Fulgentius of Ruspe, Letters

those sprung from the will of the flesh and from the will of man draw the sins of others, although they do not yet have their own, so those born of God, if there has been no fault of their own will in them, are sprinkled with no injury of another's iniquity. For as the first birth, by bringing forth, inflicted what the one being born did not do, so the second birth, original sin being washed away, imputes only the offence that lies in the will. In this respect, therefore, we must be set apart from the wicked, in which, having the first-fruits of the Spirit, buried with Christ in baptism, we have risen again. In which also, by the grace of God going before and accompanying, we put off the old man, who is corrupted according to the desires of error, that we may put on the new man, who according to God is created in justice and in the holiness of charity: Through [our] Lord.

LETTER X.

Scarila puts two questions to Fulgentius, one on the Incarnation of the Son of God, the other on the author of the lowly animals.

To the holy and most blessed lord, to be made equal to the apostles in merits, father Fulgentius, bishop, your servant Scarila.

1. The desires of the unskilled greatly long for the skill of your paternity, since it is written: Ask your father, and he will declare to you; your elders, and they will teach you (Deut. 32:7); and since what we cannot understand we desire to know by the teaching of your holiness.

2. When, at the table of your son Eventius, a Christian of the Catholic Church, a conversation arose about the Incarnation of God, one of us asserted this concerning the Incarnation itself: that not God the Father but God the Son put on flesh; and another said: God Himself, who is one in three, deigned to assume flesh, so as to bring to liberty our servitude, in which we were held bound through the transgression of our father Adam.

3. And we desire to know whether God the Father Himself descended and assumed flesh; or whether, He Himself remaining seated, He commanded the Word to assume flesh? For we know that the Word was made flesh, that He might dwell among us; but [we ask whether], between the Word, who is God, and the Father, who is God, the one majesty of both descended to put on flesh, since we read: This is our God, and no other shall be accounted beside Him; afterwards He was seen on earth, and conversed with men (Bar. 3:36–38). And when we brought this testimony forward, he for his part said on the contrary: He said this of the Son, not of God the Father; and I said for the present: Since we are equally ignorant together, let us have recourse to the holy father Fulgentius the bishop, on whom God has deigned to bestow the knowledge of so great a power, that he may show our unskilfulness the way, by laying open the divine Scriptures in plain speech. Hence, commending myself to your holy prayers, I ask by Him who has endowed your holiness with such grace that, as a good father, you would order us to be instructed in what we do not know, and would flood us from that fountain from which all who thirst are filled.

4. And when the conversation was finished, another of us said that flies, fleas and scorpions, or whatever more loathsome

animals as are called gnats, God did not make, but that after the casting down of that unworthy angel, the devil, all these things were made by the devil himself; and when we said that God made all things, and these very good, he said that we ought to consult your holiness on this too, so that you yourself might order satisfaction to be given on it: whether these things were made before the transgression, when God made all things, or after the transgression of Adam. Pray for us, holy lord and most blessed father.

LETTER XI.

Ferrandus the deacon puts two questions to Fulgentius, on the salvation of an Ethiopian catechumen, baptized when he was already out of his mind through the force of illness, and dying without having received the Eucharist.

To the most blessed lord, to be received with all veneration, father Fulgentius, bishop, Ferrandus the deacon [sends] greeting in the Lord.

1. Those who lack earthly means, and are not fed by the continued labour of long work, or by the industry of an honest craft, or perhaps by honest trade, are accustomed, once hunger has shut out shame, to seek their living with sighs and prayers before the doors of the rich, and sometimes even to knock with importunate petition at the most clement ears of noble men: for they know that silence does not profit beggars. But I, who labour under the poverty of a poor wit, and am not permitted, with many cares barking at me, to work for the food of wisdom by daily meditation of the divine reading, being still less able by my own strength, that is, by that of my disputations or thoughts, to search out what is doubtful, explain what is obscure, distinguish and define what is contrary, knock with frequent groans at the door of the heavenly householder. But when, again, I convict myself of being unworthy to have what I wish opened to me so quickly, then I beseech with suppliant voice those whom I see to have received from the innermost recesses of the King's chamber my Lord's money for dispensing, that they deign to console our hunger with at least modest provision. And since, being one of their number, you desire to multiply the gains of the talents entrusted to you, and share without consuming envy the most precious pearl of the heavenly scribe, which as a most faithful merchant you bought by selling all that you had, to be acquired, possessed and enjoyed by all in common, bring forth, I beseech you, excellent steward, from your treasure things new and old together, with which to enrich the needy, feed the hungry, teach the unskilled, and show the doubter what follows.

