and his wife, subject to them, and harmless; and he chose the serpent because, being slippery, and moving in tortuous windings, it was suitable for his purpose. And this animal being subdued to his wicked ends by the presence and superior force of his angelic nature, he abused as his instrument, and first tried his deceit upon the woman, making his assault upon the weaker part of that human alliance, that he might gradually gain the whole, and not supposing that the man would readily give ear to him, or be deceived, but that he might yield to the error of the woman. For as Aaron was not induced to agree with the people when they blindly wished him to make an idol, and yet yielded to constraint; and as it is not credible that Solomon was so blind as to suppose that idols should be worshipped, but was drawn over to such sacrilege by the blandishments of women; so we cannot believe that Adam was deceived, and supposed the devil's word to be truth, and therefore transgressed God's law, but that he by the drawings of kindred yielded to the woman, the husband to the wife, the one human being to the only other human being. For not without significance did the apostle say, And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression; 1 Timothy 2:14 but he speaks thus, because the woman accepted as true what the serpent told her, but the man could not bear to be severed from his only companion, even though this involved a partnership in sin. He was not on this account less culpable, but sinned with his eyes open. And so the apostle does not say, He did not sin, but He was not deceived. For he shows that he sinned when he says, By one man sin entered into the world, Romans 5:12 and immediately after more distinctly, In the likeness of Adam's transgression. But he meant that those are deceived who do not judge that which they do to be sin; but he knew. Otherwise how were it true Adam was not deceived? But having as yet no experience of the divine severity, he was possibly deceived in so far as he thought his sin venial. And consequently he was not deceived as the woman was deceived, but he was deceived as to the judgment which would be passed on his apology: The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me, and I did eat. Genesis 3:12 What need of saying more? Although they were not both deceived by credulity, yet both were entangled in the snares of the devil, and taken by sin. 14.13. Our first parents fell into open disobedience because already they were secretly corrupted; for the evil act had never been done had not an evil will preceded it. And what is the origin of our evil will but pride? For pride is the beginning of sin. Sirach 10:13 And what is pride but the craving for undue exaltation? And this is undue exaltation, when the soul abandons Him to whom it ought to cleave as its end, and becomes a kind of end to itself. This happens when it becomes its own satisfaction. And it does so when it falls away from that unchangeable good which ought to satisfy it more than itself. This falling away is spontaneous; for if the will had remained steadfast in the love of that higher and changeless good by which it was illumined to intelligence and kindled into love, it would not have turned away to find satisfaction in itself, and so become frigid and benighted; the woman would not have believed the serpent spoke the truth, nor would the man have preferred the request of his wife to the command of God, nor have supposed that it was a venial trangression to cleave to the partner of his life even in a partnership of sin. The wicked deed, then - that is to say, the trangression of eating the forbidden fruit - was committed by persons who were already wicked. That evil fruit Matthew 7:18 could be brought forth only by a corrupt tree. But that the tree was evil was not the result of nature; for certainly it could become so only by the vice of the will, and vice is contrary to nature. Now, nature could not have been depraved by vice had it not been made out of nothing. Consequently, that it is a nature, this is because it is made by God; but that it falls away from Him, this is because it is made out of nothing. But man did not so fall away as to become absolutely nothing; but being turned towards himself, his being became more contracted than it was when he clave to Him who supremely is. Accordingly, to exist in himself, that is, to be his own satisfaction after abandoning God, is not quite to become a nonentity, but to approximate to that. And therefore the holy Scriptures designate the proud by another name, self-pleasers. For it is good to have the heart lifted up, yet not to one's self, for this is proud, but to the Lord, for this is obedient, and can be the act only of the humble. There is, therefore, something in humility which, strangely enough, exalts the heart, and something in pride which debases it. This seems, indeed, to be contradictory, that loftiness should debase and lowliness exalt. But pious humility enables us to submit to what is above us; and nothing is more exalted above us than God; and therefore humility, by making us subject to God, exalts us. But pride, being a defect of nature, by the very act of refusing subjection and revolting from Him who is supreme, falls to a low condition; and then comes to pass what is written: You cast them down when they lifted up themselves. For he does not say, when they had been lifted up, as if first they were exalted, and then afterwards cast down; but when they lifted up themselves even then they were cast down - that is to say, the very lifting up was already a fall. And therefore it is that humility is specially recommended to the city of God as it sojourns in this world, and is specially exhibited in the city of God, and in the person of Christ its King; while the contrary vice of pride, according to the testimony of the sacred writings, specially rules his adversary the devil. And certainly this is the great difference which distinguishes the two cities of which we speak, the one being the society of the godly men, the other of the ungodly, each associated with the angels that adhere to their party, and the one guided and fashioned by love of self, the other by love of God. The devil, then, would not have ensnared man in the open and manifest sin of doing what God had forbidden, had man not already begun to live for himself. It was this that made him listen with pleasure to the words, You shall be as gods, Genesis 3:5 which they would much more readily have accomplished by obediently adhering to their supreme and true end than by proudly living to themselves. For created gods are gods not by virtue of what is in themselves, but by a participation of the true God. By craving to be more, man becomes less; and by aspiring to be self-sufficing, he fell away from Him who truly suffices him. Accordingly, this wicked desire which prompts man to please himself as if he were himself light, and which thus turns him away from that light by which, had he followed it, he would himself have become light - this wicked desire, I say, already secretly existed in him, and the open sin was but its consequence. For that is true which is written, Pride goes before destruction, and before honor is humility; Proverbs 18:12 that is to say, secret ruin precedes open ruin, while the former is not counted ruin. For who counts exaltation ruin, though no sooner is the Highest forsaken than a fall is begun? But who does not recognize it as ruin, when there occurs an evident and indubitable transgression of the commandment? And consequently, God's prohibition had reference to such an act as, when committed, could not be defended on any pretense of doing what was righteous. And I make bold to say that it is useful for the proud to fall into an open and indisputable transgression, and so displease themselves, as already, by pleasing themselves, they had fallen. For Peter was in a healthier condition when he wept and was dissatisfied with himself, than when he boldly presumed and satisfied himself. And this is averred by the sacred Psalmist when he says, Fill their faces with shame, that they may seek Your name, O Lord; that is, that they who have pleased themselves in seeking their own glory may be pleased and satisfied with You in seeking Your glory. 14.15. Therefore, because the sin was a despising of the authority of God - who had created man; who had made him in His own image; who had set him above the other animals; who had placed him in Paradise; who had enriched him with abundance of every kind and of safety; who had laid upon him neither many, nor great, nor difficult commandments, but, in order to make a wholesome obedience easy to him, had given him a single very brief and very light precept by which He reminded that creature whose service was to be free that He was Lord, - it was just that condemnation followed, and condemnation such that man, who by keeping the commandments should have been spiritual even in his flesh, became fleshly even in his spirit; and as in his pride he had sought to be his own satisfaction, God in His justice abandoned him to himself, not to live in the absolute independence he affected, but instead of the liberty he desired, to live dissatisfied with himself in a hard and miserable bondage to him to whom by sinning he had yielded himself, doomed in spite of himself to die in body as he had willingly become dead in spirit, condemned even to eternal death (had not the grace of God delivered him) because he had forsaken eternal life. Whoever thinks such punishment either excessive or unjust shows his inability to measure the great iniquity of sinning where sin might so easily have been avoided. For as Abraham's obedience is with justice pronounced to be great, because the thing commanded, to kill his son, was very difficult, so in Paradise the disobedience was the greater, because the difficulty of that which was commanded was