Migne Reading Room
PL 38 · cols. 1335–1348
Augustine, Sermo 294 (Classis III, de Sanctis)
Sermon CCXCIV
SERMO CCXCIV. Habitus in basilica Majorum, in Natali martyris Guddentis, v calendas julii. De Baptismo parvulorum, contra Pelagianos.
Sermon 294. Preached in the basilica of the Ancestors, on the birthday of the martyr Guddens, on the fifth day before the Kalends of July. On the baptism of little children, against the Pelagians.
CAPUT PRIMUM. — 1. Occasio sermonis. In Natali
Chapter I. — 1. The occasion of the sermon. On the birthday
Editors' notes and page, col. 1335
Footnotes
(*) ‹anchor: SERMO CCXCIV› · call in col 1335 Recognitus in duobus bn. in a. cst. cl. cb. f. fs. g. lr. m. pr. rn. vd. Am. Er. Par. Lov.
Collated in two bn. [manuscripts], in a. cst. cl. cb. f. fs. g. lr. m. pr. rn. vd., [and the editions of] Amerbach, Erasmus, Paris and Louvain.
(printed under page 674)
(a) ‹anchor: SERMO CCXCIV› · call in col 1335
Alias, de Verbis Apostoli 14.
Elsewhere numbered On the Words of the Apostle 14.
(printed under page 674)
(b) ‹anchor: v calendas julii› · call in col 1335
Hunc titulum praefixum habet in vetere libro PP. Cisterciensium S. Crucis in Jerusalem de Urbe. Sermonis tempus, occasionem et locum jam ante noveramus, partim ex ipsius exordio, quo significatur habitus in festo Martyris, paulo post superiorem de Natali Joannis Baptistae tractatum; partim ex illis Augustini ad Aurelium Carthaginensem episcopum verbis in libro de Gestis Pelagii, cap. 11, n. 25: « Unde coacti sumus sollicitudine charitatis, quam erga Ecclesiam Christi per gratiam Christi nos habere convenit, etiam ad beatae memoriae Marcellinum, qui eos quotidie disputatores molestissimos patiebatur, et me per litteras consulebat, de quibusdam istarum quaestionibus scribere, et maxime de Baptismo parvulorum : de quo etiam postea, te jubente, in basilica Majorum, gestans quoque in manibus epistolam gloriosissimi martyris Cypriani, et de hac re verba ejus recitans atque pertractans, ut error iste nefarius de quorumdam cordibus auferretur, quibus persuasa fuerant, quae in his Gestis videmus damnata, adjutus orationibus tuis, quantum potui, laboravi. » In isto loco, pro « in basilica Majorum, » quod ibi ferebat idem liber prima editione; alii « Majorini » legunt, alii « Majore. » Exstat supra, Sermo 258 dictus « ad basilicam Majorem; » et contra, Sermo 34 « ad Majores, » et Sermo 165 « in basilica Majorum. » Victor tandem, lib. 1 de Persecutione Vandalica, ubi legimus in excusis « basilicam Majorem, » in vetere Colbertino codice habet « basilicam Majorum. » Sermonem autem hunc citati loci auctoritate referunt ad Christi annum 413. Quia ibi testatur Augustinus habitum esse post scriptos ad Marcellinum contra Pelagianam haeresim libros, de Peccatorum meritis et remissione, qui pertinent ad annum 412. Hoc autem anno 412, die junii decima quarta, Cirtensi concilio aderat Augustinus, neque hos apud Carthaginem sermones in Natali sive post Natalem S. Joannis habere potuit citius anno 413 : quo anno revera longiorem hac in urbe moram fecit, usque ad Marcellini caedem. Porro in martyrologiis aliquot « Gaudentii » mart. ex Africa mentio fit vi cal. julii, sed « Guddentis » nusquam.
This title is prefixed in the old book of the Cistercian Fathers of Holy Cross in Jerusalem in Rome. The sermon's time, occasion and place we already knew: partly from its own opening, which shows that it was preached on a martyr's feast, shortly after the preceding treatise on the Birthday of John the Baptist; partly from these words of Augustine to Aurelius, bishop of Carthage, in the book On the Proceedings of Pelagius, ch. 11, n. 25: "So we were compelled by the care of charity, which by the grace of Christ we ought to have towards the Church of Christ, to write also to Marcellinus of blessed memory, who was suffering these most troublesome disputers daily and was consulting me by letter, about some of these questions, and above all about the baptism of little ones. On this too I afterwards, at your bidding, in the basilica of the Majores, holding in my hands as well the letter of the most glorious martyr Cyprian, and reading out and discussing his words on this matter, laboured as far as I could, helped by your prayers, that this wicked error might be taken out of the hearts of certain people who had been persuaded of the things we see condemned in these Proceedings." In that place, instead of "in the basilica of the Majores," which the same book carried there in its first edition, some read "Majorini," others "Majore." Above there stands Sermon 258, said to be preached "at the Basilica Major"; and on the other side Sermon 34 "at the Majores," and Sermon 165 "in the basilica of the Majores." Finally Victor, book 1 On the Vandal Persecution, where we read in the printed copies "the Basilica Major," has "the basilica of the Majores" in the old Colbert manuscript. On the authority of the passage cited, they assign this sermon to the year of Christ 413. For Augustine there testifies that it was preached after the books written to Marcellinus against the Pelagian heresy, On the Merits and Remission of Sins, which belong to the year 412. But in that year 412, on the fourteenth of June, Augustine was attending the Council of Cirta, and he could not have preached these sermons at Carthage on or after the Birthday of St John earlier than 413, the year in which he did in fact make a longer stay in that city, until the killing of Marcellinus. Moreover, some martyrologies mention a martyr "Gaudentius" from Africa on the sixth day before the Kalends of July, but "Guddens" nowhere.
(printed under page 674)
Page
- running head: 1335 S. AUGUSTINI EPI (cut off at image edge)
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: the column opens with the end of the previous work (another unit); not set here: the unit begins at SERMO CCXCIV.
sancti Joannis inter caetera quae dicenda videbantur, ad Baptismum parvulorum noster sermo deductus est: et quia jam prolixus erat, et de illo terminando cogitabatur, non tanta dicta sunt de tanta quaestione, quanta in tanto periculo a sollicitis dici debuerunt. Sollicitos autem nos facit, non ipsa sententia jam olim in Ecclesia catholica summa auctoritate fundata, sed disputationes quorumdam, quae modo crebrescere, et multorum animos evertere moliuntur. Hodie ergo, adjuvante Domino, placuit nobis hinc loqui. Diem quidem solemnem Martyris celebramus: sed major causa est omnium fidelium, quam tantummodo martyrum. Non enim omnes fideles etiam martyres, sed illi ideo martyres, quia fideles. Videamus ergo quid ab eis proponatur, quid eos movet; quoniam et de ipsis non tam refellendis quam sanandis cogitare debemus.
of Saint John, among the other things that seemed to need saying, our sermon was led on to the Baptism of infants; and because it was already long, and its conclusion was being considered, not as much was said on so great a question as ought to have been said by careful men amid so great a danger. What makes us careful, however, is not the doctrine itself, long since founded in the Catholic Church on the highest authority, but the arguments of certain people, which are now beginning to spread and are striving to overturn the minds of many. Today, therefore, with the Lord's help, it has pleased us to speak on this. We are indeed celebrating the solemn day of a Martyr; but the cause of all the faithful is greater than that of the martyrs only. For not all the faithful are also martyrs, but those are martyrs precisely because they are faithful. Let us see, then, what is put forward by them, what moves them; since we ought to think about them too, not so much as men to be refuted as men to be healed.
2. Baptizandos parvulos Pelagiani concedunt, non propter vitam aeternam, sed propter regnum coelorum. Concedunt parvulos baptizari oportere. Non ergo quaestio est inter nos et ipsos, utrum parvuli baptizandi sint; sed de causa quaeritur, quare baptizandi sint. Hoc ergo quod concedunt, sine ulla cum ipsis dubitatione teneamus. Baptizandos esse parvulos, nemo dubitat. Nemo dubitet, quando nec illi hinc dubitant, qui ex parte aliqua contradicunt.
2. The Pelagians grant that infants are to be baptized, not for the sake of eternal life, but for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. They grant that infants ought to be baptized. So the question between us and them is not whether infants are to be baptized; rather, it is the cause that is asked about, why they are to be baptized. This, then, which they grant, let us hold together with them without any doubt. That infants are to be baptized, no one doubts. Let no one doubt it, when even those who contradict us in some part do not doubt on this point.
CAPUT II. — Sed nos dicimus eos aliter salutem et vitam aeternam non habituros, nisi baptizentur in Christo: illi autem dicunt non propter salutem, non propter vitam aeternam, sed propter regnum coelorum. Quid sit hoc, dum exponimus ut possumus, parumper attendite. Parvulus, inquiunt, etsi non baptizetur, merito innocentiae, eo quod nullum habeat omnino, nec proprium, nec originale peccatum, nec ex se, nec de Adam tractum, necesse est, aiunt, ut habeat salutem et vitam aeternam, etiamsi non baptizetur; sed propterea baptizandus est, ut intret etiam in regnum Dei, hoc est, in regnum coelorum. Si discutiendum est hoc, discutiendum est utique propter illos, non propter nos. Fratres enim nostri sunt, permoti sunt profunditate quaestionis; sed regi debuerunt gubernaculo auctoritatis. Cum enim dicunt non esse baptizandos
Chapter II. — But we say that they will not otherwise have salvation and eternal life, unless they are baptized in Christ; they, however, say: not for the sake of salvation, not for the sake of eternal life, but for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. What this means, attend for a little while we explain it as best we can. An infant, they say, even if it is not baptized, by the merit of innocence, because it has no sin at all, neither its own nor original, neither from itself nor drawn from Adam, must necessarily, they say, have salvation and eternal life, even if it is not baptized; but it is to be baptized for this reason, that it may also enter into the kingdom of God, that is, into the kingdom of heaven. If this is to be discussed, it is surely to be discussed for their sake, not for ours. For they are our brothers; they have been disturbed by the depth of the question; but they ought to have been steered by the rudder of authority. For when they say that they are not to be baptized
Editors' notes and page, col. 1336
Page
- running head: AUGUSTINI EPISCOPI 1336
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
salutis et vitae aeternae percipiendae causa, sed tantummodo regni coelorum et regni Dei; baptizandos quidem fatentur, sed non propter vitam aeternam, sed propter regnum coelorum. Quid de vita aeterna? Habebunt, inquiunt. Quare habebunt? Quia nullum peccatum habent, et ad damnationem pertinere non possunt. Ergo est vita aeterna extra regnum coelorum?
for the sake of obtaining salvation and eternal life, but only for the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God; they admit indeed that they are to be baptized, but not on account of eternal life, but on account of the kingdom of heaven. What about eternal life? They will have it, they say. Why will they have it? Because they have no sin, and they cannot belong to damnation. So is there eternal life outside the kingdom of heaven?