2. The servant of a certain religious man, young in age, an Ethiopian in colour, brought, I believe, from the furthest parts of a barbarous province, where [men] are darkened by the dry heat of the fiery sun, had not yet been cleansed by the sprinkling of the saving bath, nor whitened by the shining grace of Christ. This man, then, by the diligence of his faithful masters, is handed over to the church to be instructed in the ecclesiastical sacraments; he becomes, according to custom, a catechumen; after some time, nevertheless, as the paschal solemnity approached, he is presented among the competents, enrolled, instructed; and, coming to know and receive all the venerable mysteries of the Catholic religion, after the scrutiny had been solemnly celebrated, he is claimed by exorcism against the devil; whom, as the custom here

required, he professed with constancy that he renounced, being about to hear the Creed. Moreover, pronouncing from memory with a clear voice the very words of the holy Creed in the sight of the faithful people, he received the holy rule of the Lord's Prayer. And now understanding at once both what he was to believe and what he was to pray, he was being prepared for the coming baptism, when suddenly he is seized by violent fevers and thrown into disorder by a growing deadly sickness. The shortness of the days persuaded [us] that he should be put off, or rather kept, to be washed at the font with the others. And why should I dwell on more? The hour longed for by all had come, in which the people of [God's] own possession, buried with its Redeemer through baptism, was to lay down the old life and, renewed, take up the new faith of the resurrection. Then he, being at his last breath, without voice, without movement, without sense, able to answer nothing to the priest's questioning, is brought in the hands of those carrying him; and while we answered for him as for an infant, wholly absent in mind he received baptism, which, dying a little after, he did not know, I think, in this present life that he had received.

3. I ask now whether the taking away of his voice did no harm to the attaining of eternal beatitude. For I greatly fear that the Lord, to whom all things are possible, denied him the power of speaking for this reason, that He judged him unworthy of the benefit of the second birth. For how an age capable of reason could be purified by another's confession, I do not see. Do we not rightly believe that only little ones are saved by the faith of those who present them, whom we know to be condemned only by original iniquity? Divine justice brings this about in wonderful ways, so that in a certain manner, where no malice of one's own, that is, actual malice, is found, one's own will is rightly not required either; but through the abundance of grace salvation is given, through others' believing, to those to whom guilt was ascribed through others' sinning. But this man was living by his own choice: over and above what he had drawn from the root, he had without doubt contracted many vices by his own desire, bound by the chains of very many sins, and to be saved only by a voluntary belief, which in that place of redemption he neither willed nor was able to confess; he who, sensing nothing, was able to will nothing at all. Or perhaps did the past confession of one who knew merit the remission of sins even for one who did not know? But I hesitate to say this, lest someone say to me truly: Then he would have been saved even if he had not come to the dipping of the body itself, since, as you assert, he had merited the merit of expiation through the mysteries already performed.

4. Finally, why should we not baptize the dead too, whom sudden death has often snatched from holy baptism, but whose will and faithful devotion were nevertheless known to all? If I should try to give assent to one answering thus, a great absurdity follows at once: that it would be thought, those mysteries alone sufficing and conferring full salvation, that he received the water of the eternal font not as one to be reborn but as one already reborn. I see that at this point the customary sentence of the canons can be put forward, which orders the sick, if they are not able to answer for themselves, but [others] have spoken testimony to their will at their own peril, to be baptized. Under this definition I think it is rather commanded what the Church ought to do than declared what he receives. Namely, that the minister

of the word may be free from the fault of negligence, not that he may be shown to be a sharer and partaker of justification. Especially since, although I see many moved in this matter, I am often moved still more myself, hesitating over what judgement ought to be held of those who, even though they are lawfully baptized of sound mind, death overtaking them too quickly, are not allowed to eat the flesh of the Lord and drink His blood. For the words of the Saviour are known to the faithful, who says: Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood, you will not have life in you (John 6:53). Hence we ask that you instruct us with a speedy reply: whether it harms, how much it harms, or whether it harms not at all, if someone baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity is defrauded of the sacred food and drink. Deign to answer both questions together, which we believe may be asked with the boldness of charity, and which we suggest will be most useful to many. May our God deign to keep your paternity for our edification, my lord, ever my father.

LETTER XII.

Fulgentius to Ferrandus, answering the questions put to him about the salvation of a dying Ethiopian.

To the venerable lord, greatly to be longed for in the charity of Christ, holy brother and fellow deacon Ferrandus, Fulgentius, servant of the servants of Christ, [sends] greeting in the Lord.

CHAPTER I. — 1. I rejoice, holy brother, that in your heart the flame of charity, which is poured forth through the Holy Spirit, is nourished as grace continually grows: which makes you seek to learn from letters something clear in matters that seem doubtful to many; lest, while ambiguity is held about the very sacrament of salvation, the grace of the Saviour be thought to be given to believers in vain.