imperceptible. And as the obedience of the second Man was the more laudable because He became obedient even unto death, Philippians 2:8 so the disobedience of the first man was the more detestable because he became disobedient even unto death. For where the penalty annexed to disobedience is great, and the thing commanded by the Creator is easy, who can sufficiently estimate how great a wickedness it is, in a matter so easy, not to obey the authority of so great a power, even when that power deters with so terrible a penalty? In short, to say all in a word, what but disobedience was the punishment of disobedience in that sin? For what else is man's misery but his own disobedience to himself, so that in consequence of his not being willing to do what he could do, he now wills to do what he cannot? For though he could not do all things in Paradise before he sinned, yet he wished to do only what he could do, and therefore he could do all things he wished. But now, as we recognize in his offspring, and as divine Scripture testifies, Man is like to vanity. For who can count how many things he wishes which he cannot do, so long as he is disobedient to himself, that is, so long as his mind and his flesh do not obey his will? For in spite of himself his mind is both frequently disturbed, and his flesh suffers, and grows old, and dies; and in spite of ourselves we suffer whatever else we suffer, and which we would not suffer if our nature absolutely and in all its parts obeyed our will. But is it not the infirmities of the flesh which hamper it in its service? Yet what does it matter how its service is hampered, so long as the fact remains, that by the just retribution of the sovereign God whom we refused to be subject to and serve, our flesh, which was subjected to us, now torments us by insubordination, although our disobedience brought trouble on ourselves, not upon God? For He is not in need of our service as we of our body's; and therefore what we did was no punishment to Him, but what we receive is so to us. And the pains which are called bodily are pains of the soul in and from the body. For what pain or desire can the flesh feel by itself and without the soul? But when the flesh is said to desire or to suffer, it is meant, as we have explained, that the man does so, or some part of the soul which is affected by the sensation of the flesh, whether a harsh sensation causing pain, or gentle, causing pleasure. But pain in the flesh is only a discomfort of the soul arising from the flesh, and a kind of shrinking from its suffering, as the pain of the soul which is called sadness is a shrinking from those things which have happened to us in spite of ourselves. But sadness is frequently preceded by fear, which is itself in the soul, not in the flesh; while bodily pain is not preceded by any kind of fear of the flesh, which can be felt in the flesh before the pain. But pleasure is preceded by a certain appetite which is felt in the flesh like a craving, as hunger and thirst and that generative appetite which is most commonly identified with the name lust, though this is the generic word for all desires. For anger itself was defined by the ancients as nothing else than the lust of revenge; although sometimes a man is angry even at iimate objects which cannot feel his vengeance, as when one breaks a pen, or crushes a quill that writes badly. Yet even this, though less reasonable, is in its way a lust of revenge, and is, so to speak, a mysterious kind of shadow of [the great law of] retribution, that they who do evil should suffer evil. There is therefore a lust for revenge, which is called anger; there is a lust of money, which goes by the name of avarice; there is a lust of conquering, no matter by what means, which is called opinionativeness; there is a lust of applause, which is named boasting. There are many and various lusts, of which some have names of their own, while others have not. For who could readily give a name to the lust of ruling, which yet has a powerful influence in the soul of tyrants, as civil wars bear witness? 14.16. Although, therefore, lust may have many objects, yet when no object is specified, the word lust usually suggests to the mind the lustful excitement of the organs of generation. And this lust not only takes possession of the whole body and outward members, but also makes itself felt within, and moves the whole man with a passion in which mental emotion is mingled with bodily appetite, so that the pleasure which results is the greatest of all bodily pleasures. So possessing indeed is this pleasure, that at the moment of time in which it is consummated, all mental activity is suspended. What friend of wisdom and holy joys, who, being married, but knowing, as the apostle says, how to possess his vessel in santification and honor, not in the disease of desire, as the Gentiles who know not God, 1 Thessalonians 4:4 would not prefer, if this were possible, to beget children without this lust, so that in this function of begetting offspring the members created for this purpose should not be stimulated by the heat of lust, but should be actuated by his volition, in the same way as his other members serve him for their respective ends? But even those who delight in this pleasure are not moved to it at their own will, whether they confine themselves to lawful or transgress to unlawful pleasures; but sometimes this lust importunes them in spite of themselves, and sometimes fails them when they desire to feel it, so that though lust rages in the mind, it stirs not in the body. Thus, strangely enough, this emotion not only fails to obey the legitimate desire to beget offspring, but also refuses to serve lascivious lust; and though it often opposes its whole combined energy to the soul that resists it, sometimes also it is divided against itself, and while it moves the soul, leaves the body unmoved. 14.17. Justly is shame very specially connected with this lust; justly, too, these members themselves, being moved and restrained not at our will, but by a certain independent autocracy, so to speak, are called shameful. Their condition was different before sin. For as it is written, They were naked and were not ashamed, Genesis 2:25 - not that their nakedness was unknown to them, but because nakedness was not yet shameful, because not yet did lust move those members without the will's consent; not yet did the flesh by its disobedience testify against the disobedience of man. For they were not created blind, as the unenlightened vulgar fancy; for Adam saw the animals to whom he gave names, and of Eve we read, The woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes. Genesis 3:6 Their eyes, therefore were open, but were not open to this, that is to say, were not observant so as to recognize what was conferred upon them by the garment of grace, for they had no consciousness of their members warring against their will. But when they were stripped of this grace, that their disobedience might be punished by fit retribution, there began in the movement of their bodily members a shameless novelty which made nakedness indecent: it at once made them observant and made them ashamed. And therefore, after they violated God's command by open transgression, it is written: And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. Genesis 3:7 The eyes of them both were opened, not to see, for already they saw, but to discern between the good they had lost and the evil into which they had fallen. And therefore also the tree itself which they were forbidden to touch was called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil from this circumstance, that if they ate of it it would impart to them this knowledge. For the discomfort of sickness reveals the pleasure of health. They knew, therefore, that they were naked,- naked of that grace which prevented them from being ashamed of bodily nakedness while the law of sin offered no resistance to their mind. And thus they obtained a knowledge which they would have lived in blissful ignorance of, had they, in trustful obedience to God, declined to commit that offense which involved them in the experience of the hurtful effects of unfaithfulness and disobedience. And therefore, being ashamed of the disobedience of their own flesh, which witnessed to their disobedience while it punished it, they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons, that is, cinctures for their privy parts; for some interpreters have rendered the word by succinctoria. Campestria is, indeed, a Latin word, but it is used of the drawers or aprons used for a similar purpose by the young men who stripped for exercise in the campus; hence those who were so girt were commonly called campestrati. Shame modestly covered that which lust disobediently moved in opposition to the will, which was thus punished for its own disobedience. Consequently all nations, being propagated from that one stock, have so strong an instinct to cover the shameful parts, that some barbarians do not uncover them even in the bath, but wash with their drawers on. In the dark solitudes of India also, though some philosophers go naked, and are therefore called gymnosophists, yet they make an exception in the case of these members and cover them. 14.18. Lust requires for its consummation darkness and secrecy; and this not only when un lawful intercourse is desired, but even such fornication as the earthly city has legalized. Where there is no fear of punishment, these permitted pleasures still shrink from the public eye. Even where provision is made for this lust, secrecy also is provided; and while lust found it easy to remove the prohibitions of law, shamelessness found it impossible to lay aside the veil of retirement. For even shameless men call this shameful; and though they love the pleasure, dare not display it. What! Does not even conjugal intercourse, sanctioned as it is by law for the