Subscribe
to CF
Be
first to know
Read our AAA review
from Catholic Culture
Our Mission
To
bring Jesus Christ; the Way, the Truth and the Life; to all who will follow,
according to scripture and tradition, per the Magisterium
of the Roman Catholic Church.
While you visit!
Listen
to
Radio
For the Sacred
Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary. |
LETTERS OF ST. AUGUSTIN
LETTERS XLV TO LV
(INCLUDING REPLIES TO
QUESTIONS OF JANUARIUS)
LETTER XLV.
A short letter to Paulinus and Therasia repeating the request made in Letter
XLII., and again complaining of the long silence of his friend.
LETTER XLVI. (A.D. 398.)
A letter propounding several cases of conscience.
TO MY BELOVED AND VENERABLE FATHER THE BISHOP AUGUSTIN, PUBLICOLA SENDS GREETING.
It is
written: "Ask thy father, and he will show thee; thy elders, and
they will tell thee." I have therefore judged it right to "seek the
law at the mouth of the priest" in regard to a certain case which I shall
state in this letter, desiring at the same time to be instructed in regard
to several other matters. I have distinguished the several questions by stating
each in a separate paragraph, and I beg you kindly to give an answer to each
in order.
I. In the country of the Arzuges it is customary, as I have heard, for the
barbarians to take an oath, swearing by their false gods, in the presence of
the decurion stationed on the frontier or of the tribune, when they have come
under engagement to carry baggage to any part, or to protect the crops from
depredation; and when the decurion certifies in writing that this oath has
been taken, the owners or farmers of land employ them as watchmen of their
crops; or travellers who have occasion to pass through their country hire them,
as if assured of their now being trustworthy. Now a doubt has arisen in my
mind whether the landowner who thus employs a barbarian, of whose fidelity
he is persuaded in consequence of such an oath, does not make himself and the
crops committed to that man's charge to share the defilement of that sinful
oath; and so also with the traveller who may employ his services. I should
mention, however, that in both cases the barbarian is rewarded for his services
with money. Nevertheless in both transactions there comes in, besides the pecuniary
remuneration, this oath before the decurion or tribune involving mortal sin.
I am concerned as to whether this sin does not defile either him who accepts
the oath of the barbarian, or at least the things which are committed to the
barbarian's keeping. For whatever other terms be in the arrangement, even such
as the payment of gold, and giving of hostages in security, nevertheless this
sinful oath has been a real part of the transaction. Be pleased to resolve
my doubts definitely and positively. For if your answer indicate that you are
in doubt yourself, I may fall into greater perplexity than before.
II. I have also heard that my own land-stewards receive from the barbarians
hired to protect the crops an oath in which they appeal to their false gods.
Does not this oath so defile these crops, that if a Christian uses them or
takes the money realized by their sale, he is himself defiled ? Do answer this.
III. Again,
I have heard from one person that no oath was taken by the barbarian in making
agreement
with my
steward, but another has said to me that such an
oath was taken. Suppose now that the latter statement were false, tell me if
I am bound to forbear from using these crops, or the money obtained for them,
merely because I have heard the statement made, according to the scriptural
rule: "If any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols,
eat not, for his sake that showed it." Is this case parallel to the case
of meat offered to idols; and if it is, what am I to do with the crops, or
with the price of them?
IV. In this case ought I to examine both him who said that no oath was taken
before my steward, and the other who said that the oath was taken, and bring
witnesses to prove which of the two spoke truly, leaving the crops or their
price untouched so long as there is uncertainty in the matter?
V. If the barbarian who swears this sinful oath were to require of the steward
or of the tribune stationed on the frontier, that he, being a Christian, should
give him assurance of his faithfulness to his part of the engagement about
watching the crops, by the same oath which he himself has taken, involving
mortal sin, does the oath pollute only that Christian man? Does it not also
pollute the things regarding which he took the oath ? Or if a pagan who has
authority on the frontier thus give to a barbarian this oath in token of acting
faithfully to him, does he not involve in the defilement of his own sin those
in whose interest he swears? If I send a man to the Arzuges, is it lawful for
him to take from a barbarian that sinful oath? Is not the Christian who takes
such an oath from him also defiled by his sin?
VI. Is it lawful for a Christian to use wheat or beans from the threshing-floor,
wine or oil from the press, if, with his knowledge, some part of what has been
taken thence was offered in sacrifice to a false god?
VII. May a Christian use for any purpose wood which he knows to have been
taken from one of their idols' groves?
VIII. If a Christian buy in the market meat which has not been offered to
idols, and have in his mind conflicting doubts as to whether it has been offered
to idols or not, but eventually adopt the opinion that it was not, does he
sin if he partake of this meat?
IX. If a man does an action good in itself, about which he has some misgivings
as to whether it is good or bad, can it be reckoned as a sin to him if he does
it believing it to be good, although formerly he may have thought it bad?
X. If any one has falsely said that some meat has been offered to idols, and
afterwards confess that it was a falsehood, and this confession is believed,
may a Christian use the meat regarding which he heard that statement, or sell
it, and use the price obtained?
XI. If a Christian on a journey, overpowered by want, having fasted for one,
two, or several days, so that he can no longer endure the privation, should
by chance, when in the last extremity of hunger, and when he sees death close
at hand, find food placed in an idol's temple, where there is no man near him,
and no other food to be found; whether should he die or partake of that food?
XII. If
a Christian is on the point of being killed by a barbarian or a Roman, ought
he to kill
the aggressor
to save his own life ? or ought he even, without
killing the assailant, to drive him back and fight with him, seeing it has
been said, "Resist not evil"?
XIII. May a Christian put a wall for defence against an enemy round his property?
and if some use that wall as a place from which to fight and kill the enemy,
is the Christian the cause of the homicide?
XIV. May a Christian drink at a fountain or well into which anything from
a sacrifice has been cast? May he drink from a well found in a deserted temple?
If there be in a temple where an idol is worshipped a well or fountain which
nothing has defiled, may he draw water thence, and drink of it?
XV. May a Christian use baths in places in which sacrifice is offered to images?
May he use baths which are used by pagans on a feastday, either while they
are there or after they have left?
XVI. May a Christian use the same sedanchair3 as has been used by pagans coming
down from their idols on a feastday, if in that chair they have performed any
part of their idolatrous service, and the Christian is aware of this?