CAPUT III. — 3. Vitam aeternam non esse praeter regnum coelorum. Inter dextram ad regnum Dei pertinentium, et sinistram damnatorum nullus medius locus. Primus hic error aversandus ab auribus, exstirpandus a mentibus. Hoc novum in Ecclesia, prius inauditum est, esse vitam aeternam praeter regnum coelorum, esse salutem aeternam praeter regnum Dei. Primo vide, frater, ne forte hinc consentire nobis debeas, quisquis ad regnum Dei non pertinet, eum ad damnationem sine dubio pertinere. Venturus Dominus, et judicaturus de vivis et mortuis, sicut Evangelium loquitur, duas partes facturus est, dextram et sinistram. Sinistris dicturus, Ite in ignem aeternum, qui paratus est diabolo et angelis ejus: dextris dicturus, Venite, benedicti Patris mei, percipite regnum q⟨u⟩od vobis paratum est ab origine mundi. Hac regnum nominat, hac cum diabolo damnationem. Nullus relictus est medius locus, ubi ponere queas infantes. De vivis et mortuis judicabitur: alii erunt ad dextram, alii ad sinistram: non novi aliud. Qui inducis medium, recede de medio: non te offendat qui dextram quaerit. Et te ipsum admoneo: recede de medio, sed noli in sinistram. Si ergo dextra erit et sinistra, et nullum medium locum in Evangelio novimus: ecce in dextra regnum coelorum est, Percipite, inquit, regnum. Qui ibi non est, in sinistra est. Quid erit in sinistra? Ite in ignem aeternum. In dextra ad regnum, utique aeternum; in sinistra in ignem aeternum. Qui non in dextra, procul dubio in sinistra: ergo qui non in regno, procul dubio in igne aeterno. Certe habere potest vitam aeternam, qui non baptizatur? Non erit in dextra, id est, non erit in regno. Vitam aeternam computas ignem sempiternum? Et de ipsa vita aeterna audi expressius, quia nihil aliud est regnum quam vita aeterna. Prius regnum nominavit, sed in dextris; ignem aeternum in sinistris. Extrema autem sententia, ut doceret quid sit regnum, et quid sit ignis aeternus, Tunc, inquit, abibunt isti in ambustionem aeternam; justi autem in vitam aeternam (Matth. XXV, 33, 34, 41, 46).
Chapter III. — 3. That eternal life is not apart from the kingdom of heaven. Between the right hand of those who belong to the kingdom of God and the left hand of the damned there is no middle place. This error must first be turned away from the ears and rooted out of the minds. This is new in the Church, previously unheard of: that there is eternal life apart from the kingdom of heaven, that there is eternal salvation apart from the kingdom of God. First see, brother, whether perhaps you ought to agree with us on this point: that whoever does not belong to the kingdom of God without doubt belongs to damnation. The Lord, when He comes, and when He judges the living and the dead, as the Gospel says, will make two parts, a right and a left. To those on the left He will say, Go into the eternal fire, which has been prepared for the devil and his angels: to those on the right He will say, Come, blessed of My Father, receive the kingdom which has been prepared for you from the beginning of the world. On this side He names the kingdom, on that side damnation with the devil. No middle place has been left where you could put infants. Judgement will be passed on the living and the dead: some will be on the right, others on the left: I know of nothing else. You who bring in a middle, withdraw from the middle: let him who seeks the right not offend you. And I warn you yourself: withdraw from the middle, but do not go to the left. If then there will be a right and a left, and we know of no middle place in the Gospel: see, on the right is the kingdom of heaven, Receive, He says, the kingdom. Whoever is not there is on the left. What will there be on the left? Go into the eternal fire. On the right, to the kingdom, eternal of course; on the left, into the eternal fire. Whoever is not on the right is without doubt on the left: therefore whoever is not in the kingdom is without doubt in the eternal fire. Can he surely have eternal life who is not baptized? He will not be on the right, that is, he will not be in the kingdom. Do you reckon everlasting fire as eternal life? And hear more expressly about eternal life itself, that the kingdom is nothing other than eternal life. First He named the kingdom, but for those on the right; the eternal fire for those on the left. But in the final sentence, to teach what the kingdom is, and what the eternal fire is, Then, He says, these will go away into eternal burning; but the just into eternal life (Matt. 25:33, 34, 41, 46).
CAPUT IV. — Ecce exposuit tibi quid sit regnum, et quid sit ignis aeternus; ut quando confiteris parvulum nou futurum in regno, fatearis futurum in igne aeterno. Regnum enim coelorum est vita aeterna.
Chapter IV. — See, He has set out for you what the kingdom is, and what the eternal fire is; so that when you confess that the little one will not be in the kingdom, you may admit that he will be in the eternal fire. For the kingdom of heaven is eternal life.
4. Exclusioni a regno Dei, conjunctam esse poenam ignis aeterni. Nec aliud etiam apostolus Paulus, cum terreret homines, non parvulos, non baptizatos, sed scelestos, facinorosos, contaminatos, perditos; non eos terruit quod erunt in igne sempiterno, quo sine dubio ibunt, si non corrigantur: sed tantum terruit, quia in regno non erunt; ut cum viderint se perdere
4. That the punishment of eternal fire is joined to exclusion from the kingdom of God. Nor did the apostle Paul either [say] anything else when he was frightening men, not little ones, not the baptized, but the wicked, the criminal, the defiled, the lost; he did not frighten them by saying that they will be in everlasting fire, where without doubt they will go if they are not corrected: but he frightened them only by saying that they will not be in the kingdom; so that when they saw that they were losing
Editors' notes and page, col. 1337
Footnotes
(1) ‹anchor: Certe habere potest› · call in col 1337
Editi, non potest. Abest, non, a Mss.
The printed editions have "non potest" ("cannot"). The "non" is absent from the manuscripts.
(printed under page 675)
Page
- running head: 1337 SERMO CC⟨...⟩ (cut off at the image edge; presumably SERMO CCXCIV)
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
spem regni, non viderent esse consequentem nisi poenam ignis aeterni. « Nolite, » inquit, « errare: neque fornicatores, neque idolis servientes, neque adulteri, neque molles, neque masculorum concubitores, neque fures, neque avari, neque ebriosi, neque maledici, neque rapaces regnum Dei possidebunt. » Non dixit, Illi et illi, tales et tales igni aeterno torquebuntur; sed, regnum Dei non possidebunt. Subtracta dextra, non remansit nisi sinistra. Unde autem evadunt ab igne sempiterno? Non ob aliud, nisi quia erunt in regno. Sequitur: « Et haec quidem fuistis. » Et unde jam non sunt? « Sed abluti estis, sed sanctificati estis, sed justificati estis in nomine Domini nostri Jesu Christi, et in Spiritu Dei nostri. In nomine Domini nostri Jesu Christi » (I Cor. VI, 9-11). « Non enim est aliud nomen sub coelo in quo oportet salvos fieri nos » (Act. IV. 12), nos omnes, pusillos cum magnis. Si autem salvos fieri oportet nos in hoc nomine, sine hoc nomine procul dubio nec salus erit, quae sine Christo promittitur parvulis. Pace eorum dicam, qui cuiquam salutem promittit sine Christo, nescio utrum ipse salutem habere possit in Christo.
hope of the kingdom, they would not see anything to follow except the punishment of eternal fire. 'Do not,' he says, 'be deceived: neither fornicators, nor those who serve idols, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor those who lie with males, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will possess the kingdom of God.' He did not say, These and those, such and such, will be tormented in eternal fire; but, 'they will not possess the kingdom of God.' With the right hand taken away, nothing remained but the left. But how do they escape the everlasting fire? For no other reason except that they will be in the kingdom. There follows: 'And such indeed you were.' And how is it that they now are not? 'But you have been washed, but you have been sanctified, but you have been justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ' (1 Cor. 6:9–11). 'For there is no other name under heaven in which we must be saved' (Acts 4:12), all of us, the little with the great. But if we must be saved in this name, without this name there will without doubt be no salvation either, the salvation which is promised to little ones without Christ. By the leave of those of whom I speak I shall say it: whoever promises anyone salvation without Christ, I do not know whether he himself can have salvation in Christ.
CAPUT V. — 5. Pelagiana vitae aeternae et regni Dei distinctio plane arbitraria. Deinde quaerimus ab eis: Quid, si aliquis dicat, parvulos merito innocentiae suae, sicut dicitis, atque immunitatis ab omni delicto, non solum habituros salutem et vitam aeternam, sed et regnum Dei? unde apud vos definitum certumque est, sine baptismo regnum Dei non habituros parvulos; ut divideretis eis pro arbitrio vestro, non adjutores parvulorum, sed oppressores miserorum; ut divideritis eis pro arbitrio vestro, et daretis eis salutem et vitam aeternam praeter regnum coelorum? Alius benevolentior vobis et misericordior, et ut putatis justior, totum eis dabit, et vitam aeternam et regnum coelorum. Istum quomodo superabitis? Quoniam vos aliquando contra evidentissimam auctoritatem ratiocinatio humana delectat, proferte ipsam regulam rationis vestrae, et asserite, quantis viribus valueritis, unde vincatur iste, qui parvulis propter merita innocentiae, propter nullam, sicut dicitis, culpam, hoc est, originale peccatum, dare voluerit etiam non baptizatis, non solum vitam aeternam, verum etiam regnum coelorum: istum vincite. Ego sine praejudicio partes hujus parumper suscipio, et dicam quod ipse non sentio: sed admoneo vos, ut acriorem adversarium videatis.
Chapter V. — 5. The Pelagian distinction between eternal life and the kingdom of God is plainly arbitrary. Next we ask of them: What if someone should say that little ones, by the merit of their innocence, as you say, and of their freedom from every offence, will have not only salvation and eternal life, but also the kingdom of God? On what ground is it defined and certain among you that without baptism little ones will not have the kingdom of God, so that you should apportion things to them at your own discretion, not as helpers of the little ones but as oppressors of the wretched; so that you should apportion things to them at your own discretion, and give them salvation and eternal life apart from the kingdom of heaven? Another, more benevolent than you and more merciful, and, as you think, more just, will give them everything, both eternal life and the kingdom of heaven. How will you overcome this man? Since you sometimes take delight in human reasoning against the most evident authority, bring forward the very rule of your reason, and assert, with all the strength you can muster, how this man is to be overcome who would wish to give to little ones, on account of the merits of innocence, on account of no fault, as you say, that is, no original sin, even to the unbaptized, not only eternal life but also the kingdom of heaven: overcome this man. Without prejudice I take up his part for a little while, and I shall say what I myself do not hold; but I warn you, so that you may see a sharper adversary.