propagation of children, legitimate and honorable though it be, does it not seek retirement from every eye? Before the bridegroom fondles his bride, does he not exclude the attendants, and even the paranymphs, and such friends as the closest ties have admitted to the bridal chamber? The greatest master of Roman eloquence says, that all right actions wish to be set in the light, i.e., desire to be known. This right action, however, has such a desire to be known, that yet it blushes to be seen. Who does not know what passes between husband and wife that children may be born? Is it not for this purpose that wives are married with such ceremony? And yet, when this well-understood act is gone about for the procreation of children, not even the children themselves, who may already have been born to them, are suffered to be witnesses. This right action seeks the light, in so far as it seeks to be known, but yet dreads being seen. And why so, if not because that which is by nature fitting and decent is so done as to be accompanied with a shame-begetting penalty of sin? 14.19. Hence it is that even the philosophers who have approximated to the truth have avowed that anger and lust are vicious mental emotions, because, even when exercised towards objects which wisdom does not prohibit, they are moved in an ungoverned and inordinate manner, and consequently need the regulation of mind and reason. And they assert that this third part of the mind is posted as it were in a kind of citadel, to give rule to these other parts, so that, while it rules and they serve, man's righteousness is preserved without a breach. These parts, then, which they acknowledge to be vicious even in a wise and temperate man, so that the mind, by its composing and restraining influence, must bridle and recall them from those objects towards which they are unlawfully moved, and give them access to those which the law of wisdom sanctions - that anger, e.g., may be allowed for the enforcement of a just authority, and lust for the duty of propagating offspring - these parts, I say, were not vicious in Paradise before sin, for they were never moved in opposition to a holy will towards any object from which it was necessary that they should be withheld by the restraining bridle of reason. For though now they are moved in this way, and are regulated by a bridling and restraining power, which those who live temperately, justly, and godly exercise, sometimes with ease, and sometimes with greater difficulty, this is not the sound health of nature, but the weakness which results from sin. And how is it that shame does not hide the acts and words dictated by anger or other emotions, as it covers the motions of lust, unless because the members of the body which we employ for accomplishing them are moved, not by the emotions themselves, but by the authority of the consenting will? For he who in his anger rails at or even strikes some one, could not do so were not his tongue and hand moved by the authority of the will, as also they are moved when there is no anger. But the organs of generation are so subjected to the rule of lust, that they have no motion but what it communicates. It is this we are ashamed of; it is this which blushingly hides from the eyes of onlookers. And rather will a man endure a crowd of witnesses when he is unjustly venting his anger on some one, than the eye of one man when he innocently copulates with his wife. 14.20. It is this which those canine or cynic philosophers have overlooked, when they have, in violation of the modest instincts of men, boastfully proclaimed their unclean and shameless opinion, worthy indeed of dogs, viz., that as the matrimonial act is legitimate, no one should be ashamed to perform it openly, in the street or in any public place. Instinctive shame has overborne this wild fancy. For though it is related that Diogenes once dared to put his opinion in practice, under the impression that his sect would be all the more famous if his egregious shamelessness were deeply graven in the memory of mankind, yet this example was not afterwards followed. Shame had more influence with them, to make them blush before men, than error to make them affect a resemblance to dogs. And possibly, even in the case of Diogenes, and those who did imitate him, there was but an appearance and pretence of copulation, and not the reality. Even at this day there are still Cynic philosophers to be seen; for these are Cynics who are not content with being clad in the pallium, but also carry a club; yet no one of them dares to do this that we speak of. If they did, they would be spat upon, not to say stoned, by the mob. Human nature, then, is without doubt ashamed of this lust; and justly so, for the insubordination of these members, and their defiance of the will, are the clear testimony of the punishment of man's first sin. And it was fitting that this should appear specially in those parts by which is generated that nature which has been altered for the worse by that first and great sin - that sin from whose evil connection no one can escape, unless God's grace expiate in him individually that which was perpetrated to the destruction of all in common, when all were in one man, and which was avenged by God's justice. 14.21. Far be it, then, from us to suppose that our first parents in Paradise felt that lust which caused them afterwards to blush and hide their nakedness, or that by its means they should have fulfilled the benediction of God, Increase and multiply and replenish the earth; Genesis 1:28 for it was after sin that lust began. It was after sin that our nature, having lost the power it had over the whole body, but not having lost all shame, perceived, noticed, blushed at, and covered it. But that blessing upon marriage, which encouraged them to increase and multiply and replenish the earth, though it continued even after they had sinned, was yet given before they sinned, in order that the procreation of children might be recognized as part of the glory of marriage, and not of the punishment of sin. But now, men being ignorant of the blessedness of Paradise, suppose that children could not have been begotten there in any other way than they know them to be begotten now, i.e., by lust, at which even honorable marriage blushes; some not simply rejecting, but sceptically deriding the divine Scriptures, in which we read that our first parents, after they sinned, were ashamed of their nakedness, and covered it; while others, though they accept and honor Scripture, yet conceive that this expression, Increase and multiply, refers not to carnal fecundity, because a similar expression is used of the soul in the words, You will multiply me with strength in my soul; and so, too, in the words which follow in Genesis, And replenish the earth, and subdue it, they understand by the earth the body which the soul fills with its presence, and which it rules over when it is multiplied in strength. And they hold that children could no more then than now be begotten without lust, which, after sin, was kindled, observed, blushed for, and covered; and even that children would not have been born in Paradise, but only outside of it, as in fact it turned out. For it was after they were expelled from it that they came together to beget children, and begot them. 14.22. But we, for our part, have no manner of doubt that to increase and multiply and replenish the earth in virtue of the blessing of God, is a gift of marriage as God instituted it from the beginning before man sinned, when He created them male and female - in other words, two sexes manifestly distinct. And it was this work of God on which His blessing was pronounced. For no sooner had Scripture said, Male and female created He them, Genesis 1:27-28 than it immediately continues, And God blessed them, and God said to them, Increase, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it, etc. And though all these things may not unsuitably be interpreted in a spiritual sense, yet male and female cannot be understood of two things in one man, as if there were in him one thing which rules, another which is ruled; but it is quite clear that they were created male and female, with bodies of different sexes, for the very purpose of begetting offspring, and so increasing, multiplying, and replenishing the earth; and it is great folly to oppose so plain a fact. It was not of the spirit which commands and the body which obeys, nor of the rational soul which rules and the irrational desire which is ruled, nor of the contemplative virtue which is supreme and the active which is subject, nor of the understanding of the mind and the sense of the body, but plainly of the matrimonial union by which the sexes are mutually bound together, that our Lord, when asked whether it were lawful for any cause to put away one's wife (for on account of the hardness of the hearts of the Israelites Moses permitted a bill of divorcement to be given), answered and said, Have you not read that He which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more two, but one flesh. What, therefore, God has joined together, let not man put asunder. Matthew 19:4-5 It is certain, then, that from the first men were created, as we see and know them to be now, of two sexes, male and female, and that they are called one, either on account of the matrimonial union, or on account of the origin of the woman, who was created from the side of the man. And it is by this original example, which God Himself instituted, that the apostle admonishes all husbands to love their own wives in particular. Ephesians 5:25 14.23. But he who says that there should have been neither copulation nor generation but for sin, virtually says that man's sin was necessary to complete the number of the saints. For if these two by not sinning should have continued to live alone, because, as is supposed, they could not have begotten children had they not