2. You say, then, that the servant of a certain religious man, young in age, an Ethiopian in colour, was handed over to the church by the diligence of his faithful masters to be instructed in the ecclesiastical sacraments, and according to custom was made a catechumen. After some time, nevertheless, as the paschal solemnity approached, he was presented among the competents, enrolled, instructed; and, coming to know and receive all the venerable mysteries of the Christian religion, after the solemn scrutiny had been celebrated, he was claimed by exorcism against the devil; whom, as the custom of the Church [of Carthage, in which, by God's favour, you now serve as deacon] required, he professed with constancy that he renounced, being about to hear the Creed. Moreover, pronouncing from memory with a clear voice the words of the holy Creed in the sight of the faithful people, he received the holy rule of the Lord's Prayer. And understanding at once both what he was to believe and what he was to pray, he was being prepared for the coming baptism. You say that he was seized by violent fevers and thrown into disorder by a growing deadly sickness. You add that the shortness of the days persuaded [you] that he should be put off, or rather kept, to be washed at the font with the others. You say too that the hour longed for by all had come, in which the people of [God's] own possession, buried with its Redeemer through baptism, was to put off the old life and, renewed, take up the new faith of the resurrection. Then he, as you say, being at his last breath, without voice, without movement, without sense, able to [answer] nothing

to answer the priest's questioning, is brought in the hands of those carrying him; and while you answered for him as for an infant, wholly absent in mind he received baptism, which, dying a little after, he did not know, so far as you judge, in this present life that he had received.

CHAPTER II. — 3. This narration being completed, you then ask whether the taking away of his voice did him no harm for attaining eternal beatitude. For you testify that you greatly fear lest God, to whom all things are possible, denied him the power of speaking for this reason, that He judged him unworthy of the benefit of the second birth. You say too that you do not see how an age capable of reason could be purified by another's confession, since we rightly believe that only little ones are saved by the faith of those who present them, whom we know to be condemned only by original iniquity, divine justice bringing this about in wonderful ways, so that in a certain manner, where no malice of one's own, that is, actual malice, is found, one's own will is not required either, but through the abundance of grace salvation is given, through others' believing, to those to whom guilt was ascribed through others' sinning. But this man, as you assert, was living by his own choice: over and above what he had drawn from the root, he had without doubt contracted many vices by his own desire, bound by the chains of very many sins, and to be saved only by a voluntary belief, which in that place of redemption he neither willed nor was able to confess, he who, sensing nothing, was able to will nothing at all.

4. To these words of yours you set other things, in fear, by way of question, saying: «Or perhaps did the past confession of one who knew merit the remission of sins even for one who did not know? This, you say, I hesitate to say, lest someone say to me truly: Then he would have been saved even if he had not come to the dipping of the body itself, since, as you assert, he had merited the merit of expiation through the mysteries already performed. Finally, why should we not baptize the dead too, whom sudden death has often snatched from holy baptism [perhaps: snatched before holy baptism], but whose will and faithful devotion were nevertheless known to all?» You then add that «if you should try to give assent to one answering thus, a great absurdity would follow at once: that it would be thought, those mysteries alone sufficing and conferring the fullest salvation, that he received the water of the eternal font not as one to be reborn but as one already reborn.»

5. Finally, lest anything should be thought to have been less inquired into by your most watchful intelligence and most loving solicitude, you add at this point that the customary sentence of the canons can be put forward, which orders the sick, if they have not been able to answer for themselves, but [others] have spoken testimony to their will at their own peril, to be baptized. «Under this definition», you say you think, «it is rather commanded what the Church ought to do than declared what he receives: namely, that the minister of the word may be free from the fault of negligence, not that he may be shown to be a sharer and partaker of justification. Especially since, although, as you say, you see many moved by this matter, you are often moved still more yourself, hesitating over what judgement ought to be held of those who, even though they are lawfully baptized of sound mind, death overtaking them too quickly, are not allowed to eat the flesh of the Lord and drink His blood»: on account, that is, of those «words of the Saviour, known to the faithful, who says: Unless you eat

the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, you will not have life in you (John 6:54).» Then you ask that I instruct you with a speedier reply: whether it harms, how much it harms, or whether it harms not at all, if someone baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity is defrauded of the sacred food and drink. Since, then, charity commands us to answer both together, it is fitting that charity should gladly obey the charity that commands. And we hope that for paying the debt of charity the grace of Him will deign to be present by whom charity itself is inspired.

CHAPTER III. — 6. First, then, we must remember that sentence which the free benevolence of the Saviour promulgated universally for the salvation of the human race. And I mean now that sentence which the Lord Himself willed to cleave to our minds the more tenaciously, inasmuch as He deigned to promulgate it at a later time than all His precepts. For after the resurrection, being about to ascend into heaven in the body, but to remain on earth with His own in His divinity, He is found to have said this to His disciples: Go into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned (Mark 16:15). Rightly did the Lord here foretell that he who believes and is baptized is saved, and showed without doubt that the unbeliever is to be condemned. For in the unbeliever no account was to be taken of a future baptism. For he who does not believe, whether he be baptized or not baptized, will without doubt be condemned.