XVII. If a Christian, being the guest of another, has forborne from using
meat set before him, concerning which it was said to him that it had been offered
in sacrifice, but afterwards by some accident finds the same meat for sale
and buys it, or has it presented to him at another man's table, and then eat
of it, without knowing that it is the same, is he guilty of sin?
XVIII. Maya Christian buy and use vegetables or fruit which he knows to have
been brought from the garden of a temple or of the priests of an idol?
That you
may not be put to trouble in searching the Scriptures concerning the oath
of which I have
spoken and
the idols, I resolved to set before you
those texts which, by the Lord's help, I have found; but if you have found
anything better or more to the purpose in Scripture, be so good as let me know.
For example, when Laban said to Jacob, "The God of Abraham and the God
of Nahor judge betwixt us," Scripture does not declare which god is meant.
Again, when Abimelech came to Isaac, and he and those who were with him sware
to Isaac, we are not told what kind of oath it was. As to the idols, Gideon
was commanded by the Lord to make a whole burnt-offering of the bullock which
he killed. And in the book of Joshua the son of Nun, it is said of Jericho
that all the silver, and gold, and brass should be brought into the treasures
of the Lord, and the things found in the accursed city were called sacred.
Also we read in Deuteronomy: "Neither shalt thou bring an abomination
into thine house, lest thou be a cursed thing like it." May the Lord preserve
thee. I salute thee. Pray for me.
LETTER XLVII. (A.D. 398.)
TO THE HONOURABLE PUBLICOLA, MY MUCH BELOVED SON, AUGUSTIN SENDS GREETING
IN THE LORD.
1. Your perplexities have, since I learned them by your letter, become mine
also, not because all those things by which you tell me that you are disturbed,
disturb my mind: but I have been much perplexed, I confess, by the question
how your perplexities were to be removed; especially since you require me to
give a conclusive answer, lest you should fall into greater doubts than you
had before you applied to me to have them resolved. For I see that I cannot
give this, since, though I may write things which appear to me most certain,
if I do not convince you, you must be beyond question more at a loss than before;
and though it is in my power to use arguments which weigh with myself, I may
fail of convincing another by these. However, lest I should refuse the small
service which your love claims, I have resolved after some consideration to
write in reply.
2. One
of your doubts is as to using the services of a man who has guaranteed his
fidelity by swearing
by
his false gods. In this matter I beg you to consider
whether, in the event of a man failing to keep his word after having pledged
himself by such an oath, you would not regard him as guilty of a twofold sin.
For if he kept the engagement which he had confirmed by this oath, he would
be pronounced guilty in this only, that he swore by such deities; but no one
would justly blame him for keeping his engagement. But in the case supposed,
seeing that he both swore by those whom he should not worship, and did, notwithstanding
his promise, what he should not have done, he was guilty of two sins: whence
it is obvious that in using, not for an evil work, but for some good and lawful
end, the service of a man whose fidelity is known to have been confirmed by
an oath in the name of false gods, one participates, not in the sin of swearing
by the false gods, but in the good faith with which he keeps his promise. The
faith which I here speak of as kept is not that on account of which those who
are baptized in Christ are called faithful: that is entirely different and
far removed from the faith desiderated in regard to the arrangements and compacts
of men. Nevertheless it is, beyond all doubt, worse to swear falsely by the
true God than to swear truly by the false gods; for the greater the holiness
of that by which we swear, the greater is the sin of perjury. It is therefore
a different question whether he is not guilty who requires another to pledge
himself by taking an oath in the name of his gods, seeing that he worships
false gods. In answering this question, we may accept as decisive those examples
which you yourself quoted of Laban and of Abimelech (if Abimelech did swear
by his gods, as Laban swore by the god of Nahor). This is, as I have said,
another question, and one which would perchance perplex me, were it not for
those examples of Isaac and Jacob, to which, for aught I know, others might
be added. It may be that some scruple might yet be suggested by the precept
in the New Testament, "Swear not at all;" words which were in my
opinion spoken, not because it is a sin to swear a true oath, but because it
is a heinous sin to forswear oneself: from which crime our Lord would have
us keep at a great distance, when He charged us not to swear at all. I know,
however, that our opinion is different: wherefore it should not be discussed
at present; let us rather treat of that about which you have thought of asking
my advice. On the same ground on which you forbear from swearing yourself,
you may, if such be your opinion, regard it as forbidden to exact an oath from
another, although it is expressly said, Swear not; but I do not remember reading
anywhere in Holy Scripture that we are not to take another's oath. The question
whether we ought to take advantage of the concord which is established between
other parties by their exchange of oaths is entirely different. If we answer
this in the negative, I know not whether we could find any place on earth in
which we could live. For not only on the frontier, but throughout all the provinces,
the security of peace rests on the oaths of barbarians. And from this it would
follow, that not only the crops which are guarded by men who have sworn fidelity
in the name of their false gods, but all things which enjoy the protection
secured by the peace which a similar oath has ratified, are defiled. If this
be admitted by you to be a complete absurdity, dismiss with it your doubts
on the cases which you named.
3. Again,
if from the threshing-floor or wine-press of a Christian anything be taken,
with his
knowledge, to be
offered to false gods, he is guilty in
permitting this to be done, if it be in his power to prevent it. If he finds
that it has been done, or has not the power to prevent it, he uses without
scruple the rest of the grain or wine, as uncontaminated, just as we use fountains
from which we know that water has been taken to be used in idol-worship. The
same principle decides the question about baths. For we have no scruple about
inhaling the air into which we know that the smoke from all the altars and
incense of idolaters ascends. From which it is manifest, that the thing forbidden
is our devoting anything to the honour of the false gods, or appearing to do
this by so acting as to encourage in such worship those who do not know our
mind, although in our heart we despise their idols. And when temples, idols,
groves, etc., are thrown down by permission from the authorities, although
our taking part in this work is a clear proof of our not honouring, but rather
abhorring, these things, we must nevertheless forbear from appropriating any
of them to our own personal and private use; so that it may be manifest that
in overthrowing these we are influenced, not by greed, but by piety. When,
however, the spoils of these places are applied to the benefit of the community
or devoted to the service of God, they are dealt with in the same manner as
the men themselves when they are turned from impiety and sacrilege to the true
religion. We understand this to be the will of God from the examples quoted
by yourself: the grove of the false gods from which He commanded wood to be
taken [by Gideon] for the burnt-offering; and Jericho, of which all the gold,
silver, and brass was to be brought into the Lord's treasury. Hence also the
precept in Deuteronomy: "Thou shalt not desire the silver or gold that
is on them, nor take it unto thee, lest thou be snared therein; for it is an
abomination to the Lord thy God. Neither shalt thou bring an abomination into
thine house, lest thou become a cursed thing like it: but thou shalt utterly
detest it, and thou shalt utterly abhor it; for it is a cursed thing." From
which it appears plainly, that either the appropriation of such spoils to their
own private use was absolutely forbidden, or they were forbidden to carry anything
of that kind into their own houses with the intention of giving to it honour;
for then this would be an abomination and accursed in the sight of God; whereas
the honour impiously given to such idols is, by their public destruction, utterly
abolished.