sinned, then certainly sin was necessary in order that there might be not only two but many righteous men. And if this cannot be maintained without absurdity, we must rather believe that the number of the saints fit to complete this most blessed city would have been as great though no one had sinned, as it is now that the grace of God gathers its citizens out of the multitude of sinners, so long as the children of this world generate and are generated. Luke 20:34 And therefore that marriage, worthy of the happiness of Paradise, should have had desirable fruit without the shame of lust, had there been no sin. But how that could be, there is now no example to teach us. Nevertheless, it ought not to seem incredible that one member might serve the will without lust then, since so many serve it now. Do we now move our feet and hands when we will to do the things we would by means of these members? Do we meet with no resistance in them, but perceive that they are ready servants of the will, both in our own case and in that of others, and especially of artisans employed in mechanical operations, by which the weakness and clumsiness of nature become, through industrious exercise, wonderfully dexterous? And shall we not believe that, like as all those members obediently serve the will, so also should the members have discharged the function of generation, though lust, the award of disobedience, had been awanting? Did not Cicero, in discussing the difference of governments in his De Republica, adopt a simile from human nature, and say that we command our bodily members as children, they are so obedient; but that the vicious parts of the soul must be treated as slaves, and be coerced with a more stringent authority? And no doubt, in the order of nature, the soul is more excellent than the body; and yet the soul commands the body more easily than itself. Nevertheless this lust, of which we at present speak, is the more shameful on this account, because the soul is therein neither master of itself, so as not to lust at all, nor of the body, so as to keep the members under the control of the will; for if they were thus ruled, there should be no shame. But now the soul is ashamed that the body, which by nature is inferior and subject to it, should resist its authority. For in the resistance experienced by the soul in the other emotions there is less shame, because the resistance is from itself, and thus, when it is conquered by itself, itself is the conqueror, although the conquest is inordinate and vicious, because accomplished by those parts of the soul which ought to be subject to reason, yet, being accomplished by its own parts and energies, the conquest is, as I say, its own. For when the soul conquers itself to a due subordination, so that its unreasonable motions are controlled by reason, while it again is subject to God, this is a conquest virtuous and praiseworthy. Yet there is less shame when the soul is resisted by its own vicious parts than when its will and order are resisted by the body, which is distinct from and inferior to it, and dependent on it for life itself. But so long as the will retains under its authority the other members, without which the members excited by lust to resist the will cannot accomplish what they seek, chastity is preserved, and the delight of sin foregone. And certainly, had not culpable disobedience been visited with penal disobedience, the marriage of Paradise should have been ignorant of this struggle and rebellion, this quarrel between will and lust, that the will may be satisfied and lust restrained, but those members, like all the rest, should have obeyed the will. The field of generation should have been sown by the organ created for this purpose, as the earth is sown by the hand. And whereas now, as we essay to investigate this subject more exactly, modesty hinders us, and compels us to ask pardon of chaste ears, there would have been no cause to do so, but we could have discoursed freely, and without fear of seeming obscene, upon all those points which occur to one who meditates on the subject. There would not have been even words which could be called obscene, but all that might be said of these members would have been as pure as what is said of the other parts of the body. Whoever, then, comes to the perusal of these pages with unchaste mind, let him blame his disposition, not his nature; let him brand the actings of his own impurity, not the words which necessity forces us to use, and for which every pure and pious reader or hearer will very readily pardon me, while I expose the folly of that scepticism which argues solely on the ground of its own experience, and has no faith in anything beyond. He who is not scandalized at the apostle's censure of the horrible wickedness of the women who changed the natural use into that which is against nature, Romans 1:26 will read all this without being shocked, especially as we are not, like Paul, citing and censuring a damnable uncleanness, but are explaining, so far as we can, human generation, while with Paul we avoid all obscenity of language. 14.24. The man, then, would have sown the seed, and the woman received it, as need required, the generative organs being moved by the will, not excited by lust. For we move at will not only those members which are furnished with joints of solid bone, as the hands, feet, and fingers, but we move also at will those which are composed of slack and soft nerves: we can put them in motion, or stretch them out, or bend and twist them, or contract and stiffen them, as we do with the muscles of the mouth and face. The lungs, which are the very tenderest of the viscera except the brain, and are therefore carefully sheltered in the cavity of the chest, yet for all purposes of inhaling and exhaling the breath, and of uttering and modulating the voice, are obedient to the will when we breathe, exhale, speak, shout, or sing, just as the bellows obey the smith or the organist. I will not press the fact that some animals have a natural power to move a single spot of the skin with which their whole body is covered, if they have felt on it anything they wish to drive off - a power so great, that by this shivering tremor of the skin they can not only shake off flies that have settled on them, but even spears that have fixed in their flesh. Man, it is true, has not this power; but is this any reason for supposing that God could not give it to such creatures as He wished to possess it? And therefore man himself also might very well have enjoyed absolute power over his members had he not forfeited it by his disobedience; for it was not difficult for God to form him so that what is now moved in his body only by lust should have been moved only at will. We know, too, that some men are differently constituted from others, and have some rare and remarkable faculty of doing with their body what other men can by no effort do, and, indeed, scarcely believe when they hear of others doing. There are persons who can move their ears, either one at a time, or both together. There are some who, without moving the head, can bring the hair down upon the forehead, and move the whole scalp backwards and forwards at pleasure. Some, by lightly pressing their stomach, bring up an incredible quantity and variety of things they have swallowed, and produce whatever they please, quite whole, as if out of a bag. Some so accurately mimic the voices of birds and beasts and other men, that, unless they are seen, the difference cannot be told. Some have such command of their bowels, that they can break wind continuously at pleasure, so as to produce the effect of singing. I myself have known a man who was accustomed to sweat whenever he wished. It is well known that some weep when they please, and shed a flood of tears. But far more incredible is that which some of our brethren saw quite recently. There was a presbyter called Restitutus, in the parish of the Calamensian Church, who, as often as he pleased (and he was asked to do this by those who desired to witness so remarkable a phenomenon), on some one imitating the wailings of mourners, became so insensible, and lay in a state so like death, that not only had he no feeling when they pinched and pricked him, but even when fire was applied to him, and he was burned by it, he had no sense of pain except afterwards from the wound. And that his body remained motionless, not by reason of his self-command, but because he was insensible, was proved by the fact that he breathed no more than a dead man; and yet he said that, when any one spoke with more than ordinary distinctness, he heard the voice, but as if it were a long way off. Seeing, then, that even in this mortal and miserable life the body serves some men by many remarkable movements and moods beyond the ordinary course of nature, what reason is there for doubting that, before man was involved by his sin in this weak and corruptible condition, his members might have served his will for the propagation of offspring without lust? Man has been given over to himself because he abandoned God, while he sought to be self-satisfying; and disobeying God, he could not obey even himself. Hence it is that he is involved in the obvious misery of being unable to live as he wishes. For if he lived as he wished, he would think himself blessed; but he could not be so if he lived wickedly. 