6. Negato semel originali peccato, Pelagianos non posse eum vincere, qui nolit parvulos excludi a regno Dei. Ecce existit nescio quis, et dicit: Parvulus non habens ullum omnino peccatum, nec quod sua vita contraxit, nec quod de vita primi parentis traxit, habebit et vitam aeternam et regnum coelorum.
6. Once original sin is denied, the Pelagians cannot overcome the man who does not wish little ones to be excluded from the kingdom of God. Behold, someone or other arises and says: A little one who has no sin at all, neither what his own life contracted nor what he drew from the life of the first parent, will have both eternal life and the kingdom of heaven.
CAPUT VI. — Respondete, vincite hominem resistentem vobis, qui aliter dividitis. Vos enim dicitis: Vitam quidem habebit iste non baptizatus aeternam,
Chapter VI. — Answer, overcome the man who resists you, you who apportion otherwise. For you say: This unbaptized one will indeed have eternal life,
Editors' notes and page, col. 1338
Footnotes
(1) ‹anchor: ratiocinatio humana delectat› · call in col 1338
Editiones Er. Lugd. et Ven. habent, ratio humana delectat. M.
The editions of Erasmus, Lyons and Venice have "ratio humana delectat" ("human reason delights"). M.
(printed under page 675)
Page
- running head: SERMO CCXCIV. 1338
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
sed non habebit regnum coelorum. Ille contra : Imo et vitam et regnum coelorum. Quare enim patrimonium regni coelorum abripis innocenti? A quo regnum coelorum non acquiritur, profecto magno bono fraudatur. Quae est ista justitia? Dic, quare? Quid offendit parvulus non baptizatus, nullam habens culpam, nec suam, nec de parente tractam? Quid offendit, dic mihi, ut non intret in regnum coelorum, ut separetur a sorte sanctorum, ut sit exsul a societate Angelorum? Videris enim tibi misericors, quia non ei aufers vitam : damnas tamen, quem separas a regno coelorum. Damnas : non eum percutis, sed in exsilium mittis. Nam et qui exsulant, vivunt, si sani sunt : in doloribus corporis non sunt, non torquentur, non carceris tenebris affliguntur : haec illis sola poena est, non esse in patria. Si amatur patria, magna poena : si autem non amatur patria, pejor est cordis poena. Parvum malum est in hominis corde, qui societatem non quaerit sanctorum, qui non desiderat regnum coelorum? Si non desiderat, poena est de perversitate : si autem desiderat, poena est de fraudata charitate. Sed si, quod vis, parva sit poena; et ipsa parva magna est, si nulla culpa est. Hic defende justitiam Dei. Quare vel parva poena infligitur innocenti, in quo nullum invenitur omnino peccatum? Dic contra istum adversarium, qui parvulis non baptizatis, misericordia et justitia majore quam tu, dare vult, non solum vitam aeternam, verum etiam regnum coelorum : responde si potes, sed rationem affer; hac enim te gloriari delectat.
but he will not have the kingdom of heaven. That other man says on the contrary: Rather, both life and the kingdom of heaven. For why do you snatch from an innocent the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven? He by whom the kingdom of heaven is not obtained is surely cheated of a great good. What justice is this? Say, why? How has an unbaptized little one given offence, having no guilt, neither his own nor drawn from a parent? How has he given offence, tell me, that he should not enter into the kingdom of heaven, that he should be separated from the lot of the saints, that he should be an exile from the fellowship of the Angels? For you seem to yourself merciful, because you do not take life away from him: yet you condemn him whom you separate from the kingdom of heaven. You condemn him: you do not strike him, but you send him into exile. For those too who are in exile live, if they are healthy: they are not in bodily pains, they are not tortured, they are not afflicted with the darkness of a prison: this is their only punishment, not to be in their homeland. If the homeland is loved, it is a great punishment: but if the homeland is not loved, worse is the punishment of the heart. Is it a small evil in a man's heart, that he does not seek the fellowship of the saints, that he does not desire the kingdom of heaven? If he does not desire it, the punishment comes from perversity: but if he desires it, the punishment comes from charity cheated. But if, as you wish, the punishment be small; even that small one is great, if there is no guilt. Here defend the justice of God. Why is even a small punishment inflicted on an innocent, in whom no sin at all is found? Speak against this adversary, who, with greater mercy and justice than you, wishes to give to unbaptized little ones not only eternal life but also the kingdom of heaven: answer if you can, but bring a reason; for in this you delight to glory.
CAPUT VII. — 7. In quaestione de parvulis non baptizatis confugiendum ad auctoritatem divinam. Ego istam quaestionem profundam sentio, et ad ejus fundum rimandum vires meas idoneas non agnosco. Libet me et hic exclamare quod Paulus, O altitudo divitiarum! Parvulus non baptizatus pergit in damnationem : Apostoli enim verba sunt, Ex uno in condemnationem (Rom. V, 16) : non satis invenio dignam causam, quia non invenio, non quia non est. Ubi ergo non invenio in profundo profundum, attendere debeo humanam infirmitatem, non damnare divinam auctoritatem. Ego prorsus exclamo, nec me pudet : « O altitudo divitiarum sapientiae et scientiae Dei! quam inscrutabilia sunt judicia ejus, et investigabiles viae ejus! Quis enim cognovit sensum Domini? aut quis consiliarius ejus fuit? aut quis prior dedit illi, et retribuetur ei? Quoniam ex ipso, et per ipsum, et in ipso sunt omnia : ipsi gloria in saecula saeculorum » (Id. XI, 33-36). Ego infirmitatem meam his verbis munio, et hac cautela circumseptus, adversus sagittas ratiocinationum tuarum muratus assisto. Sed tu, bellator, hoc est, fortis ratiocinator, huic responde, qui tibi dicit : Prorsus innocens parvulus, et immunis ab omni peccato, et proprio et originali, non solum vitam aeternam habebit, sed etiam regnum coelorum. Hoc est justum. Qui nihil mali habet, quare aliquid boni non habet? sed scio, inquis. Unde scis? Quia Dominus dixit. Tandem venisti. Non ergo quia tu ratiocinaris, sed quia Dominus dixit. Laudo plane
Chapter VII. — 7. In the question concerning unbaptized little ones one must take refuge in divine authority. I feel this question to be deep, and I do not recognize my powers as fit for searching out its bottom. I am pleased here too to cry out what Paul did, O the depth of the riches! The unbaptized little one goes into condemnation: for they are the Apostle's words, From one unto condemnation (Rom. 5:16): I do not find a sufficiently worthy cause, because I do not find it, not because it does not exist. Where therefore I do not find the depth in the deep, I ought to take account of human weakness, not to condemn divine authority. I cry out outright, and I am not ashamed: "O the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How inscrutable are His judgements, and unsearchable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been His counsellor? Or who first gave to Him, and it shall be repaid him? For from Him, and through Him, and in Him are all things: to Him be glory for ages of ages" (ibid. 11:33–36). I fortify my weakness with these words, and, fenced about with this safeguard, I stand walled against the arrows of your reasonings. But you, warrior, that is, mighty reasoner, answer this man, who says to you: The wholly innocent little one, free from all sin, both his own and original, will have not only eternal life but also the kingdom of heaven. This is just. He who has nothing evil, why does he not have something good? But I know, you say. How do you know? Because the Lord said it. At last you have come round. Not, then, because you reason, but because the Lord said it. I plainly praise
Editors' notes and page, col. 1339
Page
- running head: 1339 S. AUGUSTINI EPIS[COPI] (cut off at right edge)
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: margin letters A B C D not visible; only stray marks at left beside "fers vitam" and "lorum : responde". First line "Imo" partly unclear in the print, read as Imo. Column ends mid-sentence at "Laudo plane". Right-hand column (PL 38:1340) is partly visible and is not set.
hoc, sanum est: sicut homo non invenisti rationem, fugis ad auctoritatem. Approbo, prorsus approbo. Bene facis; non invenis quid respondeas, ad auctoritatem fuge: non ibi te persequor, non inde expello; imo fugientem recipio et amplector.
this, it is sound: as a man you have not found a reason, you flee to authority. I approve, I wholly approve. You do well; you do not find what to answer, flee to authority: there I do not pursue you, from there I do not drive you out; rather, I receive and embrace you as you flee.
8. Sententia dominica excludens non baptizatos a regno Dei, fatentibus Pelagianis. Profer ergo auctoritatem, stemus in ea simul contra communem inimicum. Quia enim parvulus non baptizatus non intrat in regnum coelorum, et tu dicis et ego. Illi igitur communi adversario, qui dicit non baptizatum parvulum intraturum in regnum coelorum, resistamus ambo, et adversus ejus insidiosissima jacula scutum fidei proferamus.
8. The Lord's sentence excluding the unbaptized from the kingdom of God, as the Pelagians acknowledge. Bring forward the authority, then; let us stand on it together against the common enemy. For that an unbaptized little one does not enter into the kingdom of heaven, both you say and I. Therefore let us both resist that common adversary who says that an unbaptized little one will enter into the kingdom of heaven, and against his most treacherous darts let us hold forth the shield of faith.
CAPUT VIII.—Cedant paulisper conjecturae rationis humanae, assumantur arma divina. Assumite, inquit Apostolus, armaturam Dei (Ephes. VI, 13). Ecce simul dicamus huic homini: Christianus es? Christianus, inquit. Audi Evangelium, qui vis non baptizatos parvulos mittere in regnum coelorum; audi Evangelium: Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu sancto, non intrabit in regnum Dei. Domini sententia est: huic non resistit, nisi non christianus. Repulsus est ille, remanet mihi tecum certamen: et forte unde vicisti bono illius, inde bono vinceris tuo. Nam quem vicisti, si durus non est, docuisti. Noli ergo esse durus et tu: simul teneamus interim sententiam istam, Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu, non intrabit in regnum Dei. Ideo, inquis, parvulo non baptizato polliceri regnum Dei non possum contra apertam Domini sententiam. Ecce quare dico: Regnum Dei non habebunt. Ecce quare dico: Ideo baptizandi sunt, ut habeant regnum Dei. Ideo dicis? Ideo, inquit. Vide tamen, propter illa quae supra diximus, ne forte non invenias vitam aeternam praeter regnum Dei. Multum enim aperta sunt dicta de duabus illis partibus, dextra et sinistra, ubi nullum in medio dedit locum vitae sine regno. Parum te hoc corrigit? parum admonet? Ipsam mecum lectionem, unde hanc sententiam protulisti, paululum adverte.