7. Now this sentence, by which the Lord established and defined that every unbeliever is to be condemned with everlasting punishment, — there is no doubt that by the divine definition not only those whom the end of this life finds strangers to the sacrament of baptism, but also all heretics, are to be condemned. For if the faith which blessed Paul, filled with the divine Spirit, asserts to be one, is assuredly that which is not feigned but true (Eph. 4:5) — since the end of the commandment is charity from a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned (1 Tim. 1:5) — how is he said to believe by whom the truth of the faith is not held? For whatever holds the mind of a believer that is known to be foreign to the truth of the faith must needs be a lie. And the Lord hates all who work iniquity, and will destroy those who speak a lie (Ps. 5:7). For this reason Wisdom too says in Proverbs: For my throat shall meditate truth, and lying lips are abominable before me (Prov. 8:7). They, then, do not receive salvation in baptism who do not hold the truth of the faith in heart and mouth. And therefore, although they may have the form of godliness, which consists in the sacrament of baptism, yet by denying the power of godliness they receive neither life nor salvation. And what remains for such, but the everlasting damnation which a faith not true but feigned will bring forth for them? For in such there is no charity from a pure heart either: since, according to the sentence of blessed Peter (Acts 15:9), the Lord purifies the hearts of His own by faith; and there can be no purity of heart where there is no faith: since it is not to be called faith at all where it is not true. Since, then, where there is charity from

a pure heart, there faith is not feigned but true, and the heart is cleansed not by a feigning of faith but by its truth; it is plain that among heretics, in whom there is not the truth but a feigning of faith, charity from a pure heart is in no way to be found. And how can they have a good conscience, in whom, through unbelief, that prince of wickedness dwells? These men, therefore, unless they are converted and saved by the truth of faith, will be condemned for the crime of unbelief: for they did not love Him in whom they did not believe according to the truth of faith, nor could there be a good conscience in those who, it is established, held fast against the true faith, to the very end of life, a deadly faithlessness.

8. Nor let it trouble anyone that the blessed Apostle nevertheless called it faith, though feigned: for in another place, just as he preached one God, so he preached also one faith. For the blessed Apostle set that down not according to the truth of the thing but according to the opinion of the faithful. For that too which was preached by the false apostles the same apostle both calls a Gospel and affirms is not a Gospel. This is contained in his epistle which was written to the Galatians, in these words: I marvel that you are so soon being transferred from him who called you into the grace of Christ, to another gospel, which is not another (Gal. 1:6). How then is it another gospel, if it is not another, unless it is another according to the error of the faithless, but not another according to the truth of faith? So too faith is feigned by the faithless according to their own opinion, by whom the true faith, which the Holy Spirit bestows, is not possessed. The same blessed apostle also points out a knowledge falsely so named, saying: O Timothy, guard the deposit, avoiding profane novelties of words, and oppositions of knowledge falsely so named (1 Tim. 6:20). And just as that which is called knowledge by a false name is not knowledge, so too the faith which the Spirit does not pour in divinely (another reading: the divine Spirit does not pour in), but which the human spirit feigns for itself, is assuredly not faith; and hence it is called faith according to their opinion, though it is in no way found to be faith. For we also find gods so named in the holy oracles, whom yet the divine oracles themselves wholly testify not to be gods. For it is said in the Psalms: All the gods of the nations are demons (Ps. 95:5). Jeremiah also says: The gods who did not make heaven and earth, let them perish from under heaven (Jer. 10:11). Yet in another place he shows that those very ones whom he calls gods are not gods. For he says: Go round to the island of Kittim, and see; and send to Kedar, and consider diligently, and see whether such things have been done. If a nation has changed its gods, and these are not gods (Jer. 2:10[–11]).

9. Now we find the name of God in the holy Scriptures, so far as occurs to us at present, in four ways. For God is so called according to the truth of nature, in the way in which the holy Trinity alone is the one, true and unchangeable God, who says: See that I am God, and there is no other besides Me (Deut. 32:39); and of whom David says: Who is God but the Lord, or who is God but our God (Ps. 17:32)? This is the one and only God, who alone is God by nature. From this one true God certain persons, that they might be gods, not by nature

had [it], but received [it] by the gift of grace. Of such gods was Moses, to whom that one true God said: Behold, I have made you a god to Pharaoh (Exod. 7:1). Of such also are those of whom it is said: I have said, You are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High (Ps. 81:6). These gods, then, received the same grace that they might be gods as they received that they might become sons of God. For the evangelist says that as many as received Him, to them He gave power to become sons of God, to those who believe in His name; who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, but of God (John 1:12[–13]). To them likewise it is said: I have said, You are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High (Ps. 81:6).