14.26. In Paradise, then, man lived as he desired so long as he desired what God had commanded. He lived in the enjoyment of God, and was good by God's goodness; he lived without any want, and had it in his power so to live eternally. He had food that he might not hunger, drink that he might not thirst, the tree of life that old age might not waste him. There was in his body no corruption, nor seed of corruption, which could produce in him any unpleasant sensation. He feared no inward disease, no outward accident. Soundest health blessed his body, absolute tranquillity his soul. As in Paradise there was no excessive heat or cold, so its inhabitants were exempt from the vicissitudes of fear and desire. No sadness of any kind was there, nor any foolish joy; true gladness ceaselessly flowed from the presence of God, who was loved out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned. 1 Timothy 1:5 The honest love of husband and wife made a sure harmony between them. Body and spirit worked harmoniously together, and the commandment was kept without labor. No languor made their leisure wearisome; no sleepiness interrupted their desire to labor. In tanta facilitate rerum et felicitate hominum, absit ut suspicemur, non potuisse prolem seri sine libidinis morbo: sed eo voluntatis nutu moverentur illa membra qua c tera, et sine ardoris illecebroso stimulo cum tranquillitate animi et corporis nulla corruptione integritatis infunderetur gremio maritus uxoris. Neque enim quia experientia probari non potest, ideo credendum non est; quando illas corporis partes non ageret turbidus calor, sed spontanea potestas, sicut opus esset, adhiberet; ita tunc potuisse utero conjugis salva integritate feminei genitalis virile semen immitti, sicut nunc potest eadem integritate salva ex utero virginis fluxus menstrui cruoris emitti. Eadem quippe via posset illud injici, qua hoc potest ejici. Ut enim ad pariendum non doloris gemitus, sed maturitatis impulsus feminea viscera relaxaret: sic ad fœtandum et concipiendum non libidinis appetitus, sed voluntarius usus naturam utramque conjungeret. We speak of things which are now shameful, and although we try, as well as we are able, to conceive them as they were before they became shameful, yet necessity compels us rather to limit our discussion to the bounds set by modesty than to extend it as our moderate faculty of discourse might suggest. For since that which I have been speaking of was not experienced even by those who might have experienced it - I mean our first parents (for sin and its merited banishment from Paradise anticipated this passionless generation on their part) - when sexual intercourse is spoken of now, it suggests to men's thoughts not such a placid obedience to the will as is conceivable in our first parents, but such violent acting of lust as they themselves have experienced. And therefore modesty shuts my mouth, although my mind conceives the matter clearly. But Almighty God, the supreme and supremely good Creator of all natures, who aids and rewards good wills, while He abandons and condemns the bad, and rules both, was not destitute of a plan by which He might people His city with the fixed number of citizens which His wisdom had foreordained even out of the condemned human race, discriminating them not now by merits, since the whole mass was condemned as if in a vitiated root, but by grace, and showing, not only in the case of the redeemed, but also in those who were not delivered, how much grace He has bestowed upon them. For every one acknowledges that he has been rescued from evil, not by deserved, but by gratuitous goodness, when he is singled out from the company of those with whom he might justly have borne a common punishment, and is allowed to go scathless. Why, then, should God not have created those whom He foresaw would sin, since He was able to show in and by them both what their guilt merited, and what His grace bestowed, and since, under His creating and disposing hand, even the perverse disorder of the wicked could not pervert the right order of things? 14.28. Accordingly, two cities have been formed by two loves: the earthly by the love of self, even to the contempt of God; the heavenly by the love of God, even to the contempt of self. The former, in a word, glories in itself, the latter in the Lord. For the one seeks glory from men; but the greatest glory of the other is God, the witness of conscience. The one lifts up its head in its own glory; the other says to its God, You are my glory, and the lifter up of mine head. In the one, the princes and the nations it subdues are ruled by the love of ruling; in the other, the princes and the subjects serve one another in love, the latter obeying, while the former take thought for all. The one delights in its own strength, represented in the persons of its rulers; the other says to its God, I will love You, O Lord, my strength. And therefore the wise men of the one city, living according to man, have sought for profit to their own bodies or souls, or both, and those who have known God glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened; professing themselves to be wise,- that is, glorying in their own wisdom, and being possessed by pride -they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. For they were either leaders or followers of the people in adoring images, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Romans 1:21-25 But in the other city there is no human wisdom, but only godliness, which offers due worship to the true God, and looks for its reward in the society of the saints, of holy angels as well as holy men, that God may be all in all. 1 Corinthians 15:28 15.1. of the bliss of Paradise, of Paradise itself, and of the life of our first parents there, and of their sin and punishment, many have thought much, spoken much, written much. We ourselves, too, have spoken of these things in the foregoing books, and have written either what we read in the Holy Scriptures, or what we could reasonably deduce from them. And were we to enter into a more detailed investigation of these matters, an endless number of endless questions would arise, which would involve us in a larger work than the present occasion admits. We cannot be expected to find room for replying to every question that may be started by unoccupied and captious men, who are ever more ready to ask questions than capable of understanding the answer. Yet I trust we have already done justice to these great and difficult questions regarding the beginning of the world, or of the soul, or of the human race itself. This race we have distributed into two parts, the one consisting of those who live according to man, the other of those who live according to God. And these we also mystically call the two cities, or the two communities of men, of which the one is predestined to reign eternally with God, and the other to suffer eternal punishment with the devil. This, however, is their end, and of it we are to speak afterwards. At present, as we have said enough about their origin, whether among the angels, whose numbers we know not, or in the two first human beings, it seems suitable to attempt an account of their career, from the time when our two first parents began to propagate the race until all human generation shall cease. For this whole time or world-age, in which the dying give place and those who are born succeed, is the career of these two cities concerning which we treat. of these two first parents of the human race, then, Cain was the first-born, and he belonged to the city of men; after him was born Abel, who belonged to the city of God. For as in the individual the truth of the apostle's statement is discerned, that is not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural, and afterward that which is spiritual, 1 Corinthians 15:46 whence it comes to pass that each man, being derived from a condemned stock, is first of all born of Adam evil and carnal, and becomes good and spiritual only afterwards, when he is grafted into Christ by regeneration: so was it in the human race as a whole. When these two cities began to run their course by a series of deaths and births, the citizen of this world was the first-born, and after him the stranger in this world, the citizen of the city of God, predestinated by grace, elected by grace, by grace a stranger below, and by grace a citizen above. By grace - for so far as regards himself he is sprung from the same mass, all of which is condemned in its origin; but God, like a potter (for this comparison is introduced by the apostle judiciously, and not without thought), of the same lump made one vessel to honor, another to dishonor. Romans 9:21 But first the vessel to dishonor was made, and after it another to honor. For in each individual, as I have already said, there is first of all that which is reprobate, that from which we must begin, but in which we need not necessarily remain; afterwards is that which is well-approved, to which we may by advancing attain, and in which, when we have reached it we may abide. Not, indeed, that every wicked man shall be good, but that no one will be good who was not first of all wicked; but the sooner any one becomes a good man, the more speedily does he receive this title, and abolish the old name in the new. Accordingly, it is recorded of Cain that he built a city, Genesis 4:17 but Abel, being a sojourner, built none. For the city of the saints is above, although here below it begets citizens, in whom it sojourns till the time of its reign arrives, when it shall gather together all in the day of the resurrection; and then shall the promised kingdom be given to them, in which they shall reign with their Prince, the King of the ages, time without end. 19.23. For in his book called ἐκ λογίων φιλοσοφίας, in which he collects and comments upon the responses which he pretends were uttered by the gods concerning divine things, he says - I give his own words as they have been translated from the Greek: To one who inquired what god he should propitiate in order to recall his wife from Christianity, Apollo replied in the following verses. Then the following words are given as those of Apollo: You will probably find it easier to write lasting characters on the water, or lightly fly like a bird through the air, than to restore right feeling in your impious wife once she has polluted herself. Let her remain as she pleases in her foolish deception, and sing false