Chapter VIII. Let the conjectures of human reason give way for a little; let divine arms be taken up. "Take up," says the Apostle, "the armour of God" (Eph. 6:13). See, let us say together to this man: Are you a Christian? A Christian, he says. Hear the Gospel, you who wish to send unbaptized little ones into the kingdom of heaven; hear the Gospel: "Unless one has been born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he will not enter into the kingdom of God." It is the Lord's sentence: no one resists it except one who is not a Christian. That man has been driven back; there remains for me a contest with you: and perhaps by the very means by which you conquered him for his good, by that you are conquered for your own good. For him whom you conquered, if he is not hard, you have taught. Do not, then, be hard yourself either: let us meanwhile hold together this sentence, "Unless one has been born again of water and the Spirit, he will not enter into the kingdom of God." That is why, you say, I cannot promise the kingdom of God to an unbaptized little one, against the plain sentence of the Lord. See why I say: They will not have the kingdom of God. See why I say: That is why they must be baptized, so that they may have the kingdom of God. Is that why you say it? That is why, he says. See, however, on account of those things which we said above, that you may perhaps not find eternal life apart from the kingdom of God. For very plain things have been said about those two parts, the right and the left, where He gave no place in the middle for life without the kingdom. Does this correct you too little? Does it admonish you too little? Attend a little, together with me, to the very reading from which you brought forward this sentence.
9. Ex eadem Evangelii lectione vincendi Pelagiani. Una in duabus naturis persona Christi, qui simul in terra se esse dicit et in coelo. Dixisti enim, te ideo regnum coelorum non baptizatis parvulis nolle promittere, quia sententia Domini aperta est, Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu, non intrabit in regnum coelorum. Non ibi advertisti, cum quaereret Nicodemus, quomodo ista fierent, id est, quomodo renasceretur homo, quomodo denuo nasceretur; quoniam non potest utique iterum introire in uterum matris, et denuo nasci; quid audierit a Domino, quid audierit a magistro bono, quid audierit error a veritate?
9. From the same reading of the Gospel the Pelagians are to be conquered. The one person of Christ in two natures, Who says that He is at the same time on earth and in heaven. For you said that you are unwilling to promise the kingdom of heaven to unbaptized little ones for this reason, that the Lord's sentence is plain: "Unless one has been born again of water and the Spirit, he will not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Did you not notice there, when Nicodemus asked how these things could come about, that is, how a man could be born again, how he could be born anew, since he certainly cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born anew, what he heard from the Lord, what he heard from the good master, what error heard from truth?
CAPUT IX. — Inter caetera enim ostendens quemadmodum fiat, etiam similitudinem posuit. Sed prius ait: Nemo ascendit in coelum, nisi qui de coelo descendit, Filius hominis qui est in coelo (Joan. III, 5, 13). In terra erat, et in coelo se esse dicebat; et quod est majus, in coelo Filium hominis: ut unam demonstraret in utraque natura personam, et in eo
Chapter IX. For among other things, showing how it comes about, He also set forth a likeness. But first He says: "No one ascends into heaven except He Who descended from heaven, the Son of Man Who is in heaven" (John 3:5, 13). He was on earth, and He said that He was in heaven; and, what is greater, the Son of Man in heaven: so that He might show one person in each nature, and in that
Editors' notes and page, col. 1340
Page
- running head: [A]UGUSTINI EPISCOPI (left edge cut off)
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: column begins mid-sentence with "hoc"; in the italic summary of §8, "a regno" is set as a, though the letter may be printed as u; "rationis" in the CAPUT VIII line is partly damaged at the line end; "Ephes. VI, 13": the last figure may read 15, set as 13; the end punctuation after "veritate" is unclear, set as ?; left column (1339) is partly visible and not set
quod Dei Filius erat aequalis Patri, Verbum Dei in principio Deus apud Deum, et in eo quod filius hominis erat, assumens animam humanam et carnem humanam, et indutus hominem, exiens ad homines: quia in hoc utroque non duo christi sunt, nec duo filii Dei sed una persona, unus Christus Dei Filius, idemque unus Christus, non alius, hominis filius; sed Dei, Filius secundum divinitatem, hominis filius secundum carnem. Quis autem nostrum, qui parum advertimus, aut parum sapimus, non potius ita vellet distinguere, Filius Dei in coelo, et Filius hominis in terra? Sed ne sic divideremus, et ita dividendo duas personas induceremus, Non ascendit in coelum, inquit, nisi qui de coelo descendit Filius hominis. Filius ergo hominis descendit de coelo. Nonne filius hominis in terra factus est? nonne filius hominis per Mariam factus est? Sed, o homo, noli, inquit, separare, quem volo copulare. Parum est quia Filius hominis descendit (Christus enim descendit, idemque filius hominis qui Filius Dei est); sedet in coelo, qui ambulat in terra. In coelo erat, quia ubique est Christus, idemque Christus est et Filius Dei et filius hominis. Propter unitatem personae in terra Filius Dei, propter eamdem unitatem personae esse probavimus in coelo filium hominis, ex his verbis Domini, Filius hominis, inquit, qui est in coelo. Propter unitatem personae, nonne in terra constituto atque conspicuo Petrus dicit, Tu es Christus Filius Dei vivi (Matth. XVI, 17)?
the Son of God was equal to the Father, the Word of God, in the beginning God with God, and in that He was son of man, taking on a human soul and human flesh, and clothed with man, going out to men: for in this twofold being there are not two christs, nor two sons of God, but one person, one Christ the Son of God, and the same one Christ, not another, the son of man; but of God, Son according to the divinity, son of man according to the flesh. Now which of us, who pay little attention or have little wisdom, would not rather wish to distinguish thus: the Son of God in heaven, and the Son of man on earth? But lest we should divide in this way, and by so dividing introduce two persons, No one has ascended into heaven, He says, except He who descended from heaven, the Son of man. The Son of man, then, descended from heaven. Was not the son of man made on earth? Was not the son of man made through Mary? But, O man, He says, do not separate whom I wish to join. It is a small thing that the Son of man descended (for Christ descended, and the same is the son of man who is the Son of God); He sits in heaven who walks on earth. He was in heaven, because Christ is everywhere, and the same Christ is both the Son of God and the son of man. Because of the unity of the person, the Son of God is on earth; because of the same unity of the person, we have proved that the son of man is in heaven, from these words of the Lord: The Son of man, He says, who is in heaven. Because of the unity of the person, does not Peter say to Him while He was set on earth and visible, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matt. 16:17)?
10. In coelum solus Christus ascendit. Christi membra cum capite unus Christus. Ergo discat Nicodemus quomodo fiat illud, quod ei minus intelligenti, incredibile et quasi impossibile videbatur: Nemo ascendit in coelum, nisi qui de coelo descendit.
10. Christ alone ascends into heaven. The members of Christ with the head are one Christ. Let Nicodemus, then, learn how that comes about which seemed to him, understanding too little, incredible and as it were impossible: No one has ascended into heaven, except He who descended from heaven.
CAPUT X. — Omnes autem qui renascuntur, utique ascendunt in coelum: caeterorum nemo prorsus. Et omnes qui renascuntur, per gratiam Dei ascendunt in coelum: et nemo ascendit in coelum, nisi qui de coelo descendit, Filius hominis qui est in coelo. Unde hoc? Quia omnes qui renascuntur, membra ipsius fiunt; et solus Christus de Maria natus unus est Christus, et cum corpore suo caput unus est Christus. Hoc ergo dicere voluit, Nemo ascendit, nisi qui descendit. Non ergo ascendit, nisi Christus. Si vis ascendere, esto in corpore Christi: si vis ascendere, esto membrum Christi. Sicut enim in uno corpore multa membra habemus, omnia autem membra corporis, cum sint multa, unum est corpus; sic et Christus (I Cor. XII, 12): quia caput et corpus Christus. Et quomodo fit hoc, adhuc quaeramus. Latet quaestio, exaltatur illa profunditas.
Chapter X. — Now all who are reborn certainly ascend into heaven; of the rest, no one at all. And all who are reborn ascend into heaven by the grace of God: and no one has ascended into heaven, except He who descended from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven. How is this? Because all who are reborn become His members; and Christ alone, born of Mary, is one Christ, and the head with His body is one Christ. This, then, is what He meant to say: No one has ascended, except He who descended. No one, then, ascends but Christ. If you wish to ascend, be in the body of Christ; if you wish to ascend, be a member of Christ. For just as in one body we have many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ (1 Cor. 12:12): for head and body are Christ. And how this comes about, let us inquire further. The question lies hidden; that depth is raised up.
11. Quomodo Christi membra efficimur. Fides in Christum necessaria ad salutem. Christus peccatum non habet, nec originale traxit, nec suum addidit: extra voluptatem carnalis libidinis venit, non ibi fuit complexus maritalis: de Virginis corpore non assumpsit vulnus, sed medicamentum; non assumpsit quod sanaret, sed unde sanaret: quantum ad peccatum pertinet, dico. Solus ergo ille sine peccato: quomodo erunt membra ejus, quorum nullus est sine
11. How we are made members of Christ. Faith in Christ is necessary for salvation. Christ has no sin; He neither contracted original sin nor added His own: He came apart from the pleasure of carnal lust; there was no marital embrace there: from the Virgin's body He took on not a wound but a remedy; He did not take on what He would heal, but that by which He would heal: so far as it concerns sin, I mean. He alone, then, is without sin: how will they be His members, of whom none is without
Editors' notes and page, col. 1341
Page
- running head: 1341 SERMO CCXCIV.