10. These two ways of naming, then, are praiseworthy: the one by which the true God is called [God] by nature; the other, which God has bestowed through grace on those whom He willed; yet they are distinguished from each other by a great difference. For that way in which natural truth is shown in the name of God so declares one God by the very truth of the natural name that it never allows gods to be named within it. Hence it is that, just as the Father alone, or the Son alone, or the Holy Spirit alone is truly called God, so the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit together are truly named not three gods but one God. This that Trinity, the one God, has: that there are indeed three persons, yet there are not three gods; for that Trinity is the one true God. Therefore the Son of God, not only according to the true divinity which He has from the nature of the Father, but also according to the flesh which He truly and by nature has from the body of His mother, is believed and preached by us to be true God. For the eternal divinity of the Son with His full humanity, and that same full humanity of the Son with His eternal divinity, is one person in the Trinity: and He Himself, whole in His divinity and humanity, the only-begotten Son, is with the Father and the Holy Spirit one God. But the other way, because it is not of nature but of grace, therefore admits the name of gods without any perversity of faith; for it contains only the multitude of the adopted, to whom the supreme Trinity, the one true God, gave power to become sons of God. — CHAPTER IV. — In the former way, then, a natural glory is recognized; in the latter, the bounty of grace is found.

11. But the two remaining ways in which God, or some thing or person, is named are found more worthy of blame than of praise. And therefore in each a manifest fault is found, because neither nature nor grace can be present in either of them. For the one is according to the affection of depraved desire, the other according to the opinion of error. For the mind given over to carnal desire makes for itself a god of what it loves above all things. Hence it is that the blessed Apostle declares without hesitation that the belly is the god of certain men who mind earthly things, saying: Whose end is destruction, whose god is the belly, and whose glory is in the shame of those who mind earthly things (Phil. 3:19). Here I think the Apostle put to mind earthly things for to love earthly things. I judge the same sense to be contained in that place too where the said apostle says: If then you have risen with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God: mind the things that are above,

not the things that are upon the earth (Col. 3:1). For, showing that they ought not to mind the things that are upon the earth, he added a little later: Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth: fornication, uncleanness, lust, evil desire, and covetousness, which is the service of idols (ibid., 5). When, then, he commands that our members which are upon the earth be mortified, he is surely ordering that the desire of earthly things be mortified in us. For which reason it is said in another place: And those who are Christ's have crucified their flesh with its vices and desires (Gal. 5:24). To these things he wishes us also to reckon ourselves dead, saying: Reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus (Rom. 6:11). For each one lives to that thing which he loves, and shows himself dead to that thing whose affection he has mortified in himself. They therefore mind earthly things who love earthly things; and they make the belly their god who enslave their heart to a seductive servitude to the delights of gluttony.

12. But the opinion of human error has falsely fashioned for itself the name of God in a twofold way, to its own ruin: and this twin opinion of error claims for itself heretics no less than pagans; while it subjects both these and those to itself, it binds them all together with the various chains of a manifold falsehood. For the pagans, having abandoned the true God, are devoted to the superstition of false gods; but the heretics, holding false opinions about the true God, resist the truth of holy religion. It is plain, therefore, that heretics are bound by the chain of a deadly error, and that those whom the Church endures as stubborn enemies ought not to be called faithful: since it is the guilt of unbelief either to believe false things about the true God or to worship a false god under the name of the true God.

CHAPTER V. — 13. Since, then, we took the beginning of our discussion from that saying of the Lord which lays down that whoever believes and is baptized shall be saved (Mark 16:16), let us believe that boy to have been saved in whom we find that nothing was lacking of the things which belong to the office and the effect of baptism. For the office of the second birth consists in faith and confession, and its effect in regeneration. For as many as received Him, to them He gave power to become sons of God, to those who believe in His name (John 1:12). They believe, therefore, that they may become sons of God; for they receive the grace of faith to this end, that believing they may receive the grace of the sacrament. For it is fitting that, while with the heart one believes unto justice, with the mouth confession should be made unto salvation. And it is plain that, just as the office of belief and confession belongs to the catechumen, so the effect of baptism belongs to the minister; and when confession is brought forth by the former through true faith, it follows that, as the latter dips [him], the grace of the saving mystery is accomplished.

14. This rule we see kept in deed by Saint Philip in the Acts of the Apostles: when he was admonished by the Holy Spirit to preach the Lord Jesus Christ to the eunuch, and they had come together to a certain water, and the eunuch asked, saying: See, here is water; who forbids me to be baptized? (Acts 8:36), he first drew forth the office of confession, so that he might rightly administer to him the effect of holy baptism. Therefore he answered the eunuch:

If you believe with your whole heart, you may (ibid., 37 [Acts 8:37]). And because the eunuch's confession went before, the effect of holy regeneration was thereafter fulfilled in him also through Philip's ministry. By what justice, then, should he who had discharged the office of belief and confession not obtain the effect of holy regeneration? For if one speaks of an order of work and wage, the work lies in faith and confession, the wage in baptism. For each is judged worthy of baptism on this ground, when the merit of faith and confession goes before, to which the sacrament of holy baptism is owed as a wage. And the labourer is worthy of his wage (Luke 10:7). He therefore ought not to be cheated of the wage of baptism who discharged the work of belief and confession with the devotion of heart and mouth given him from God. He certainly did not need to be questioned at the hour of baptism on what he had already confessed in pronouncing the Creed. The voice taken from him, then, did him no harm in attaining eternal blessedness, since for as long as he was able he persevered in the very confession of faith. It was not taken away, nor changed; nor was what he said abolished when he could no longer say it, for as long as he could perceive he did not change his mind.