laments to her dead God, who was condemned by right-minded judges, and perished ignominiously by a violent death. Then after these verses of Apollo (which we have given in a Latin version that does not preserve the metrical form), he goes on to say: In these verses Apollo exposed the incurable corruption of the Christians, saying that the Jews, rather than the Christians, recognized God. See how he misrepresents Christ, giving the Jews the preference to the Christians in the recognition of God. This was his explanation of Apollo's verses, in which he says that Christ was put to death by right-minded or just judges, - in other words, that He deserved to die. I leave the responsibility of this oracle regarding Christ on the lying interpreter of Apollo, or on this philosopher who believed it or possibly himself invented it; as to its agreement with Porphyry's opinions or with other oracles, we shall in a little have something to say. In this passage, however, he says that the Jews, as the interpreters of God, judged justly in pronouncing Christ to be worthy of the most shameful death. He should have listened, then, to this God of the Jews to whom he bears this testimony, when that God says, He that sacrifices to any other god save to the Lord alone shall be utterly destroyed. But let us come to still plainer expressions, and hear how great a God Porphyry thinks the God of the Jews is. Apollo, he says, when asked whether word, i.e., reason, or law is the better thing, replied in the following verses. Then he gives the verses of Apollo, from which I select the following as sufficient: God, the Generator, and the King prior to all things, before whom heaven and earth, and the sea, and the hidden places of hell tremble, and the deities themselves are afraid, for their law is the Father whom the holy Hebrews honor. In this oracle of his god Apollo, Porphyry avowed that the God of the Hebrews is so great that the deities themselves are afraid before Him. I am surprised, therefore, that when God said, He that sacrifices to other gods shall be utterly destroyed, Porphyry himself was not afraid lest he should be destroyed for sacrificing to other gods. This philosopher, however, has also some good to say of Christ, oblivious, as it were, of that contumely of his of which we have just been speaking; or as if his gods spoke evil of Christ only while asleep, and recognized Him to be good, and gave Him His deserved praise, when they awoke. For, as if he were about to proclaim some marvellous thing passing belief, he says, What we are going to say will certainly take some by surprise. For the gods have declared that Christ was very pious, and has become immortal, and that they cherish his memory: that the Christians, however, are polluted, contaminated, and involved in error. And many other such things, he says, do the gods say against the Christians. Then he gives specimens of the accusations made, as he says, by the gods against them, and then goes on: But to some who asked Hecate whether Christ were a God, she replied, You know the condition of the disembodied immortal soul, and that if it has been severed from wisdom it always errs. The soul you refer to is that of a man foremost in piety: they worship it because they mistake the truth. To this so-called oracular response he adds the following words of his own: of this very pious man, then, Hecate said that the soul, like the souls of other good men, was after death dowered with immortality, and that the Christians through ignorance worship it. And to those who ask why he was condemned to die, the oracle of the goddess replied, The body, indeed, is always exposed to torments, but the souls of the pious abide in heaven. And the soul you inquire about has been the fatal cause of error to other souls which were not fated to receive the gifts of the gods, and to have the knowledge of immortal Jove. Such souls are therefore hated by the gods; for they who were fated not to receive the gifts of the gods, and not to know God, were fated to be involved in error by means of him you speak of. He himself, however, was good, and heaven has been opened to him as to other good men. You are not, then, to speak evil of him, but to pity the folly of men: and through him men's danger is imminent. Who is so foolish as not to see that these oracles were either composed by a clever man with a strong animus against the Christians, or were uttered as responses by impure demons with a similar design - that is to say, in order that their praise of Christ may win credence for their vituperation of Christians; and that thus they may, if possible, close the way of eternal salvation, which is identical with Christianity? For they believe that they are by no means counter working their own hurtful craft by promoting belief in Christ, so long as their calumniation of Christians is also accepted; for they thus secure that even the man who thinks well of Christ declines to become a Christian, and is therefore not delivered from their own rule by the Christ he praises. Besides, their praise of Christ is so contrived that whosoever believes in Him as thus represented will not be a true Christian but a Photinian heretic, recognizing only the humanity, and not also the divinity of Christ, and will thus be precluded from salvation and from deliverance out of the meshes of these devilish lies. For our part, we are no better pleased with Hecate's praises of Christ than with Apollo's calumniation of Him. Apollo says that Christ was put to death by right-minded judges, implying that He was unrighteous. Hecate says that He was a most pious man, but no more. The intention of both is the same, to prevent men from becoming Christians, because if this be secured, men shall never be rescued from their power. But it is incumbent on our philosopher, or rather on those who believe in these pretended oracles against the Christians, first of all, if they can, to bring Apollo and Hecate to the same mind regarding Christ, so that either both may condemn or both praise Him. And even if they succeeded in this, we for our part would notwithstanding repudiate the testimony of demons, whether favorable or adverse to Christ. But when our adversaries find a god and goddess of their own at variance about Christ the one praising, the other vituperating Him, they can certainly give no credence, if they have any judgment, to mere men who blaspheme the Christians. When Porphyry or Hecate praises Christ, and adds that He gave Himself to the Christians as a fatal gift, that they might be involved in error, he exposes, as he thinks, the causes of this error. But before I cite his words to that purpose, I would ask, If Christ did thus give Himself to the Christians to involve them in error, did He do so willingly, or against His will? If willingly, how is He righteous? If against His will, how is He blessed? However, let us hear the causes of this error. There are, he says, in a certain place very small earthly spirits, subject to the power of evil demons. The wise men of the Hebrews, among whom was this Jesus, as you have heard from the oracles of Apollo cited above, turned religious persons from these very wicked demons and minor spirits, and taught them rather to worship the celestial gods, and especially to adore God the Father. This, he said, the gods enjoin; and we have already shown how they admonish the soul to turn to God, and command it to worship Him. But the ignorant and the ungodly, who are not destined to receive favors from the gods, nor to know the immortal Jupiter, not listening to the gods and their messages, have turned away from all gods, and have not only refused to hate, but have venerated the prohibited demons. Professing to worship God, they refuse to do those things by which alone God is worshipped. For God, indeed, being the Father of all, is in need of nothing; but for us it is good to adore Him by means of justice, chastity, and other virtues, and thus to make life itself a prayer to Him, by inquiring into and imitating His nature. For inquiry, says he, purifies and imitation deifies us, by moving us nearer to Him. He is right in so far as he proclaims God the Father, and the conduct by which we should worship Him. of such precepts the prophetic books of the Hebrews are full, when they praise or blame the life of the saints. But in speaking of the Christians he is in error, and caluminates them as much as is desired by the demons whom he takes for gods, as if it were difficult for any man to recollect the disgraceful and shameful actions which used to be done in the theatres and temples to please the gods, and to compare with these things what is heard in our churches, and what is offered to the true God, and from this comparison to conclude where character is edified, and where it is ruined. But who but a diabolical spirit has told or suggested to this man so manifest and vain a lie, as that the Christians reverenced rather than hated the demons, whose worship the Hebrews prohibited? But that God, whom the Hebrew sages worshipped, forbids sacrifice to be offered even to the holy angels of heaven and divine powers, whom we, in this our pilgrimage, venerate and love as our most blessed fellow citizens. For in the law which God gave to His Hebrew people He utters this menace, as in a voice of thunder: He that sacrifices unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed. Exodus 22:20 And that no one might suppose that this prohibition extends only to the very wicked demons and earthly spirits, whom this philosopher calls very small and inferior - for even these are in the Scripture called gods, not of the Hebrews, but of the nations, as the Septuagint translators have shown in the psalm where it is said, For all the gods of the nations are demons, - that no one might suppose, I say, that sacrifice to these demons was prohibited, but that sacrifice might be offered to all or some of the