4. As
to meats offered to idols, I assure you we have no duty beyond observing
what the apostle
taught concerning
them. Study, therefore, his words on the
subject, which, if they were obscure to you, I would explain as well as I could.
He does not sin who, unwittingly, afterwards partakes of food which he formerly
refused because it had been offered to an idol. A kitchen-herb, or any other
fruit of the ground, belongs to Him who created it; for "the earth is
the Lord's, and the fulness thereof," and "every creature of God
is good." But if that which the earth has borne is consecrated or offered
to an idol, then we must reckon it among the things offered to idols. We must
beware lest, in pronouncing that we ought not to eat the fruits of a garden
belonging to an idol-temple, we be involved in the inference that it was wrong
for the apostle to take food in Athens, since that city belonged to Minerva,
and was consecrated to her as the guardian deity. The same answer I would give
as to the well or fountain enclosed in a temple, though my scruples would be
somewhat more awakened if some part of the sacrifices be thrown into the said
well or fountain. But the case is, as I have said before, exactly parallel
to our using of the air which receives the smoke of these sacrifices; or, if
this be thought to make a difference, that the sacrifice, the smoke whereof
mingles with the air, is not offered to the air itself, but to some idol or
false god, whereas sometimes offerings are cast into the water with the intention
of sacrificing to the waters themselves, it is enough to say that the same
principle would preclude us from using the light of the sun, because wicked
men continually worship that luminary wherever they are tolerated in doing
so. Sacrifices are offered to the winds, which we nevertheless use for our
convenience, although they seem, as it were, to inhale and swallow greedily
the smoke of these sacrifices. If any one be in doubt regarding meat, whether
it has been offered to an idol or not, and the fact be that it has not, when
he eats that meat under the impression that it has not been offered to an idol,
he by no means does wrong; because neither in fact, nor now in his judgment,
is it food offered to an idol, although he formerly thought it was. For surely
it is lawful to correct false impressions by others that are true. But if any
one believes that to be good which is evil, and acts accordingly, he sins in
entertaining that belief; and these are all sins of ignorance, in which one
thinks that to be right which it is wrong for him to do.
5. As
to killing others in order to defend one's own life, I do not approve of
this, unless one happen
to
be a soldier or public functionary acting, not
for himself, but in defence of others or of the city in which he resides, if
he act according to the commission lawfully given him, and in the manner becoming
his office. When, however, men are prevented, by being alarmed, from doing
wrong, it may be said that a real service is done to themselves. The precept, "Resist
not evil," was given to prevent us from taking pleasure in revenge, in
which the mind is gratified by the sufferings of others, but not to make us
neglect the duty of restraining men from sin. From this it follows that one
is not guilty of homicide, because he has put up a wall round his estate, if
any one is killed by the wall falling upon him when he is throwing it down.
For a Christian is not guilty of homicide though his ox may gore or his horse
kick a man, so that he dies. On such a principle, the oxen of a Christian should
have no horns, and his horses no hoofs, and his dogs no teeth. On such a principle,
when the Apostle Paul took care to inform the chief captain that an ambush
was laid for him by certain desperadoes, and received in consequence an armed
escort, if the villains who plotted his death had thrown themselves on the
weapons of the soldiers, Paul would have had to acknowledge the shedding of
their blood as a crime with which he was chargeable. God forbid that we should
be blamed for accidents which, without our desire, happen to others through
things done by us or found in our possession, which are in themselves good
and lawful. In that event, we ought to have no iron implements for the house
or the field, lest some one should by them lose his own life or take another's
no tree or tone on our premises, lest some one hang himself; no window in our
house, lest some one throw himself down from it. But why mention more in a
list which must be interminable? For what good and lawful thing is there in
use among men which may not become chargeable with being an instrument of destruction?
6. I have now only to notice (unless I am mistaken) the case which you mentioned
of a Christian on a journey overcome by the extremity of hunger; whether, if
he could find nothing to eat but meat placed in an idol's temple, and there
was no man near to relieve him, it would be better for him to die of starvation
than to take that food for his nourishment? Since in this question it is not
assumed that the food thus found was offered to the idol (for it might have
been left by mistake or designedly by persons who, on a journey, had turned
aside there to take refreshment; or it might have been put there for some other
purpose), I answer briefly thus: Either it is certain that this food was offered
to the idol, or it is certain that it was not, or neither of these things is
known. If it is certain, it is better to reject it with Christian fortitude.
In either of the other alternatives, it may be used for his necessity without
any conscientious scruple.
LETTER XLVIII. (A.D. 398.)
TO MY LORD EUDOXIUS, MY BROTHER AND FELLOW-PRESBYTER, BELOVED AND LONGED FOR,
AND TO THE BRETHREN WHO ARE WITH HIM, AUGUSTIN AND THE BRETHREN WHO ARE HERE
SEND GREETING.
1. When
we reflect upon the undisturbed rest which you enjoy in Christ, we also,
although engaged
in labours manifold
and arduous, find rest with you,
beloved. We are one body under one Head, so that you share our toils, and we
share your repose: for "if one member suffer, all the members suffer with
it ; or if one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it." Therefore
we earnestly exhort and beseech you, by the deep humility and most compassionate
majesty of Christ, to be mindful of us in your holy intercessions; for we believe
you to be more lively and undistracted in prayer than we can be, whose prayers
are often marred and weakened by the darkness and confusion arising from secular
occupations: not that we have these on our own account, but we can scarcely
breathe for the pressure of such duties imposed upon us by men compelling us,
so to speak, to go with them one mile, with whom we are commanded by our Lord
to go farther than they ask. We believe, nevertheless, that He before whom
the sighing of the prisoner comes s will look on us persevering in the ministry
in which He was pleased to put us, with promise of reward, and, by the assistance
of your prayers, will set us free from all distress.