15. But, “I fear,” you say, “that the Lord, to whom all things are possible, denied him the faculty of speech for this reason, that He judged him unworthy of the benefit of the second birth.” Rather let us recognize there that our Lord did not forget His mercy, in whom, even if He took away the voice, He did not take away life, so that what He had granted him to believe and confess, he might receive while living.

16. But it is doubted “how that age, capable of reason, could be cleansed by another's confession.” Rather it is found cleansed by its own confession; for the confession of others which followed could not then have profited it, had its own not gone before. In the second place, then, the confession of others without doubt profited him, since it did not forestall him against his will, but, following after, came to the aid of one who was failing; and what his enlightened will began in him by believing and confessing, that brotherly charity completed on his behalf.

CHAPTER VI. — We read, then, that the Lord said: Whoever confesses Me before men, I also will confess him before My Father, who is in heaven (Matt. 10:32). Now in this man, as long as he had the faculty of speech, that confession was not lacking. Who then will dare to call that confession unworthy of salvation, which he sees to have been not rejected by perversity of will but overtaken by the necessity of infirmity? For it was the tongue that was weakened, not the conscience that was corrupted; and the Apostle says: But having the same spirit of faith, as it is written: I believed, therefore I have spoken; we too believe, and therefore we also speak (2 Cor. 4:13). He, then, who having received the spirit of faith believed and spoke: since he could then have been without that very Spirit, whom he had received in order to believe, had he denied, when he did not deny he was assuredly not without Him. By the same Spirit, therefore, by which he spoke while believing, he was redeemed while silent: for the second birth is perfected by the same Spirit by whom the second belief is given. Accordingly, since the will to believe and to confess was not lacking to him when well, the necessity of silence did not harm him when sick.

CHAPTER VII. — 17. It is true, moreover, that only little children are we rightly to believe saved by the faith of those who present them, whom we know to be condemned by original iniquity alone, divine justice bringing this about in wondrous ways: so that, in a manner, where no personal, that is actual, wickedness is found, neither is a personal will required; but through the abundance of grace salvation is given, others believing, to those to whom, others sinning, guilt was imputed. But you add that this man lived by his own choice: over and above what he had drawn from the root, he had without doubt contracted many vices by his own desire, bound by the chains of very many sins, and to be saved only by a voluntary belief; whereas at that point of redemption he neither willed nor was able to confess, since, perceiving nothing, he was not able to will anything at all. These, to be sure, dearest brother, are your words, which are contained in that letter which you sent.

18. Accordingly, the nature of original sin must first be considered: which, committed by others, has been propagated into others by the fault of generation. In its abolition, if at any time it is that age in which no confession of its own can be present, salvation is given to little children through others believing and confessing, to whom, through others sinning, guilt was imputed. Wherefore, since in those of an age already using reason a confession of their own is required, for this reason, namely, that they both live and understand, having from life the sin of origin and from understanding the sin of their own action, we therefore rightly say that this man was without doubt saved, because he both believed with understanding and confirmed by his own confession what he believed; and then, though no longer understanding, yet still living, he received the sacrament of holy regeneration. For through the sacrament of holy baptism that life was freed from the bonds of original sin which had been bound by the chains of that same sin. And since so great is the power of holy baptism that, where it finds life in which it may loose that chain of original sin, it washes away by the benefit of the second birth all the things it finds added on top, according to what the Apostle says: For the judgement was from one unto condemnation, but grace from many offences unto justification (Rom. 5:16): we rightly believe him to have been saved in whom neither belief nor the confession of understanding was lacking before baptism, and in whom life remained at the hour of baptism, though in a sick and fevered man. The life, therefore, which contracted original sin, since it gave testimony of its conscience and understanding when it could, received, even when it could not confess, the remission of original sin by the merit of that confession. Above all, the consecration of the unity of the Church came to its aid, by which it came about that the confession rendered in time past, which he could not render at the hour of baptism because of bodily infirmity, he rendered by the help of brotherly charity: so that he was helped by the word of those members to whose fellowship he was to be assigned. And that original sin being remitted, all the sins which he had contracted by his own will,

no one of the faithful doubts were remitted. The past confession of one who knew, therefore, merited the remission of sins even for one who did not know what he was saying; and concerning this let us in no way doubt.