celestials, it was immediately added, save unto the Lord alone. The God of the Hebrews, then, to whom this renowned philosopher bears this signal testimony, gave to His Hebrew people a law, composed in the Hebrew language, and not obscure and unknown, but published now in every nation, and in this law it is written, He that sacrifices unto any god, save unto the Lord alone, he shall be utterly destroyed. What need is there to seek further proofs in the law or the prophets of this same thing? Seek, we need not say, for the passages are neither few nor difficult to find; but what need to collect and apply to my argument the proofs which are thickly sown and obvious, and by which it appears clear as day that sacrifice may be paid to none but the supreme and true God? Here is one brief but decided, even menacing, and certainly true utterance of that God whom the wisest of our adversaries so highly extol. Let this be listened to, feared, fulfilled, that there may be no disobedient soul cut off. He that sacrifices, He says, not because He needs anything, but because it behooves us to be His possession. Hence the Psalmist in the Hebrew Scriptures sings, I have said to the Lord, You are my God, for You need not my good. For we ourselves, who are His own city, are His most noble and worthy sacrifice, and it is this mystery we celebrate in our sacrifices, which are well known to the faithful, as we have explained in the preceding books. For through the prophets the oracles of God declared that the sacrifices which the Jews offered as a shadow of that which was to be would cease, and that the nations, from the rising to the setting of the sun, would offer one sacrifice. From these oracles, which we now see accomplished, we have made such selections as seemed suitable to our purpose in this work. And therefore, where there is not this righteousness whereby the one supreme God rules the obedient city according to His grace, so that it sacrifices to none but Him, and whereby, in all the citizens of this obedient city, the soul consequently rules the body and reason the vices in the rightful order, so that, as the individual just man, so also the community and people of the just, live by faith, which works by love, that love whereby man loves God as He ought to be loved, and his neighbor as himself - there, I say, there is not an assemblage associated by a common acknowledgment of right, and by a community of interests. But if there is not this, there is not a people, if our definition be true, and therefore there is no republic; for where there is no people there can be no republic.
24. Augustine, Letters, 118.14 (7th cent. CE - 7th cent. CE)



Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
adam Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271; Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 1, 10, 40, 96, 97, 102, 135, 146, 207, 208, 209
aegritudo Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 53
aeneas Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 46, 47, 48, 208
affectio Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 76, 135
affectus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 3, 50, 79, 86, 96
africa Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 8, 24, 30, 207
alypius Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 30
ambrose Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 25, 26, 41
ambrosiaster Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 32
amor Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 27, 63, 76, 79, 89, 97
anchises Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 46, 48
angels Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271; Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 24, 39
anger Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 206
anima Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 26, 28, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 53
animus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 3, 4, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 32, 36, 44, 79, 86, 96
anonymous commentator discovered by h.j. frede Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 32
apatheia Nisula, Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence (2012) 197; Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 86, 96, 208
apollinarianism Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 30
apostolus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 26, 30, 31, 32, 33, 50
apuleius Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 45
arbitrium Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 102
arianism Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 30
asceticism Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 23, 31
athletes Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 146
auctoritas Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 9, 23, 37, 208
authority Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 23, 48
beatus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 26, 27, 40
body Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 22, 26, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 41, 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, 51, 63, 97, 135, 136, 208
bonum Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 25, 33, 44, 45, 50, 51, 63, 73, 76, 79, 86, 89, 97, 102
campestria Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 146
caritas Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 63, 79
caro Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, 96, 97, 146
carthage Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 10, 27, 207
catholic Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 30, 37, 45, 102
children Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 97
cicero Nisula, Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence (2012) 197; Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 3, 9, 25, 27, 28, 45, 48, 50, 53, 63, 73, 86, 97, 208
ciuitas Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 8, 9, 24, 76, 79, 86, 89
cognatio Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 207
constantia Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 208
corpus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 25, 26, 34, 35, 43, 46, 47, 97
corruptio, corruptibilis Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 35, 36, 43
corruption Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 35, 36, 102
cupiditas, concupiscentia Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 33, 36, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, 53, 63, 73, 76, 86
damnatio, damnatus Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271
death, eternal / second death Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271
death/mortality Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 22, 34, 43
death Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271
demons Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 31, 86
determinism Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 33, 51, 146
devil Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 24, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 208
difficultas, difficulty Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271
diligo/dilectio/diligenter Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 4, 23, 63
doctrina Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 4, 27, 76, 86, 89
dominus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 8
dreams Nisula, Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence (2012) 197
emotions Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 1, 3, 4, 9, 10, 26, 27, 35, 36, 40, 44, 45, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, 63, 73, 76, 79, 86, 89, 96, 97, 135, 206, 208, 209
emotions (passio, perturbatio), movements) of Nisula, Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence (2012) 197
emotions (passio, perturbatio), spatialiaty of Nisula, Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence (2012) 197
emotions (passio, perturbatio), stoic tetrachord of Nisula, Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence (2012) 197
epicureans Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, 207
epicurus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 25, 26
eschaton, eschatological Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 35, 96, 97, 208
eve Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 1, 10, 40, 96, 97, 102, 146, 208, 209
evil Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 33, 35, 44, 45, 50, 51, 53, 102, 135
exemplum Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 9, 79, 89, 208
fall, of sin Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271
fear Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 36, 45, 49, 50, 63, 73, 76, 89, 96
fig leaves Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 146, 209
flesh Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271; Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 10, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 51, 97, 135, 136, 207
fortunatus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 33
free choice (of will), liberum arbitrium Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271
free will Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 4, 10, 49, 50, 51, 53, 102, 207
friendship Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 8
gaudeo, gaudium Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 26, 33, 36, 73, 76, 97
genitals Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 146, 209
good, goodness Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 25, 44, 50, 51, 53, 63, 73, 79, 97, 102, 135
grace Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 1, 4, 9, 10, 43, 102, 207, 209
gratia Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 207
greek Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 45, 96
guilt Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 146, 209