2. We
exhort you in the Lord, brethren, to be stedfast in your purpose, and persevere
to the end;
and if the Church,
your Mother, calls you to active service,
guard against accepting it, on the one hand, with too eager elation of spirit,
or declining it, on the other, under the solicitations of indolence; and obey
God with a lowly heart, submitting yourselves in meekness to Him who governs
you, who will guide the meek in judgment, and will teach them His way. Do not
prefer your own ease to the claims of the Church; for if no good men were willing
to minister to her in her bringing forth of her spiritual children, the beginning
of your own spiritual life would have been impossible. As men must keep the
way carefully in walking between fire and water, so as to be neither burned
nor drowned, so must we order our steps between the pinnacle of pride and the
whirlpool of indolence; as it is written, "declining neither to the right
hand nor to the left." For some, while guarding too anxiously against
being lifted up and raised, as it were, to the dangerous heights on the right
hand, have fallen and been engulphed in the depths on the left. Again, others,
while turning too eagerly from the danger on the left hand of being immersed
in the torpid effeminacy of inaction, are, on the other hand, so destroyed
and consumed by the extravagance of self-conceit, that they vanish into ashes
and smoke. See then, beloved, that in your love of ease you restrain yourselves
from all mere earthly delight, and remember that there is no place where the
fowler who fears lest we fly back to God may not lay snares for us; let us
account him whose captives we once were to be the sworn enemy of all good men;
let us never consider ourselves in possession of perfect peace until iniquity
shall have ceased, and "judgment shall have returned unto righteousness."
3. Moreover,
when you are exerting yourselves with energy and fervour, whatever you do,
whether
labouring diligently
in prayer, fasting, or almsgiving, or
distributing to the poor, or forgiving injuries, "as God also for Christ's
sake hath forgiven us," or subduing evil habits, and chastening the body
and bringing it into subjection, or bearing tribulation, and especially bearing
with one another in love (for what can he bear who is not patient with his
brother?), or guarding against the craft and wiles of the tempter, and by the
shield of faith averting and extinguishing his fiery darts, or "singing
and making melody to the Lord in your hearts," or with voices in harmony
with your hearts; -- whatever you do, I say, "do all to the glory of God," who "worketh
all in all," and be so "fervent in Spirit " that your "soul
may make her boast in the Lord." Such is the course of those who walk
in the "straight way," whose "eyes are ever upon the Lord, for
He shall pluck their feet out of the net." Such a course is neither interrupted
by business, nor benumbed by leisure, neither boisterous nor languid, neither
presumptuous nor desponding, neither reckless nor supine. "These things
do, and the God of peace shall be with you."
4. Let your charity prevent you from accounting me forward in wishing to address
you by letter. I remind you of these things, not because I think you come short
in them, but because I thought that I would be much commended unto God by you,
if, in doing your duty to Him, you do it with a remembrance of my exhortation.
For good report, even before the coming of the brethren Eustasius and Andreas
from you, had brought to us, as they did, the good savour of Christ, which
is yielded by your holy conversation. Of these, Eustasius has gone before us
to that land of rest, on the shore of which beat no rude waves such as those
which encompass your island home, and in which he does not regret Caprera,
for the homely raiment with which it furnished him he wears no more.
LETTER XLIX.
This letter, written to Honoratus, a Donatist bishop, contains nothing on
the Donatist schism which is not already found in Letters XLIII and XLIV.,
or supplied in Letter LIII.
LETTER L. (A.D. 399.)
TO THE MAGISTRATES AND LEADING MEN, OR ELDERS, OF THE COLONY OF SUFFECTUM,
BISHOP AUGUSTIN SENDS GREETING.
Earth reels and heaven trembles at the report of the enormous crime and unprecedented
cruelty which has made your streets and temples run red with blood, and ring
with the shouts of murderers. You have buried the laws of Rome ,in a dishonoured
grave, and trampled in scorn the reverence due to equitable enactments. The
authority of emperors you neither respect nor fear. In your city there has
been shed the innocent blood of sixty of our brethren; and whoever approved
himself most active in the massacre, was rewarded with your applause, and with
a high place in your Council. Come now, let us arrive at the chief pretext
for this outrage. If you say that Hercules belonged to you, by all means we
will make good your loss: we have metals at hand, and there is no lack of stone;
nay, we have several varieties of marble, and a host of artisans. Fear not,
your god is in the hands of his makers, and shall be with all diligence hewn
out and polished and ornamented. We will give in addition some red ochre, to
make him blush in such a way as may well harmonize with your devotions. Or
if you say that the Hercules must be of your own making, we will raise a subscription
in pennies, and buy a god from a workman of your own for you. Only do you at
the same time make restitution to us; and as your god Hercules is given back
to you, let the lives of the many men whom your violence has destroyed be given
back to us.
LETTER LI. (A.D. 399 on 400.)
An invitation to Crispinus, Donatist bishop at Calama, to discuss the whole
question of the Donatist schism. (No salutation at the beginning of the letter.)
1. I have adopted this plan in regard to the heading of this letter, because
your party are offended by the humility which I have shown in the salutations
prefixed to others. I might be supposed to have done it as an insult to you,
were it not that I trust that you will do the same in your reply to me. Why
should I say much regarding your promise at Carthage, and my urgency to have
it fulfilled? Let the manner in which we then acted to each other be forgotten
with the past, lest it should obstruct future conference. Now, unless I am
mistaken, there is, by the Lord's help, no obstacle in the way: we are both
in Numidia, and located at no great distance from each other. I have heard
it said that you are still willing to examine, in debate with me, the question
which separates us from communion with each other. See how promptly all ambiguities
may be cleared away: send me an answer to this letter if you please, and perhaps
that may be enough, not only for us, but for those also who desire to hear
us; or if it is not, let us exchange letters again and again until the discussion
is exhausted. For what greater benefit could be secured to us by the comparative
nearness of the towns which we inhabit? I have resolved to debate with you
in no other way than by letters, in order both to prevent anything that is
said from escaping from our memory, and to secure that others interested in
the question, but unable to be present at a debate, may not forfeit the instruction.