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: column ends mid-sentence at "sine"; "ei" in section 10 printed with a damaged/odd first letter, read as ei; reference (Matth. XVI, 17) kept as printed though the confession is Matt. 16:16; right-hand column (1342) cut off at image edge, not set
peccato? Quomodo? Audi similitudinem quae sequitur: Et sicut Moyses exaltavit serpentem in eremo, sic oportet exaltari Filium hominis, ut omnis qui credit in eum, non pereat, sed habeat vitam aeternam (Joan. III, 14, 15). Unde tibi non videbatur peccatores homines posse fieri membra Christi, id est, illius qui nullum omnino haberet peccatum? Serpentis morsu movebaris: ideo crucifigitur Christus, ideo fundit sanguinem Christus in remissionem peccatorum; quia propter peccatum, id est, serpentis venenum, Sicut exaltavit Moyses serpentem in eremo, unde sanarentur qui in illo deserto a serpentibus mordebantur, et illum exaltatum attendere jubebantur, et quisquis attenderet, sanabatur; sic oportet exaltari Filium hominis, ut omnis qui credit in eum, id est, qui attendit exaltatum, qui non erubescit crucifixum, qui in cruce Christi gloriatur, non pereat, sed habeat vitam aeternam. Non pereat, unde? Credendo in eum. Unde non pereat? Attendendo exaltatum: alioquin perisset. Hoc est enim, Omnis qui credit in eum, non pereat, sed habeat vitam aeternam.
sin? How? Hear the likeness that follows: And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that everyone who believes in Him may not perish, but may have eternal life (John 3:14–15). Hence it did not seem to you that sinful men could become members of Christ, that is, of Him who had no sin at all? You were stirred by the serpent's bite: that is why Christ is crucified, that is why Christ sheds His blood for the remission of sins; because on account of sin, that is, the serpent's venom, As Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, whereby those were to be healed who in that desert were being bitten by serpents, and they were bidden to look upon it lifted up, and whoever looked upon it was healed; so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that everyone who believes in Him, that is, who looks upon Him lifted up, who is not ashamed of the Crucified, who glories in the cross of Christ, may not perish, but may have eternal life. May not perish, by what means? By believing in Him. By what means may he not perish? By looking upon Him lifted up: otherwise he would have perished. For this is it: Everyone who believes in Him may not perish, but may have eternal life.
CAPUT XI. — 12. Parvulis alieno facto vulneratis aliena fide subvenitur. Profers parvulum mihi, et jubes ut attendat exaltatum, quem negas habere serpentis venenum. Imo si faves ei, si movet te innocentia in vita propria, noli negare tractum aliquem reatum de vita prima, non sua, sed parentis sui primi. Noli negare; confitere venenum, ut poscas medicamentum: aliter non sanatur. Aut utquid ei dicis ut credat? Hoc enim respondetur a portante parvulum. Ad verba aliena sanatur, quia ad factum alienum vulneratur. Credit in Jesum Christum? fit interrogatio: respondetur, Credit. Pro non loquente, pro silente, pro flente, et flendo quodam modo ut subveniatur orante, respondetur, et valet. An etiam hoc serpens ille persuadere conatur, quia non valet? Absit a cordibus qualiumcumque Christianorum. Ergo respondetur, et valet. Conspiratione quadam communicat spiritus; credit in altero, quia peccavit in altero. An vero invenit vitam praesentis saeculi, quem parturivit infirmitas; et non invenit vitam futuri saeculi, quem parturivit charitas?
Chapter XI. — 12. Little children, wounded by another's deed, are succoured by another's faith. You bring forward a little child to me, and you bid that he look upon Him lifted up, though you deny that he has the serpent's venom. Nay rather, if you favour him, if his innocence in his own life moves you, do not deny some guilt drawn from the first life, not his own, but that of his first parent. Do not deny it; confess the venom, that you may ask for the medicine: otherwise he is not healed. Or why do you tell him to believe? For this is answered by the one carrying the little child. He is healed at another's words, because he was wounded by another's deed. Does he believe in Jesus Christ? the question is put: the answer is given, He believes. For one who does not speak, for one who is silent, for one who weeps, and by weeping in a certain manner prays to be succoured, the answer is given, and it avails. Or does that serpent try to persuade us of this too, that it does not avail? Far be it from the hearts of Christians of whatever sort. Therefore the answer is given, and it avails. By a certain breathing-together the spirit communicates; he believes in another, because he sinned in another. Or does he indeed find the life of the present age, he whom weakness brought to birth; and does he not find the life of the age to come, he whom charity brought to birth?
13. Serpens aereus exaltatus figura Christi crucifixi in similitudine carnis peccati. Ergo sicut Moyses exaltavit serpentem in eremo, ut omnis a serpente percussus intueretur exaltatum, et sanaretur: sic oportuit exaltari Filium hominis, ut omnis a serpente venenatus intueatur exaltatum, et sanetur. Adam primus accepit morsum serpentis cum veneno. Ergo natus in carne peccati, fit salvus in Christo per similitudinem carnis peocati.
13. The bronze serpent lifted up a figure of Christ crucified in the likeness of the flesh of sin. Therefore, just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so that everyone struck by a serpent might gaze upon it lifted up and be healed: so it was necessary for the Son of Man to be lifted up, so that everyone envenomed by the serpent may gaze upon Him lifted up and be healed. Adam first received the bite of the serpent with its venom. Therefore one born in the flesh of sin is made safe in Christ through the likeness of the flesh of sin.
CAPUT XII. — Misit enim Deus Filium suum, non in carne peccati; sed, sicut sequitur qui scripsit, in similitudine carnis peccati; quia non de complexu maritali, sed de utero virginali. Misit in similitudine carnis peccati: utquid hoc? Ut de peccato damnaret peccatum in carne (Rom. VIII, 3): de peccato peccatum, de serpente serpentem. Quis enim dubitet nomine serpentis appellari peccatum? Ergo de peccato peccatum,
Chapter XII. — For God sent His Son, not in the flesh of sin; but, as he who wrote it goes on, in the likeness of the flesh of sin; because not from the conjugal embrace, but from a virgin womb. He sent Him in the likeness of the flesh of sin: why this? That by sin He might condemn sin in the flesh (Rom. 8:3): by sin, sin; by the serpent, the serpent. For who would doubt that sin is called by the name of serpent? Therefore by sin, sin,
Editors' notes and page, col. 1342
Page
- running head: SERMO CCXCIV. 1342
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
de serpente serpentem : sed de similitudine, quia in Christo nullum peccatum, sed sola similitudo carnis peccati. Ideo exaltatus serpens, sed aereus; exaltata est similitudo carnis peccati, ut sanaretur origo peccati. Quia misit Deus Filium suum in similitudine carnis peccati. Non in similitudine carnis; nam vera caro est, sed in similitudine carnis peccati; quia mortalis caro sine ullo omnino peccato. Ut de peccato, propter similitudinem, damnaret peccatum in carne, propter veram iniquitatem. Vera iniquitas in Christo non fuit : sed mortalitas in illo fuit. Peccatum non suscepit, sed poenam peccati suscepit. Suscipiendo sine culpa poenam, et poenam sanavit et culpam. Ecce quomodo fiunt ista. Quod admiratus Nicodemus dixerat, Quomodo possunt ista fieri? Sic enim sanamur, non quia meremur. Ecce quomodo fiunt ista. Modo ubi mihi parvulos ponis? Jam dicis, Nullo veneno sauciati sunt. Aufer eos a conspectu exaltati serpentis. Si autem non aufers, sanandos dicis, venenatos confiteris.
by the serpent, the serpent: but by likeness, because in Christ there is no sin, but only the likeness of the flesh of sin. Therefore a serpent was lifted up, but a bronze one; the likeness of the flesh of sin was lifted up, so that the origin of sin might be healed. For God sent His Son in the likeness of the flesh of sin. Not in the likeness of flesh, for it is true flesh, but in the likeness of the flesh of sin; because it was mortal flesh without any sin at all. That from sin, on account of the likeness, He might condemn sin in the flesh, on account of the true iniquity. True iniquity was not in Christ: but mortality was in Him. He did not take on sin, but He took on the penalty of sin. By taking on the penalty without the guilt, He healed both the penalty and the guilt. Behold how these things come about. What Nicodemus had said in wonder, How can these things come about? For thus we are healed, not because we deserve it. Behold how these things come about. Now where do you place the little ones for me? You say straight away, They have been wounded by no venom. Take them away from the sight of the serpent lifted up. But if you do not take them away, you call them in need of healing, you confess them envenomed.
CAPUT XIII. — 14. Quicumque in Christum non credit damnatur. Judicium pro damnatione. Infantes dicti fideles. Peccatum originis. Deinde ipse Dominus in eodem sermone ad Nicodemum non audistis quid dixerit, cum eadem lectio hodie legeretur? Qui credit in eum, non judicatur; qui autem non crediderit, jam judicatus est (Joan. III, 9, 18). Et hic quaeris medium homo de medio, et disputas, et attenderis, nec attendis : Qui credit in eum, non judicatur; qui autem non crediderit, jam judicatus est. Quid est autem, Jam judicatus est? Damnatus est. Nam judicium pro damnatione plerumque poni nostis : Scripturae testes sunt; maxime illo uno testimonio apertissimo, cui nemo est qui contradicat. De resurrectione cum ageret Dominus, Qui bene fecerunt, inquit, in resurrectionem vitae; qui male egerunt, in resurrectionem judicii (Id. V, 29) : utique judicium pro damnatione posuit. Et tu aliter audes disserere aut credere? Qui non credit, jam judicatus est. Alio loco : Qui credit in Filium, habet vitam aeternam : quam tu parvulis promittebas non baptizatis. Qui credit in Filium, habet vitam aeternam. Sed habet, inquit, et qui non credit parvulus, quamvis non habeat regnum Dei. Sed vide quod sequitur : Qui autem incredulus est Filio, non habet vitam; sed ira Dei manet super eum (Joan. III, 36). Ubi ponis parvulos baptizatos? Profecto in numero credentium. Nam ideo et consuetudine Ecclesiae antiqua, canonica, fundatissima, parvuli baptizati fideles vocantur. Et sic de his quaerimus : Iste infans christianus est? Respondetur : Christianus. Catechumenus, an fidelis? Fidelis; utique a fide, fides a credendo. Inter credentes igitur baptizatos parvulos numerabis : nec judicare ullo modo aliter audebis, si non vis esse apertus haereticus. Ergo ideo habent vitam aeternam : quia qui credit in Filium, habet vitam aeternam.