CHAPTER VIII. — 19. Nor ought any suspicion to call our mind back from this judgement, lest anyone should say that he “would have been saved even if he had not come to the very dipping of the body,” since we certainly do not say that he could have been saved by confession alone without the sacrament of baptism. For whoever believes and is baptized shall be saved [Mark 16:16]. That young man, assuredly, because we know that he believed and confessed, we therefore affirm to have been saved through the sacrament of baptism. Had he not been baptized, he would in no way have been saved, not only unknowing, but even knowing. For the way of salvation lay in confession, salvation in baptism. For at that age not only would confession without baptism have profited him nothing, but neither would baptism itself have availed in any way for salvation to one not believing nor confessing. God therefore willed that confession should profit him for this reason, that He kept him in this life until holy regeneration. So the gift of holy regeneration, just as he asked for it because he willed, so God, because He willed, gave.

CHAPTER IX. Why the dead are not baptized. — 20. Now we do not baptize the dead for this reason: because every sin, whether original or actual, since it is common to soul and flesh together, none of them is remitted if the soul is separated from its flesh. For we must all be made manifest before the judgement seat of Christ, so that each may receive the things proper to the body, according as he has done, whether good or evil (2 Cor. 5:10). The soul, therefore, which sinned in the body and did not believe while it was in the body, is by no means saved without the flesh. And hence it receives the evil which it did in the body, not the good, which it did not do when placed in the body. Nor can the flesh be baptized without the soul, since neither can it receive the remission of sins. For a thing which does not live can no more have repentance for sinning than it can sin. How can the sacrament of remission be given where there is no life? Or how should the flesh be baptized for the remission of sins where the soul is not, with which the fellowship of sin clings to it together? Therefore, even if someone had, while living, the will and faithful devotion, yet if he died without the sacrament of baptism, he could not be baptized when dead, for this reason: that the soul, whose was the faithful will and devotion, had departed from that body. This man, therefore, of whom we are now treating, was rightly baptized, because his soul, whose faithful will and devotion were known to all, remained in its flesh until the hour of holy baptism. Those mysteries, then, which are performed in the Church before baptism cause the spiritual man to be conceived, not to be reborn. Hence it is that he will come to salvation whom the second birth brings forth into the light. To that light man is prepared by those mysteries, but is brought through by the sacrament of baptism. This is what I said above: that in those mysteries is the office of salvation, in baptism the

effect of salvation; which surely no onset of infirmity can harm, but only a change of will.

CHAPTER X. — 21. Accordingly, that judgement of the fathers' canons must be held most firmly which orders the sick to be baptized if they are unable to answer for themselves, [provided] others have spoken testimony to their will at their own peril. For the holy Fathers saw that a will is not guilty which is known to be hindered, not changed; and that the sacrament of baptism ought not to be denied where the firmness of the will is known. And in establishing this the holy Fathers indicated both what the Church ought to do and what that man receives. For the Church would not do this if he received no benefit in the doing of it. For since the Apostle testifies that the Church of God is the pillar and foundation of truth, if she has any part in the mysteries of faith where the truth is not firm, she is not in all her mysteries the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15). For whatever firmness is taken from her sacraments must needs be taken from the Church herself. The Church, then, is not truly called the pillar and foundation of truth if she is found infirm in the very chief mystery of human salvation. But since she is truly named by the Apostle the pillar and foundation of truth, whatever is given and received within her, according to the ordinances of the Church herself, in the holy mysteries of human redemption and reconciliation, is given in firm truth and received in firm truth.

22. And that we may in no way reject the general ordinances of holy mother Church, that is, those which the most harmonious assent of all the bishops confirms, it is thus commanded in Proverbs: Hear, my son, the laws of your father, and do not reject the ordinances of your mother (Prov. 1:8). Who then would reckon void of usefulness what he hears from God is in no way to be rejected? If, then, one who is baptized in this way is not saved, there is no guilt if this is neglected: nor will the minister of the word, if he has not done it, be held to the fault of negligence, if he in whom it is done cannot be a sharer in justice. A man is convicted of being guilty of negligence there, where the effect of the work is not despaired of. And just as he is rightly convicted of negligence who does not do what is useful, so in the case of one who spends labour on superfluous things the labour itself is rightly condemned as vain and useless. And if in this matter labour is spent in vain, then without doubt the judgement of the apostle Paul will be vain in which he said: For each will receive his own wage according to his own labour (1 Cor. 3:8): since he was beyond doubt speaking of the ministers of Christ and dispensers of the mysteries of God, as the passage of the same epistle shows. For he had said before: I planted, Apollos watered, but the Lord gave the increase (ibid., 6). And what was Paul's planting and Apollos's watering, if not that Paul planted by preaching the word of salvation, and Apollos watered by ministering the sacrament of baptism? When, then, the Apostle had said: So neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase (ibid., 7), to show that the wage of that planting remains firm, he straightway added: Each will receive his own wage according to his own labour. Showing

moreover that the labour of the divine work cannot be in vain, he speaks thus in another place of the same epistle: Therefore, beloved brethren, be steadfast and immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labour is not in vain in the Lord (1 Cor. 15:58).