You are accustomed, not with any intention of falsehood, but by mistake, to
reproach us with charges such as may suit your purpose, concerning past transactions,
which we repudiate as untrue. Therefore, if you please, let us weigh the question
in the light of the present, and let the past alone. You are doubtless aware
that in the Jewish dispensation the sin of idolatry was committed by the people,
and once the book of the prophet of God was burned by a defiant king; the punishment
of the sin of schism would not have been more severe than that with which these
two were visited, had not the guilt of it been greater. You remember, of course,
how the earth opening swallowed up alive the leaders of a schism, and fire
from heaven breaking forth destroyed their accomplices. Neither the making
and worshipping of an idol, nor the burning of the Holy Book, was deemed worthy
of such punishment.
2. You
are wont to reproach us with a crime, not proved against us, indeed, though
proved beyond question
against some of your own party, -- the crime,
namely, of yielding up, through fear of persecution, the Scriptures to be burned.
Let me ask, therefore, why you have received back men whom you condemned for
the crime of schism by the "unerring voice of your plenary Council" (I
quote from the record), and replaced them in the same episcopal sees as they
were in at the time when you passed sentence against them? I refer to Felicianus
of Musti and Praetextatus of Assuri.4 These were not, as you would have the
ignorant believe, included among those to whom your Council appointed and intimated
a certain time, after the lapse of which, if they had not returned to your
communion, the sentence would become final; but they were included among the
others whom you condemned, without delay, on the day on which you gave to some,
as I have said, a respite. I can prove this, if you deny it. Your own Council
is witness. We have also the proconsular Acts, in which you have not once,
but often, affirmed this. Provide, therefore, some other line of defence if
you can, lest, denying what I can prove, you cause loss of time. If, then,
Felicianus and Praetextatus were innocent, why were they thus condemned ? If
they were guilty, why were they thus restored? If you prove them to have been
innocent, can you object to our believing that it was possible for innocent
men, falsely charged with being traditors, to be condemned by a much smaller
number of your predecessors, if it is found possible for innocent men, falsely
charged with being schismatics, to be condemned by three hundred and ten of
their successors, whose decision is magniloquently described as proceeding
from "the unerring voice of a plenary Council"? If, however, you
prove them to have been justly condemned, what can you plead in defence of
their being restored to office in the same episcopal sees, unless, magnifying
the importance and benefit of peace, you maintain that even such things as
these should be tolerated in order to preserve unbroken the I bond of unity
? Would to God that you would urge this plea, not with the lips only, but with
the whole heart! You could not fail then to perceive that no calumnies whatever
could justify the breaking up of the peace of Christ throughout the world,
if it is lawful in Africa for men, once condemned for impious schism, to be
restored to the same office which they held, rather than break up the peace
of Donatus and his party.
3. Again, you are wont to reproach us with persecuting you by the help of
the civil power. In regard to this, I do not draw an argument either from the
demerit involved in the enormity of so great an impiety, nor from the Christian
meekness moderating the severity of our measures. I take up this position:
if this be a crime, why have you harshly persecuted the Maximianists by the
help of judges appointed by those emperors whose spiritual birth by the gospel
was due to our Church ? Why have you driven them, by the din of controversy,
the authority of edicts, and the violence of soldiery, from those buildings
for worship which they possessed, and in which they were when they seceded
from you? The wrongs endured by them in that struggle in every place are attested
by the existing traces of events so recent. Documents declare the orders given.
The deeds done are notorious throughout regions in which also the sacred memory
of your leader Optatus is mentioned with honour.
4. Again, you are wont to say that we have not the baptism of Christ, and
that beyond your communion it is not to be found. On this I would enter into
a more lengthened argument; but in dealing with you this is not necessary,
seeing that, along with Felicianus and Praetextatus, you admitted also the
baptism of the Maximianists as valid. For all whom these bishops baptized so
long as they were in communion with Maximianus, while you were doing your utmost
in a protracted contest in the civil courts to expel these very men [Felicianus
and Praetextatus] from their churches, as the Acts testify, -- all those, I
say, whom they baptized during that time, they now have in fellowship with
them and with you; and though these were baptized by them when excommunicated
and in the guilt of schism, not only in cases of extremity through dangerous
sickness, but also at the Easter services, in the large number of churches
belonging to their cities, and in these important cities themselves, -- in
the case of none of them has the rite of baptism been repeated. And I wish
you could prove that those whom Felicianus and Praetextatus had baptized, as
it were, in vain, when they were excommunicated and in the guilt of schism,
were satisfactorily baptized again by them when they were restored. For if
the renewal of baptism was necessary for the people, the renewal of ordination
was not less necessary for the bishops. For they had forfeited their episcopal
office by leaving you, if they could not baptize beyond your communion; because,
if they had not forfeited their episcopal office by leaving you, they could
still baptize. But if they had forfeited their episcopal office, they should
have received ordination when they returned, so that what they had lost might
be restored. Let not this, however, alarm you. As it is certain that they returned
with the same standing as bishops with which they had gone forth from you,
so is it also certain that they brought back with themselves to your communion,
without any repetition of their baptism, all those whom they had baptized in
the schism of Maximianus.
5. How
can we weep enough when we see the baptism of the Maximianists acknowledged
by you, and the
baptism
of the Church universal despised? Whether it was with
or without hearing their defence, whether it was justly or unjustly, that you
condemned Felicianus and Praetextatus, I do not ask; but tell me what bishop
of the Corinthian Church ever defended himself at your bar, or received sentence
from you? or what bishop of the Galatians has done so, or of the Ephesians,
Colossians, Philippians, Thessalonians, or of any of the other cities included
in the promise: "All the kindreds of the nations shall worship before
Thee " Yet you accept the baptism of the former, while that of the latter
is despised; whereas baptism belongs neither to the one nor to the other, but
to Him of whom it was said: "This same is He that baptizeth with the Holy
Ghost." I do not, however, dwell on this in the meantime: take notice
of the things which are beside us -- behold what might make an impression even
on the blind! Where do we find the baptism which you acknowledge? With those,
forsooth, whom you have condemned, but not with those who were never even tried
at your bar! -- with those who were denounced by name, and cast forth from
you for the crime of schism, but not with those who, unknown to you, and dwelling
in remote lands, never were accused or condemned by you ! --with those who
are but a fraction of the inhabitants of a fragment of Africa, but not with
those from whose country the gospel first came to Africa ! Why should I add
to your burden? Let me have an answer to these things. Look to the charge made
by your Council against the Maximianists as guilty of impious schism: look
to the persecutions by the civil courts to which you appealed against them:
look to the fact that you restored some of them without re-ordination, and
accepted their baptism as valid: and answer, if you can, whether it is in your
power to hide, even from the ignorant, the question why you have separated
yourselves from the whole world, in a schism much more heinous than that which
you boast of having condemned in the Maximianists? May the peace of Christ
triumph in your heart! Then all shall be weld.