Chapter XIII. — 14. Whoever does not believe in Christ is condemned. Judgement in place of condemnation. Infants called believers. The sin of origin. Next, did you not hear what the Lord Himself said in the same discourse to Nicodemus, when this same reading was read today? He who believes in Him is not judged; but he who has not believed has already been judged (John 3:9, 18). And here you seek a middle, a man of the middle, and you dispute, and you are heeded, and you do not heed: He who believes in Him is not judged; but he who has not believed has already been judged. But what is, He has already been judged? He has been condemned. For you know that judgement is very often used in place of condemnation: the Scriptures are witnesses; above all by that one most open testimony, which there is no one who contradicts. When the Lord was treating of the resurrection, He said, Those who have done well, unto the resurrection of life; those who have done evil, unto the resurrection of judgement (ibid. 5:29): certainly He used judgement in place of condemnation. And do you dare to argue or to believe otherwise? He who does not believe has already been judged. In another place: He who believes in the Son has eternal life: which you were promising to unbaptized little ones. He who believes in the Son has eternal life. But, he says, even the little one who does not believe has it, although he does not have the kingdom of God. But see what follows: But he who is unbelieving towards the Son does not have life; but the wrath of God remains upon him (John 3:36). Where do you place baptized little ones? Surely among the number of believers. For this is why, by the ancient, canonical, most firmly founded custom of the Church, baptized little ones are called believers. And thus we ask about them: Is this infant a Christian? The answer is given: A Christian. A catechumen, or a believer? A believer; that is, from faith, and faith from believing. You will therefore number baptized little ones among believers: nor will you dare to judge otherwise in any way, if you do not wish to be an open heretic. Therefore they have eternal life for this reason: because he who believes in the Son has eternal life.
CAPUT XIV. — Noli eis sine ista fide, et sine isto sacramento hujus fidei, promittere vitam aeternam. Qui autem incredulus est Filio, et qui non credit in Filium, non habet vitam, sed ira Dei manet super eum.
Chapter XIV. — Do not promise them eternal life without this faith, and without this sacrament of this faith. But he who is unbelieving towards the Son, and he who does not believe in the Son, does not have life, but the wrath of God remains upon him.
Editors' notes and page, col. 1343
Page
- running head: 1343 S. AUGUSTINI EPIS[cut off at image edge]
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: column begins with "tum," apparently the end of a word broken from the previous column, set as printed, not rendered in English; "Ut de peccato" followed by a faint mark read as comma, unsure; "attenderis" read as printed, possibly for "attendis", unsure; reference "(Joan. III, 9, 18)" set as printed; margin letters not visible in the images; right-hand column (1344) partly visible, not set
Non dixit, Veniet super eum; sed, manet super eum. Respexit originem, cum ait, Ira Dei manet super eum. Quam respiciens et Apostolus dixit, Fuimus et nos aliquando natura filii irae (Ephes. II, 3). Non accusamus naturam. Naturae auctor Deus est. A Deo bona est instituta natura: sed per malam voluntatem a serpente vitiata est. Ideo quod fuit in Adam culpae, non naturae, nobis propagatis factum est jam naturae. Ab hoc vitio naturae, cum quo nascitur homo, non liberat nisi qui natus est sine vitio. Ab hac carne peccati non liberat nisi ille qui natus est sine peccato per similitudinem carnis peccati. Ab hoc veneno serpentis non liberat nisi exaltatio serpentis. Quid ad haec dicis? Satisne hoc est?
He did not say, It will come upon him; but, it remains upon him. He looked back to the origin when he said, The wrath of God remains upon him. Looking back to this, the Apostle too said, We also were once by nature children of wrath (Eph. 2:3). We do not accuse nature. The author of nature is God. By God nature was established good: but through an evil will it was vitiated by the serpent. Therefore what was in Adam a matter of fault, not of nature, has now become in us, his propagated offspring, a matter of nature. From this vice of nature, with which man is born, none sets free but He Who was born without vice. From this flesh of sin none sets free but He Who was born without sin in the likeness of the flesh of sin. From this venom of the serpent nothing sets free but the lifting up of the serpent. What do you say to these things? Is this enough?
15. Pelagianorum effugium, dum urgentur verbis Apostoli de originali peccato. Non primum peccandi exemplum, sed originis peccatum ibi significatum. Unum aliquid acutissimum, quod ab eis profertur, paululum attendite. Cum coeperint urgeri verbis Apostoli dicentis, Per unum hominem peccatum intravit in mundum, et per peccatum mors; et ita in omnes homines pertransiit, in quo omnes peccaverunt (Rom. V, 12). quae verba nescio quis non intelligat; in quibus verbis nescio utrum quisquam expositorem requirat: conantur respondere, et dicere, ideo dictum hoc ab Apostolo, quia primus peccavit Adam, et qui postea peccaverunt, illum imitando peccaverunt. Hoc quid est aliud, quam conari tenebras aperto lumini offundere? Peccatum per unum hominem intravit, et per peccatum mors; et ita in omnes homines pertransiit, in quo omnes peccaverunt. Propter imitationem dicis, quia primus peccavit Adam.
15. The evasion of the Pelagians, when they are pressed by the words of the Apostle concerning original sin. Not the first example of sinning, but the sin of origin is signified there. Pay attention for a little while to one exceedingly sharp thing that is put forward by them. When they begin to be pressed by the words of the Apostle saying, Through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin death; and so it passed through into all men, in whom all sinned (Rom. 5:12) — words which I do not know who would fail to understand; words for which I do not know whether anyone would require an expositor — they try to reply and to say that this was said by the Apostle because Adam sinned first, and those who sinned afterwards sinned by imitating him. What else is this than trying to pour darkness over open light? Sin entered through one man, and through sin death; and so it passed through into all men, in whom all sinned. You say it is on account of imitation, because Adam sinned first.
CAPUT XV. — Respondeo prorsus: Non primus peccavit Adam. Si primum peccatorem requiris, diabolum vide. Sed humani generis massam volens ostendere Apostolus de origine venenatam, ideo eum posuit unde nati sumus, non eum quem imitati sumus. Dicitur quidem et pater tuus, quem fueris imitatus: Filii mei, inquit, quos iterum parturio (Galat. IV, 19). Qui itidem dicit: Imitatores mei estote (I Cor. IV, 16). Et propter ipsam imitationem dicitur impiis: Vos a patre diabolo estis (Joan. VIII, 44). Nam constat in catholica fide, quod diabolus nec generavit nostram naturam, nec condidit: sola in illo seductio est praecedentis, imitatio consequentis. Denique quomodo dictum est de Adam, In quo omnes peccaverunt; legatur mihi alicubi, Omnes in diabolo peccaverunt. Aliud est illo praecedente et seducente peccare, aliud in illo peccare. Quia secundum propaginem carnis in illo eramus omnes, antequam nati essemus, tanquam in parente, tanquam in radice ibi eramus: sic venenata est ista arbor, ubi eramus. Nam quia ad diabolum, hoc est, principem peccati, et vere primum peccatorem, non pertinet origo, sed imitatio; cum de illo Scriptura loqueretur, Invidia, inquit, diaboli, mors intravit in orbem terrarum: imitantur autem eum, qui sunt ex parte ipsius (Sap. II, 24, 25). Imitando eum fiunt ex parte ipsius. Numquid dictum est, In illo peccaverunt? Cum vero de Adam diceretur, propter orig⟨i⟩nem,
Chapter XV. — I answer outright: Adam did not sin first. If you seek the first sinner, look at the devil. But the Apostle, wishing to show that the mass of the human race was poisoned from its origin, therefore set down him from whom we are born, not him whom we have imitated. He too is indeed called your father whom you have imitated: My children, he says, of whom I am in labour again (Gal. 4:19). The same man likewise says: Be imitators of me (1 Cor. 4:16). And on account of this very imitation it is said to the ungodly: You are of your father the devil (John 8:44). For it is established in the catholic faith that the devil neither begot our nature nor created it: in him there is only the seduction of the one who goes before, and the imitation of the one who follows. Finally, as it was said of Adam, In whom all sinned; let it be read to me anywhere, All sinned in the devil. It is one thing to sin with him going before and seducing, another to sin in him. Because according to the propagation of the flesh we were all in him before we were born, as in a parent, as in a root we were there: thus this tree was poisoned, where we were. For since to the devil, that is, the prince of sin and truly the first sinner, there belongs not origin but imitation; when Scripture was speaking of him, By the envy, it says, of the devil death entered into the world: and they imitate him who are of his part (Wis. 2:24–25). By imitating him they become of his part. Was it said, In him they sinned? But when it was said of Adam, on account of origin,
Editors' notes and page, col. 1344
Page
- running head: [A]UGUSTINI EPISCOPI 1344 (first letter and part of column number cut off at image edge)
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: column ends mid-word "ori-" split at column break; "culpae" ending damaged in print, read as culpae; "quae verba" printed lowercase after period, kept as printed; left column (1343) visible but not set
propter posteritatem, propter propaginem viscerum, In quo omnes, inquit, peccaverunt. Nam si propterea primus constitutus est Adam, quia primus peccavit, tanquam in exemplo sit, non in origine; utquid tam in longinquo, post tam prolixa tempora contra Adam quaeritur Christus? Si omnes peccatores ad Adam propterea pertinent, quia primus peccator; omnes justi debuerunt ad Abel pertinere, quia primus justus. Quare Christus quaeritur? Expergiscere, frater. Quare Christus quaeritur, nisi quia in Adam damnata est generatio, in Christo quaeritur regeneratio?
on account of posterity, on account of the offspring of his loins: In whom, he says, all have sinned. For if Adam was set as first for this reason, that he sinned first, so that he stands as an example, not as an origin, why, so far off, after such long ages, is Christ sought against Adam? If all sinners belong to Adam for this reason, that he was the first sinner, all the just ought to have belonged to Abel, because he was the first just man. Why is Christ sought? Wake up, brother. Why is Christ sought, if not because in Adam the generation is condemned, and in Christ regeneration is sought?
CAPUT XVI. — 16. Pelagianorum objectio contra peccatum originale, Cur de baptizato non justus nascitur. Proinde nemo nos fallat: Scriptura evidens est, auctoritas fundatissima est, fides catholicissima est. Omnis generatus, damnatus: nemo liberatus, nisi regeneratus. Unde et alteri versutiae illorum jam vos instructi respondete, charissimi: quando dicunt, et parvulos turbant, Si de peccatore peccatores nati sunt, quare non de baptizato jam fideli, cui remissa sunt universa peccata, justi nascuntur? Cito respondete: Ideo de baptizato non justus nascitur, quia non eum generat unde regeneratus est, sed unde generatus est. De Christo dictum est, Mortificatus carne, vivificatus spiritu (I Petr. III, 18): sic de homine dici potest, Tabefactus carne, justificatus spiritu. Quod nascitur de carne, caro est. Quaeris ut de justo justus nascatur, cum videas justum esse nisi regeneratum omnino non posse. Nec attendis Domini sententiam, quam tu ipse in ore habes: Si quis non renatus fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu (Joan. III, 6, 5). Puto quia non hoc factum est in concubitu. Miraris quare peccator nascatur de semine justi: non te delectat mirari quare oleaster nascatur de semine olivae? Accipe aliam similitudinem. Justum baptizatum, pone granum purgatum: non attendis, quia de grano purgato frumentum cum palea nascitur, sine qua seminatur. Deinde cum sit in propagine natorum generatio carnalis, in propagine renatorum generatio spiritualis, vis ut de baptizato baptizatus nascatur, cum videas de circumciso non nasci circumcisum? Carnalis est certe ista generatio, et carnalis est circumcisio, et tamen de circumciso non nascitur circumcisus: sic ergo de baptizato non potest nasci baptizatus; quia nemo renatus, antequam natus.