happiness/the happy life Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 26, 27, 36, 40, 45, 49, 50, 63, 73, 96, 97
heart Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 63
hope Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 96
iamblichus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 8
idolatry Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 23, 86
immortality Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 35, 86, 97
increase and multiply command' Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 97
injury Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 146
iustus, iustitia Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 22, 29
jerome Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 32
jesus christ Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 22, 27, 30, 53, 73, 79, 89
joy Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 27, 73, 89, 96, 97, 102
joy (laetitia, gratulatio) Nisula, Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence (2012) 197
julian of aeclanum Nisula, Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence (2012) 197
julian of eclanum Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 1, 10, 42, 43, 206, 207, 209
justice/righteousness Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 136, 209
laetitia Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 26, 30, 36, 45, 49, 50, 53, 63, 73, 86, 97
law Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 22, 43
libero/libertas Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 33, 102
libido Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 23, 26, 31, 53, 96, 146, 209
lie, lying Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 37, 38, 39, 40, 44
life, eternal life Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 26, 34, 76, 135
light, illumination Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 46
love, charity Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 8, 23, 38, 50, 51, 63, 76, 79, 89, 96, 97, 102, 135, 136, 208, 209
lust Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 26, 206, 209
macrobius Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 37, 46
malus, malum Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 24, 32, 33, 34, 35, 43, 44, 45, 47, 51, 63, 76
manichees/manichaeism Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 10, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 43, 44, 45, 49, 51, 73, 89, 136, 146, 207, 209
marcellinus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 25
marius victorinus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 32
marriage Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 31
mary magdalene Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 22
members (bodily) Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 45, 47
membrum Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 32, 36, 45
mendacium Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 38, 39, 40, 43
metempsychosis Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 208
metus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 26, 36, 49, 50, 53, 73, 76, 96
milan Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 31
mind Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 23, 24, 26, 30, 33, 44, 135, 136
mors, mortalis Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 43, 47
motus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 3, 4, 43, 47, 49, 50, 53, 76, 79
natura Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 22, 24, 34, 35, 44, 45, 51, 89, 135, 146, 207
nihil, nothingness Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271
noceo Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 146
nudity Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 146
obedience/disobedience Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 135, 146, 209
oboedientia/inoboedientia Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 89, 96, 135, 146
pagan, paganism Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 24, 31, 46, 73
pain Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 86, 96, 135, 146, 209
pain (dolor) Nisula, Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence (2012) 197
passio Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 3, 4, 45, 47, 50, 53, 76
peace Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 207
peccatum Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 31, 32, 36, 38, 79, 96, 102, 146, 206
pelagian/pelagianism Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 1, 9, 10, 32, 33, 34, 42, 43, 45, 206, 207, 209
pelagius Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 10, 32, 33, 34
peripatetics Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 3, 97, 136
perturbatio Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 3, 4, 36, 45, 46, 47, 49, 50, 53, 63, 76, 79, 86, 89, 96, 97, 208
pietas/impietas Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 27
piety, pious Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 31, 86, 206
plato Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 35, 45, 47, 73
platonic, platonists Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271
platonicus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 8, 9, 10, 21, 22, 23, 35, 45, 47, 51
platonism Nisula, Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence (2012) 197
platonists/platonism Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 3, 8, 9, 10, 35, 36, 37, 41, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, 63, 73, 76, 79, 86, 97, 102, 208, 209
pleasure Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 23, 26, 27, 135, 136
plotinus Nisula, Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence (2012) 197; Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 47
poena Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 36, 136
polemic Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 24, 31, 48, 63
porphyry Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 8, 47
possidius Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 8
pride, haughtiness Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 27, 86, 135
pride Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271
primal sin Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 40, 102, 209
providence Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 4, 26, 30
pudicitia/pudicus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 31, 146
punishment Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271; Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 36, 96, 135, 136, 146, 209
ratio Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 3, 53, 89
reason/rationality Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 1, 53, 89, 96, 206
repentance Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 79
resurrection Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 23, 35
retribution Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 135
sadness Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 36, 45, 49, 50, 63, 73, 79, 89, 146
sapiens, sapientia Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 26, 41, 42, 73
secular literature Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 73
sermons Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 26, 27, 29
sex, sexuality Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 1, 4, 23, 25, 31, 146
shame Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 146, 209
sickness Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 45, 86
society, fellowship Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 86
soul Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271; Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 3, 22, 26, 30, 34, 35, 36, 41, 45, 46, 47, 53, 96, 135, 136
st. paul Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 23, 24, 26, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 37, 42, 73, 79
stoicism Nisula, Augustine and the Functions of Concupiscence (2012) 197
stoics, stoicism Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 1, 3, 9, 10, 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, 35, 36, 44, 53, 73, 79, 89, 96, 97, 136, 206, 207, 208
synecdoche Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29, 32, 41, 42
terence Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 26
tertullian Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 44
tranquillity Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 89
tripartite soul model Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 206
tripartite time structure Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 34, 35, 208
tristitia Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 3, 36, 45, 49, 50, 53, 63, 86
uerecundia Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 146
ueritas Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 8, 30, 38, 39, 43
uitium, uitiosus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 23, 32, 34, 36, 45, 51, 73, 79, 102, 146
uoluntas Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 39, 40, 49, 50, 53, 63, 73, 76, 89, 96, 102, 135, 208
uoluptas Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 21, 23, 25
varro Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 8, 36
vergil Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 9, 25, 26, 35, 36, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, 63, 76, 79, 208
vice, viciousness Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 22, 23, 24, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 46, 47, 48, 51, 73, 79, 102, 208
virgin, virginity Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 31
virtue Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 73, 79
voluntas, will Karfíková, Grace and the Will According to Augustine (2012) 271
volusianus Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 24, 25
wisdom, wise man Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 41, 42, 73, 97
zeno Trettel, Desires in Paradise: An Interpretative Study of Augustine's City of God 14 (2019) 53