LETTER LII.
This letter to his kinsman Severinus, exhorting him to withdraw from the Donatists,
contains no new argument.
LETTER LIII. (A.D. 400.)
TO GENEROSUS, OUR MOST LOVED AND HONOURABLE BROTHER, FORTUNATUS ALYPIUS AND
AUGUSTIN SEND GREETING IN THE LORD.
CHAP.
I. -- 1. Since you were pleased to acquaint us with the letter sent to you
by a Donatist presbyter,
although,
with the spirit of a true Catholic,
you regarded it with contempt, nevertheless, to aid you in seeking his welfare
if his folly be not incurable, we beg you to forward to him the following reply.
He wrote that an angel had enjoined him to declare to you the episcopal succession
of the Christianity of your town; to you, forsooth, who hold the Christianity
not of your own town only, nor of Africa only, but of the whole world, the
Christianity which has been published, and is now published to all nations.
This proves that they think it a small matter that they themselves are not
ashamed of being cut off, and are taking no measures, while they may, to be
engrafted anew; they are not content unless they do their utmost to cut others
off, and bring them to share their own fate, as withered branches fit for the
flames. Wherefore, even if you had yourself been visited by that angel whom
he affirms to have appeared to him, -- a statement which we regard as a cunning
fiction; and if the angel had said to you the very words which he, on the warrant
of the alleged command, repeated to you, -- even in that case it would have
been your duty to remember the words of the apostle: "Though we, or an
angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that we have preached
unto you, let him be accursed." For to you it was proclaimed by the voice
of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, that His "gospel shall be preached unto
all nations, and then shall the end come." To you it has moreover been
proclaimed by the writings of the prophets and of the apostles, that the promises
were given to Abraham and to his seed, which is Christ? when God said unto
him: "In thy seed shall all nations of the earth be blessed." Having
then such promises, if an angel from heaven were to say to thee, "Let
go the Christianity of the whole earth, and cling to the faction of Donatus,
the episcopal succession of which is set forth in a letter of their bishop
in your town," he ought to be accursed in your estimation; because he
would be endeavouring to cut you off from the whole Church, and thrust you
into a small party, and make you forfeit your interest in the promises of God.
2. For
if the lineal succession of bishops is to be taken into account, with how
much more certainty and
benefit to the Church do we reckon back till we
reach Peter himself, to whom, as bearing in a figure the whole Church, the
Lord said: "Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against it !" The successor of Peter was Linus, and
his successors in unbroken continuity were these: -- Clement, Anacletus, Evaristus,
Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Iginus, Anicetus, Pius, Soter, Eleutherius,
Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus, Urbanus, Pontianus, Antherus, Fabianus, Cornelius,
Lucius, Stephanus, Xystus, Dionysius, Felix, Eutychianus, Gaius, Marcellinus,
Marcellus, Eusebius, Miltiades, Sylvester, Marcus, Julius, Liberius, Damasus,
and Siricius, whose successor is the present Bishop Anastasius. In this order
of succession no Donatist bishop is found. But, reversing the natural course
of things, the Donatists sent to Rome from Africa an ordained bishop, who,
putting himself at the head of a few Africans in the great metropolis, gave
some notoriety to the name of "mountain men," or Cutzupits, by which
they were known.
3. Now,
even although some traditor had in the course of these centuries, through
inadvertence,
obtained a place
in that order of bishops, reaching from
Peter himself to Anastasius, who now occupies that see, -- this fact would
do no harm to the Church and to Christians having no share in the guilt of
another; for the Lord, providing against such a case, says, concerning officers
in the Church who are wicked: "All whatsoever they bid you observe, that
observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not." Thus
the stability of the hope of the faithful is secured, inasmuch as being fixed,
not in man, but in the Lord, it never can be swept away by the raging of impious
schism; whereas they themselves are swept away who read in the. Holy Scriptures
the names of churches to which the apostles wrote, and in which they have no
bishop. For what could more clearly prove their perversity and their folly,
than their saying to their clergy, when they read these letters, "Peace
be with thee," at the very time that they are themselves disjoined from
the peace of those churches to which the letters were originally written?
CHAP.
II. -- 4. Lest, however, he should congratulate himself too much on the succession
of bishops
in Constantina,
your own city, read to him the records
of proceedings before Munatius Felix, the resident Flamen [heathen priest],
who was governor of your city in the consulship of Diocletian for the eighth
time, and Maximian for the seventh, on the eleventh day before the calends
of June. By these records it is proved that the bishop Paulus was a traditor;
the fact being that Sylvanus was then one of his sub-deacons, and, along with
him, produced and surrendered certain things belonging to the Lord's house,
which had been most carefully concealed, namely a box and a lamp of silver,
upon seeing which a certain Victor is reported to have said, "You would
have been put to death if you had not found these." Your Donatist priest
makes great account of this Sylvanus, this clearly convicted traditor, in the
letter which he writes you, mentioning him as then ordained to the office of
bishop by the Primate Secundus of Tigisis. Let them keep their proud tongues
silent, let them admit the charges which may truly be brought against themselves,
and not utter foolish calumnies against others. Read to him also, if he permits
it, the ecclesiastical records of the proceedings of this same Secundus of
Tigisis in the house of Urbanus Donatus, in which he remitted to God, as judge,
men who confessed themselves to have been traditors -- Donatus of Masculi,
Marinns of Aquae Tibilitanae, Donatus of Calama, with whom as his colleagues,
though they were confessed traditors, he ordained their bishop Sylvanus, of
whose guilt in the same matter I have given the history above. Read to him
also the proceedings before Zenophilus, a man of consular rank, in the course
of which a certain deacon of theirs, Nundinarius, being angry with Sylvanus
for having excommunicated him, brought all these facts into court, proving
them incontestably by authentic documents, and the questioning of witnesses,
and the reading of public records and many letters.