Chapter XVI. — 16. An objection of the Pelagians against original sin: Why a just man is not born of a baptized man. Therefore let no one deceive us: the Scripture is evident, the authority most firmly founded, the faith most catholic. Everyone generated is condemned; no one is set free unless regenerated. Hence, now that you are instructed, dearly beloved, answer also another piece of their cunning, when they say, and disturb the little ones: If sinners are born of a sinner, why are just men not born of a baptized man, already a believer, to whom all sins have been remitted? Answer quickly: A just man is not born of a baptized man for this reason, that he does not beget him from that by which he has been regenerated, but from that by which he was generated. Of Christ it was said, Put to death in the flesh, made alive in the spirit (1 Pet. 3:18); so it can be said of a man, Wasted away in the flesh, justified in the spirit. What is born of the flesh is flesh. You ask that a just man be born of a just man, when you see that no one can be just at all unless regenerated. Nor do you heed the Lord's saying, which you yourself have in your mouth: Unless someone has been reborn of water and the Spirit (John 3:6, 5). I suppose this did not happen in sexual intercourse. You wonder why a sinner is born from the seed of a just man; does it not please you to wonder why a wild olive is born from the seed of an olive? Take another comparison. Put a baptized just man as a cleaned grain: do you not notice that from a cleaned grain wheat is born with chaff, without which it is sown? Then, since in the line of those born there is a carnal generation, and in the line of those reborn a spiritual generation, do you want a baptized man to be born of a baptized man, when you see that a circumcised man is not born of a circumcised one? This generation is certainly carnal, and circumcision is carnal, and yet a circumcised man is not born of a circumcised one; so, then, a baptized man cannot be born of a baptized one, because no one is reborn before he is born.
CAPUT XVII. — 17. Alia eorumdem cavillatio exploditur. Christus nihil prodest non credentibus. Infantibus baptizatis prodest Christus. Infantes baptizati vere credentes aliorum fide. Infantes credunt fide parentum. Aliud eorum quasi acutissimum: sed quid acutum non obtunditur scuto veritatis? Aliud dicunt, videte quale. Si Adam, inquiunt, nocet his qui non peccaverunt; ergo et Christus prodesse debet etiam his qui non crediderunt. Videtis certe quam hoc acutum sit contra veritatem: audite quantum adjuvet veritatem.
Chapter XVII. — 17. Another quibble of the same men is exploded. Christ profits nothing to those who do not believe. Christ profits baptized infants. Baptized infants are truly believers by the faith of others. Infants believe by the faith of their parents. Another argument of theirs, as if most sharp; but what sharp thing is not blunted by the shield of truth? They say something else; see of what kind. If Adam, they say, harms those who have not sinned, then Christ too ought to profit even those who have not believed. You certainly see how sharp this is against the truth; hear how much it helps the truth.
Editors' notes and page, col. 1345
Footnotes
(1) ‹anchor: fides catholicissima est› · call in col 1345
Aliquot Mss., Scripturae evidens est auctoritas, fundatissima est fides, catholicissima est.
Some manuscripts: "The authority of Scripture is plain, the faith is most firmly founded, it is most catholic."
(printed under page 679)
(2) ‹anchor: Tabefactus carne› · call in col 1345
Loco, tabefactus, habetur in Mss., tabificatus.
In place of "tabefactus" ("wasted away"), the manuscripts have "tabificatus" ("made to waste away").
(printed under page 679)
Page
- running head: 1345 SERMO CCXCIV.
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
Qui enim hoc dicit, nihil aliud, nisi Christum nihil prodesse non credentibus. Hoc est verum. Quis non acceptet. Quis non consentiat, quia Christus non credentibus non prodest, credentibus prodest? Sed dic mihi, obsecro te, Parvulis baptizatis Christus aliquid, an nihil prodest? Necesse est ut dicat prodesse: premitur mole matris Ecclesiae. Forte quidem vellent hoc dicere; nam ratiocinationes eorum ad hoc videntur compellere: sed auctoritate reprimuntur Ecclesiae, ne non dicam sputis hominum obruantur, sed ipsorum infantium lacrymis tanquam fluvio pertrahantur. Si enim dixerint, nihil prodesse Christum baptizatis infantibus; nihil aliud dicunt quam, Superfluo baptizantur infantes. Ut autem non superfluo baptizentur, quia hoc dicere non audent, prodesse Christum baptizatis infantibus confitentur.
For he who says this says nothing other than that Christ benefits non-believers nothing. This is true. Who would not accept it? Who would not agree that Christ does not benefit non-believers and does benefit believers? But tell me, I beseech you: does Christ benefit baptized little ones somewhat, or does He benefit them nothing? He must say that He benefits them: he is pressed down by the weight of mother Church. Perhaps indeed they would like to say this, for their reasonings seem to drive them to it; but they are held back by the authority of the Church, lest (I will not say they be overwhelmed by the spitting of men, but) they be swept away by the tears of the infants themselves as by a river. For if they say that Christ benefits baptized infants nothing, they say nothing other than: Infants are baptized superfluously. But so that they may not be baptized superfluously, since they dare not say this, they confess that Christ benefits baptized infants.
CAPUT XVIII. — Si prodest baptizatis, quaero quibus prosit, credentibus, an non credentibus? Eligant quod volunt. Si dixerint, Non credentibus: ubi est ergo quod calumniabaris, quia Christus non credentibus prodesse non potest? Ecce tu confiteris prodesse infantibus, non tamen credentibus. Ad quodlibet prodest: non putas ad vitam aeternam, non putas ad salutem aeternam: ad ipsum regnum coelorum percipiendum utique prodest Christus parvulis baptizatis. Prodest ergo non credentibus? Sed absit, ut ego dicam non credentes infantes. Jam superius disputavi, credit in altero, qui peccavit in altero: dicitur, Credit; et valet, et inter fideles baptizatos computatur. Hoc habet auctoritas matris Ecclesiae, hoc fundatus veritatis obtinet canon: contra hoc robur, contra hunc inexpugnabilem murum quisquis arietat, ipse confringitur. Ergo prodest Christus aliquid infantibus baptizatis; et sicut ego dico, et sicut mecum tota Ecclesia dicit, credentibus prodest, fidelibus prodest: tu quod vis elige. Volo quidem ut quod verius est, eligas; ut nobiscum dicas quia credentibus prodest. Sed si dixeris, Non credentibus prodest; contra te dixisti. Si dixeris, Credentibus prodest; mecum dixisti. Elige, utrum contra te dicas quod falsum est, an mecum dicas quod verum est. Tu enim paulo ante dicebas, Christum non credentibus nihil prodesse, volens efficere quia sic et Adam non peccantibus nihil nocuit, quomodo Christus non credentibus nihil prodest. Ecce jam fateris infantibus non credentibus baptizatis aliquid prodesse Christum. Sed si credentibus dicis, bene dicis, mecum dicis, credunt et infantes.
Chapter XVIII. — If He benefits the baptized, I ask whom He benefits: believers, or non-believers? Let them choose what they will. If they say, Non-believers: where then is your cavil that Christ cannot benefit non-believers? See, you confess that He benefits infants, yet not believers. For whatever end He benefits them (you do not think it is for eternal life, you do not think it is for eternal salvation), at any rate Christ benefits baptized little ones for receiving the very kingdom of heaven. Does He then benefit non-believers? But far be it from me to call infants non-believers. I have already argued above: he believes in another who sinned in another. It is said, He believes; and it avails, and he is counted among the baptized faithful. This the authority of mother Church holds, this the established rule of truth maintains: whoever batters against this strength, against this impregnable wall, is himself shattered. Therefore Christ benefits baptized infants somewhat; and as I say, and as the whole Church says with me, He benefits believers, He benefits the faithful. Choose what you will. I wish indeed that you would choose what is truer, so as to say with us that He benefits believers. But if you say, He benefits non-believers, you have spoken against yourself. If you say, He benefits believers, you have spoken with me. Choose whether to say against yourself what is false, or to say with me what is true. For a little while ago you were saying that Christ benefits non-believers nothing, wishing to establish that, just as Adam harmed those who do not sin in no way, so Christ benefits non-believers in no way. See, now you admit that Christ benefits somewhat baptized infants who do not believe. But if you say He benefits believers, you speak well, you speak with me: infants too believe.
CAPUT XIX. — Unde credunt? Quomodo credunt? Fide parentum. Si fide parentum purgantur, peccato parentum polluti sunt. Corpus mortis in primis parentibus generavit eos peccatores: spiritus vitae in posterioribus parentibus regeneravit eos fideles. Tu das fidem non respondenti, et ego peccatum nihil agenti.
Chapter XIX. — Whence do they believe? How do they believe? By the faith of their parents. If they are cleansed by the faith of their parents, they were polluted by the sin of their parents. The body of death in the first parents begot them sinners; the spirit of life in later parents regenerated them faithful. You ascribe faith to one who does not answer, and I ascribe sin to one who does nothing.