23. Now that is a work of God which is so bestowed on each living person that it can profit either the soul or the body of the one who receives it. And those things which profit the soul must needs profit the body also; but not all things which profit the body pertain to the benefit of souls: such as food, drink, clothing and lodging, which are found to profit the soul not of the one who receives but of the one who gives. But the sacrament of baptism is given to man to this end, that the soul may be saved together with the flesh. Assuredly the minister gives it in vain if he does not give it to this end, that he who is baptized may receive the gift of eternal salvation. For the sacrament of redemption is given in vain if the one to whom it is given is not redeemed. But if we attend to a single word of your letter, no doubt on this will remain. For you said that this was defined in the fathers' canons “so that the minister of the word may be free from the fault of negligence.” But how does the minister incur fault in this negligence if by diligence he achieves nothing? For he does not contract the fault of negligence for nothing, but because he did not do what he ought to have done: and he ought to have done it for this reason, that it could have profited had he done it. And he has incurred the fault of negligence for this reason, that he did harm by not doing what would without doubt have profited had he done it. Accordingly, by the fathers' canons, that sick man to whose will the attestation of those near him is not lacking ought without doubt to be baptized for this reason: so that both the minister of the word may be free from the fault of negligence, and he may become a partaker and sharer of justice.

CHAPTER XI. — 24. But none of the faithful ought to be disturbed about those who, though they are lawfully baptized while of sound mind, are, death overtaking them too swiftly, not allowed to eat the flesh of the Lord and drink His blood: on account, namely, of that saying of the Saviour in which He said: Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you will not have life in you (John 6:54). Whoever is able to consider this not only according to the mysteries of the truth but according to the truth of the mystery will see that this is done in the very font of holy regeneration. For what is effected by the sacrament of holy baptism, if not that believers become members of our Lord Jesus Christ and belong to the frame of His body by the unity of the Church? For to them the blessed Apostle says: You are the body of Christ, members of member (1 Cor. 12:27). He shows them to be not only sharers in the sacrifice itself but themselves the holy sacrifice, when he bids them humbly present themselves to God as a living victim, saying: I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercy of God, that you present your bodies a living victim, holy, pleasing to God (Rom. 12:1). Saint Peter too, teaching the same, says: And you, as living stones, are built into spiritual houses, into a holy priesthood, offering spiritual victims acceptable to God through Jesus Christ (1 Pet. 2:5). Hence the blessed Paul

having said in a certain place: The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the loaves which we break, are they not the partaking of the body of the Lord? (1 Cor. 10:16), he straightway added, to show that we ourselves are the true bread and the true body: For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all who partake of the one bread (ibid., 17). Hence in another place he says: One body and one spirit, as you were called in the one hope of your calling (Eph. 4:4). And again: But doing the truth in charity, let us grow up in Him in all things, who is the head, Christ. From whom the whole body, compacted and joined together by every joint of supply, according to the working in the measure of each member, makes the increase of the body to the building up of itself in charity (ibid., 15[–16]). And confirming that we are also the flesh of the Lord, he says: For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ also does the Church: for we are members of His body, and of His bones (Eph. 5:29[–30]). Wherefore, since we, being many, are one bread and one body, each one begins to be a partaker of that one bread when he has begun to be a member of that one body, which in its several members, when in baptism it is joined to Christ the head, is then truly offered to God as a living victim. For by that gift of birth a sacrifice is made just as a temple is made. Teaching this, the blessed Apostle says: Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwells in you? (1 Cor. 3:16). He, then, who is made a member of the body of Christ, how does he not receive what he himself is made? since he is made a true member of that body whose body is the sacrament in the sacrifice. This, then, he is made by the regeneration of holy baptism, which he is to receive from the sacrifice of the altar. We know that the holy Fathers too believed and taught this without hesitation. The blessed Augustine also composed on this matter a very lucid sermon, fit for the edification and instruction of the faithful. I have preferred to append this sermon whole to the letter, since it is not long, and in its very brevity it is full of great instruction and sweetness.

25. “What you see on the altar of God you saw also last night; but what it was, what it meant, of how great a thing it contained the sacrament, you have not yet heard. What you see, then, is bread and a cup; this even your eyes report to you. But what your faith, needing to be instructed, requires is this: the bread is the body of Christ, the cup the blood of Christ. This indeed has been said briefly, which perhaps may suffice for faith; but faith desires instruction. For the prophet says: Unless you believe, you will not understand (Isa. 7:9). You can therefore say to me now: You have commanded us to believe; explain, that we may understand. For such a thought can arise in anyone's mind. Our Lord Jesus Christ: we know whence He took flesh, from the Virgin Mary; as an infant He was suckled, He was nourished, He grew, He was brought to the age of a young man, He suffered persecution from the Jews, He was hung on the wood, He was slain on the wood, He was taken down from the wood, He was buried, on the third day He rose again, on the day He willed He ascended into heaven. Thither He raised His body, whence He is to come to judge the living and the dead. There He is now, seated at