5. There are many other things which you might read in his hearing, if he
is disposed not to dispute angrily, but to listen prudently, such as: the petition
of the Donatists to Constantine, begging him to send from Gaul bishops who
should settle this controversy which divided the African bishops; the Acts
recording what took place in Rome, when the case was taken up and decided by
the bishops whom he sent thither: also you might read in other letters how
the Emperor aforesaid states that they had made a complaint to him against
the decision of their peers -- the bishops, namely, whom he had sent to Rome;
how he appointed other bishops to try the case over again at Arles; how they
appealed from that tribunal also to the Emperor again; how at last he himself
investigated the matter; and how he most emphatically declares that they were
vanquisbed by the innocence of Caecilianus. Let him listen to these things
if he be willing, and he will be silent and desist from plotting against the
truth.
CHAP. III. -- 6. We rely, however, not so much on these documents as on the
Holy Scriptures, wherein a dominion extending to the ends of the earth among
all nations is promised as the heritage of Christ, separated from which by
their sinful schism they reproach us with the crimes which belong to the chaff
in the Lord's threshingfloor, which must be permitted to remain mixed with
the good grain until the end come, until the whole be winnowed in the final
judgment. From which it is manifest that, whether these charges be true or
false, they do not belong to the Lord's wheat, which must grow until the end
of the world throughout the whole field, i.e. the whole earth; as we know,
not by the testimony of a false angel such as confirmed your correspondent
in his error, but from the words of the Lord in the Gospel. And because these
unhappy Donatists have brought the reproach of many false and empty accusations
against Christians who were blameless, but who are throughout the world mingled
with the chaff or tares, i.e. with Christians unworthy of the name, therefore
God has, in righteous retribution, appointed that they should, by their universal
Council, condemn as schismatics the Maximianists, because they bad condemned
Primianus, and baptized while not in communion with Primianus, and rebaptized
those whom he had baptized, and then after a short interval should, under the
coercion of Optatus the minion of Gildo, reinstate in the honours of their
office two of these, the bishops Felicianus of Musti and Praetextatus of Assuri,
and acknowledge the baptism of all whom they, while under sentence and excommunicated,
had baptized. If, therefore, they are not defiled by communion with the men
thus restored again to their office, -- men whom with their own mouth they
had condemned as wicked and impious, and whom they compared to those first
heretics whom the earth swallowed up alive, -- let them at last awake and consider
how great is their blindness and folly in pronouncing the whole world defiled
by unknown crimes of Africans, and the heritage of Christ (which according
to the promise has been shown unto all nations) destroyed through the sins
of these Africans by the maintenance of communion with them; while they refuse
to acknowledge themselves to be destroyed and defiled by communicating with
men whose crimes they had both known and condemned.
7. Wherefore,
since the Apostle Paul says in another place, that even Satan transforms
himself into
an angel
of light, and that therefore it is not strange
that his servants should assume the guise of ministers of righteousness: if
your correspondent did indeed see an angel teaching him error, and desiring
to separate Christians from the Catholic unity, he has met with an angel of
Satan transforming himself into an angel of light. If, however, he has lied
to you, and has seen no such vision, he is himself a servant of Satan, assuming
the guise of a minister of righteousness. And yet, if he be not incorrigibly
obstinate and perverse, he may, by considering all the things now stated, be
delivered both from misleading others, and from being himself misled. For,
embracing the opportunity which you have given, we have met him without any
rancour, remembering in regard to him the words of the apostle: "The servant
of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient;
in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will
give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; and that they may recover
themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his
will." If, therefore, we have said anything severe, let him know that
it arises not from the bitterness of controversy, but from love vehemently
desiring his return to the right path. May you live safe in Christ, most beloved
and honourable brother!
LETTER LIV.
Styled also Book I. of Replies to Questions of Januarius.
(A.D. 400.)
TO HIS BELOVED SON JANUARIUS, AUGUSTIN SENDS GREETING IN THE LORD.
CHAP.
I. -- 1. In regard to the questions which you have asked me, I would like
to have known what
your own
answers would have been; for thus I might
have made my reply in fewer words, and might most easily confirm or correct
your opinions, by approving or amending the answers which you had given. This
I would have greatly preferred. But desiring to answer you at once, I think
it better to write a long letter than incur loss of time. I desire you therefore,
in the first place, to hold fast this as the fundamental principle in the present
discussion, that our Lord Jesus Christ has appointed to us a "light yoke" and
an "easy burden," as He declares in the Gospel : in accordance with
which He has bound His people under the new dispensation together in fellowship
by sacraments, which are in number very few, in observance most easy, and in
significance most excellent, as baptism solemnized in the name of the Trinity,
the communion of His body and blood, and such other things as are prescribed
in the canonical Scriptures, with the exception of those enactments which were
a yoke of bondage to God's ancient people, suited to their state of heart and
to the times of the prophets, and which are found in the five books of Moses.
As to those other things which we hold on the authority, not of Scripture,
but of tradition, and which are observed throughout the whole world, it may
be understood that they are held as approved and instituted either by the apostles
themselves, or by plenary Councils, whose authority in the Church is most useful,
e.g. the annual commemoration, by special solemnities, of the Lord's passion,
resurrection, and ascension, and of the descent of the Holy Spirit from heaven,
and whatever else is in like manner observed by the whole Church wherever it
has been established.
CHAP. II. -- 2. There are other things, however, which are different in different
places and countries: e.g., some fast on Saturday, others do not; some partake
daily of the body and blood of Christ, others receive it on stated days: in
some places no day passes without the sacrifice being offered; in others it
is only on Saturday and the Lord's day, or it may be only on the Lord's day.
In regard to these and all other variable observances which may be met anywhere,
one is at liberty to comply with them or not as he chooses; and there is no
better rule for the wise and serious Christian in this matter, than to conform
to the practice which he finds prevailing in the Church to which it may be
his lot to come. For such a custom, if it is clearly not contrary to the faith
nor to sound morality, is to be held as a thing indifferent, and ought to be
observed for the sake of fellowship with those among whom we live.
3. I think
you may have heard me relate before, what I will nevertheless now mention.
When my mother
followed
me to Milan, she found the Church there not
fasting on Saturday. She began to be troubled, and to hesitate as to what she
should do; upon which I, though not taking a personal interest then in such
things, applied on her behalf to Ambrose, of most blessed memory, for his advice.