18. Contra peccatum originale perperam citatus Apostolus. Sanctificationis modi multi. Sancti, inquit, de sanctis nasci debuerunt: quia dixit Apostolus, Alioquin
18. The Apostle wrongly cited against original sin. The modes of sanctification are many. Saints, he says, ought to have been born of saints, because the Apostle said, Otherwise
Editors' notes and page, col. 1346
Page
- running head: [cut off at left] O CCXCIV. 1346
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: running head cut off at the left edge, only "O CCXCIV." visible (presumably SERMO CCXCIV.); no marginal letters A B C D visible, the left-edge fragments are line ends of column 1345 and are not set; last word "Alio-" hyphenated across the column break, its letters blurred in the scan and so UNSURE (expected Alioquin); "debuerunt" and "Apostolus" in the last line are blurred in the scan but readable; "Quis non acceptet." is printed with a full stop and set as printed; Google digitization stamp at the foot not set
filii vestri immundi essent; nunc autem sancti sunt (I Cor. VII, 14). Et quomodo hoc accipis? Quomodo intelligis, de fidelibus natum ita sanctum, ut baptizari non debeat? Quomodo libet, accipias istam sanctitatem. Multi enim modi sunt sanctitatis, et multi modi sunt sanctificationis. Non enim omne quod sanctificatur, ad regnum coelorum mittitur. De esca nostra dixit Apostolus, Sanctificatur per verbum Dei et orationem (I Tim. IV, 5). Numquid quia esca nostra sanctificatur, non scimus quo mittatur? Disce ergo esse aliquem modum, et quasi umbraculum quoddam sanctificationis, quod non sufficiat ad perceptionem salutis. Distat, et quid distet, Deo notum est. Tamen cum filio fidelium curratur ad Baptismum; non sic errent parentes, ut putent eum jam fidelem natum. Natum enim possunt dicere, non renatum. Nam ut noveris quomodo intelligas sanctificatos filios fidelium, ut modo non quaeram, quia longum est, modum sanctificationis hujus; ubi et maritum habes infidelem, ibi habes et uxorem fidelem. Sanctificatur, inquit, vir infidelis in uxore, et sanctificatur mulier infidelis in fratre (I Cor. VII, 14). Numquid quia est ibi forte modus aliquis sanctificationis, ut vir infidelis sanctificetur in uxore fideli, ideo jam securitatem debet accipere, quod in regnum coelorum intraturus est, et non baptizandus, non regenerandus, non Christi sanguine redimendus? Quomodo ergo sanctificatur vir infidelis in uxore, et tamen perit, nisi baptizetur: sic filii fidelium, etsi ad quemdam modum sanctificati, pereunt tamen, si non fuerint baptizati.
your children would be unclean; but now they are holy (1 Cor. 7:14). And how do you take this? How do you understand that one born of believers is so holy that he ought not to be baptized? Take this holiness in whatever way you please. For there are many modes of holiness, and many modes of sanctification. For not everything that is sanctified is sent into the kingdom of heaven. Of our food the Apostle said, It is sanctified by the word of God and prayer (1 Tim. 4:5). Just because our food is sanctified, do we not know where it is sent? Learn, then, that there is a certain mode, and as it were a kind of shadow of sanctification, which does not suffice for the receiving of salvation. There is a difference, and what the difference is, is known to God. Nevertheless, let the child of believers be hurried to Baptism; let parents not err so far as to think him already born a believer. For they can call him born, not reborn. For, that you may know how to understand the children of believers as sanctified (not to inquire now into the mode of this sanctification, because it would take long): where you have an unbelieving husband, there you also have a believing wife. The unbelieving husband, he says, is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the brother (1 Cor. 7:14). Just because there is perhaps some mode of sanctification there, such that the unbelieving husband is sanctified in a believing wife, must he therefore now feel secure that he will enter the kingdom of heaven, and is not to be baptized, not to be regenerated, not to be redeemed by the blood of Christ? As, then, the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife and yet perishes unless he is baptized, so the children of believers, although sanctified after a certain mode, nevertheless perish if they have not been baptized.
CAPUT XX. — 19. Cypriani auctoritas pro originali peccato. Rogo vos, ut paululum acquiescatis. Lego tantum. Sanctus Cyprianus est, quem in manus sumpsi, antiquus episcopus Sedis hujus: quid senserit de Baptismo parvulorum, imo quid semper Ecclesiam sensisse monstraverit paululum accipite. Parum est enim quia isti disserunt, et disputant nescio quas impias novitates; et nos conantur arguere, quod aliquid novum dicamus. Ad hoc ergo lego sanctum Cyprianum, ut videatis quomodo sit intellectus canonicus, et catholicus sensus in his verbis quae paulo ante tractavi. Interrogatus est utrum infans baptizari debeat ante octavum diem, quia vetere Lege non licebat circumcidi infantem, nisi octavo die. Quaestio inde erat nata, de die baptizandi: nam de origine peccati nulla erat quaestio; et ideo ex ea re, unde nulla erat quaestio, soluta est exorta quaestio. Sanctus Cyprianus dixit inter caetera, quae superius dixi: « Propter quod neminem putamus a gratia consequenda impediendum esse a lege quae jam statuta est, nec spiritualem circumcisionem impediri carnali circumcisione debere, sed omnem omnino admittendum esse ad gratiam Christi: quando et Petrus in Actibus Apostolorum loquatur et dicat, Deus mihi dixit neminem hominem communem dicendum et immundum (Act. X, 15). Caeterum si homines impedire aliquid ad consecutionem gratiae possit, magis
Chapter XX. — 19. The authority of Cyprian for original sin. I ask you to bear with me a little. I am only reading. It is Saint Cyprian whom I have taken into my hands, a former bishop of this See: hear for a little what he thought about the Baptism of little ones, or rather what he showed the Church always to have thought. For it is not enough for them that they argue and dispute I know not what impious novelties; they also try to accuse us of saying something new. For this purpose, then, I read Saint Cyprian, that you may see what the canonical understanding and the catholic sense is in these words which I treated a little while ago. He was asked whether an infant ought to be baptized before the eighth day, because under the old Law it was not permitted to circumcise an infant except on the eighth day. The question had arisen from this, concerning the day of baptizing: for about the origin of sin there was no question; and therefore from that matter about which there was no question, the question that had arisen was resolved. Saint Cyprian said, among other things which I mentioned above: « For which reason we think that no one is to be hindered from obtaining grace by the law which has now been established, nor that spiritual circumcision ought to be hindered by carnal circumcision, but that absolutely everyone is to be admitted to the grace of Christ: since Peter too speaks in the Acts of the Apostles and says, God has told me that no man is to be called common and unclean (Acts 10:15). But if anything could hinder men from the obtaining of grace, rather
Editors' notes and page, col. 1347
Footnotes
(1) ‹anchor: esse a lege› · call in col 1347
In Cypriani editis, ea lege.
In the printed editions of Cyprian, "ea lege" ("by that law").
(printed under page 680)
Page
- running head: 1347 AUGUSTINI EPISC[OPI] (cut off at image edge)
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
adultos et provectos et majores natu possint impedire peccata graviora. Porro autem, si etiam gravissimis delictoribus et in Dominum multum ante peccantibus, cum postea crediderint, remissa peccatorum datur, et a Baptismo atque gratia nemo prohibetur: quanto magis prohiberi non debet infans, qui recens natus nihil peccavit, nisi quod secundum Adam carnaliter natus contagium mortis antiquae prima nativitate contraxit; qui ad remissam peccatorum accipiendam hoc ipso facilius accedit, quod illi dimittuntur, non propria, sed aliena peccata » (Epist. 59, ad Fidum)? Videte quemadmodum de hac re nihil dubitans, solvit illam unde dubitabatur. Hoc de fundamento Ecclesiae sumpsit, ad confirmandum lapidem nutantem.
adults and those advanced and older in years could graver sins hinder. Moreover, if even to the most grievous offenders, and to those who have previously sinned much against the Lord, remission of sins is given when they afterwards believe, and no one is kept from baptism and grace: how much more ought an infant not to be kept from it, who, newly born, has committed no sin, except that, born carnally according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of the ancient death by his first birth; who for this very reason comes the more easily to receiving remission of sins, because it is not his own sins but another's that are forgiven him » (Ep. 59, to Fidus)? See how, doubting nothing on this matter, he resolved that question about which there was doubt. This he took from the foundation of the Church, to make firm a tottering stone.
CAPUT XXI. — 20. Veritatis hostes quatenus patienter ferendi. Impetremus ergo, si possumus, a fratribus nostris, ne nos insuper appellent haereticos, quod eos talia disputantes nos appellare possimus forsitan, si velimus, nec tamen appellamus. Sustineat eos mater piis visceribus sanandos, portet docendos, ne plangat mortuos. Nimium est quo progrediuntur; multum est, vix ferendum est, magnae patientiae adhuc ferri. Non abutantur hac patientia Ecclesiae, corrigantur, bonum est. Ut amici exhortamur, non ut inimici litigamus. Detrahunt nobis, ferimus: canoni non detrahant, veritati non detrahant; Ecclesiae sanctae pro remissione peccati originalis parvulorum quotidie laboranti non contradicant. Fundata ista res est. Ferendus est disputator errans in aliis quaestionibus non diligenter digestis, nondum plena Ecclesiae auctoritate firmatis; ibi ferendus est error: non tantum progredi debet, ut etiam fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliatur. Non expedit, adhuc forte nostra non est reprehendenda patientia: sed debemus timere ne culpetur etiam negligentia. Sufficiat Charitati vestrae, habete ad illos qui nostis illos, habete cum illis amice, fraterne, placide, amanter, dolenter: quidquid potest faciat pietas; quia postea diligenda non erit impietas. Conversi ad Dominum, etc.
Chapter XXI. — 20. How far the enemies of the truth are to be patiently borne. Let us therefore obtain, if we can, from our brethren that they do not on top of this call us heretics, which we perhaps could call them, since they argue such things, if we wished, and yet we do not call them so. Let the mother sustain them with tender bowels so that they may be healed, carry them so that they may be taught, lest she mourn them dead. It is too much, the point to which they are going; it is much, it is scarcely bearable, it belongs to great patience that they are still borne with. Let them not abuse this patience of the Church; let them be corrected, that is good. As friends we exhort, not as enemies do we quarrel. They disparage us, we bear it: let them not disparage the canon, let them not disparage the truth; let them not contradict the holy Church, which labours daily for the remission of the original sin of little ones. This matter is founded. A disputant who errs is to be borne in other questions not carefully worked out, not yet made firm by the full authority of the Church; there error is to be borne: it ought not to go so far as to try to shake even the very foundation of the Church. It is not expedient; perhaps as yet our patience is not to be blamed: but we ought to fear lest negligence too be found fault with. Let this suffice for your Charity; deal with them, you who know them, deal with them in a friendly, brotherly, gentle, loving, sorrowing way: let piety do whatever it can; for afterwards impiety will not be something to be loved. Turning to the Lord, etc.
Editors' notes and page, col. 1348
Footnotes
(1) ‹anchor: quia postea diligenda› · call in col 1348
Aliquot Mss., postea diligentia. Et quidam, post eam diligentiam.
Some manuscripts have "postea diligentia" ("afterwards ... diligence"), and one has "post eam diligentiam" ("after that diligence").
(printed under page 680)
Page
- running head: [cut at left edge]GUSTINI EPISCOPI 1348
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: the column continues with SERMO CCXCV. (another unit); not set here. Its foot notes (*), (a), (b), printed under page 680, are called in Sermon 295 and belong to that unit (removed here by QA Q1).