He answered that he could not teach me anything but what he himself practised,
because if he knew any better rule, he would observe it himself. When I supposed
that he intended, on the ground of his authority alone, and without supporting
it by any argument, to recommend us to give up fasting on Saturday, he followed
me, and said: "When I visit Rome, I fast on Saturday; when I am here,
I do not fast. On the same principle, do you observe the custom prevailing
in whatever Church you come to, if you desire neither to give offence by your
conduct, nor to find cause of offence in another's." When I reported this
to my mother, she accepted it gladly; and for myself, after frequently reconsidering
his decision, I have always esteemed it as if I had received it by an oracle
from heaven. For often have I perceived, with extreme sorrow, many disquietudes
caused to weak brethren by the contentious pertinacity or superstitious vacillation
of some who, in matters of this kind, which do not admit of final decision
by the authority of Holy Scripture, or by the tradition of the universal Church
or by their manifest good influence on manners raise questions, it may be,
from some crotchet of their own, or from attachment to the custom followed
in one's own country, or from preference for that which one has seen abroad,
supposing that wisdom is increased in proportion to the distance to which men
travel from home, and agitate these questions with such keenness, that they
think all is wrong except what they do themselves.
CHAP.
III. -- 4. Some one may say, "The Eucharist ought not to be taken
every day." You ask, "On what grounds ?" He answers, "Because,
in order that a man may approach worthily to so great a sacrament, he ought
to choose those days upon which he lives in more special purity and self-restraint;
for 'whosoever eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment
to himself.'" Another answers, "Certainly; if the wound inflicted
by sin and the violence of the soul's distemper be such that the use of these
remedies must be put off for a time, every man in this case should be, by the
authority of the bishop, forbidden to approach the altar, and appointed to
do penance, and should be afterwards restored to privileges by the same authority;
for this would be partaking unworthily, if one should partake of it at a time
when he ought to be doing penance; and it is not a matter to be left to one's
own judgment to withdraw himself from the communion of the Church, or restore
himself, as he pleases. If, however, his sins are not so great as to bring
him justly under sentence of excommunication, he ought not to withdraw himself
from the daily use of the Lord's body for the healing of his soul." Perhaps
a third party interposes with a more just decision of the question, reminding
them that the principal thing is to remain united in the peace of Christ, and
that each should be free to do what, according to his belief, he conscientiously
regards as his duty. For neither of them lightly esteems the body and blood
of the Lord; on the contrary, both are contending who shall most highly honour
the sacrament fraught with blessing. There was no controversy between those
two mentioned in the Gospel, Zacchaeus and the Centurion; nor did either of
them think himself better than the other, though, whereas the former received
the Lord joyfully into his house, the latter said, "I am not worthy that
Thou shouldest come under my roof," -- both honouring the Saviour, though
in ways diverse and, as it were, mutually opposed; both miserable through sin,
and both obtaining the mercy they required. We may further borrow an illustration
here, from the fact that the manna given to the ancient people of God tasted
in each man's mouth as he desired that it might. It is the same with this world-sabduing
sacrament in the heart of each Christian. For he that dares not take it every
day, and' he who dares not omit it any day, are both alike moved by a desire
to do it honour. That sacred food will not submit to be despised, as the manna
could not be loathed with impunity. Hence the apostle says that it was unworthily
partaken of by those who did not distinguish between this and all other meats,
by yielding to it the special veneration which was due; for to the words quoted
already, "eateth and drinketh judgment to himself," he has added
these, "not discerning the Lord's body;" and this is apparent from
the whole of that passage in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, if it be
carefully studied.
CHAP.
IV. -- 5. Suppose some foreigner visit a place in which during Lent it is
customary to abstain
from the use
of the bath, and to continue fasting
on Thursday. "I will not fast today," he says. The reason being asked,
he says, "Such is not the custom in my own country." Is not he, by
such conduct, attempting to assert the superiority of his custom over theirs
? For he cannot quote a decisive passage on the subject from the Book of God;
nor can he prove his opinion to be right by the unanimous voice of the universal
Church, wherever spread abroad; nor can he demonstrate that they act contrary
to the faith, and he according to it, or that they are doing what is prejudicial
to sound morality, and he is defending its interests. Those men injure their
own tranquillity and peace by quarrelling on an unnecessary question. I would
rather recommend that, in matters of this kind, each man should, when sojourning
in a country in which he finds a custom different from his own consent to do
as others do. If, on the other hand, a Christian, when travelling abroad in
some region where the people of God are more numerous, and more easily assembled
together, and more zealous in religion, has seen, e.g., the sacrifice twice
offered, both morning and evening, on the Thursday of the last week in Lent,
and therefore, on his coming back to his own country, where it is offered only
at the close of the day, protests against this as wrong and unlawful, because
he has himself seen another custom in another land, this would show a childish
weakness of judgment against which we should guard ourselves, and which we
must bear with in others, but correct in all who are under our influence.
CHAP.
V. -- 6. Observe now to which of these three classes the first question in
your letter is
to be referred.
You ask, "What ought to be done on the
Thursday of the last week of Lent ? Ought we to offer the sacrifice in the
morning, and again after supper, on account of the words in the Gospel, 'Likewise
also . . . after supper' ? Or ought we to fast and offer the sacrifice only
after supper? Or ought we to fast until the offering has been made, and then
take supper as we are accustomed to do ?" I answer, therefore, that if
the authority of Scripture has decided which of these methods is right, there
is no room for doubting that we should do according to that which is written;
and our discussion must be occupied with a question, not of duty, but of interpretation
as to the meaning of the divine institution. In like manner, if the universal
Church follows any one! of these methods, there is no room for doubt as: to
our duty; for it would be the height of arrogant madness to discuss whether
or not we should comply with it. But the question which you propose is not
decided either by Scripture or by universal practice. It must therefore be
referred to the third class -- as pertaining, namely, to things which are different
in different places and countries. Let every man, therefore, conform himself
to the usage prevailing in the Church to which he may come. For none of these
methods is contrary to the Christian faith or the interests of morality, as
favoured by the adoption of one custom more than the other. If this were the
case, that either the faith or sound morality were at stake, it would be necessary
either to change what was done amiss, or to appoint the doing of what had been
neglected. But mere change of custom, even though it may be of advantage in
some respects, unsettles men by reason of the novelty: therefore, if it brings
no advantage, it does much harm by unprofitably disturbing the Church.
7. Let
me add, that it would be a mistake to suppose that the custom prevalent in
many places, of
offering
the sacrifice on that day after partaking of food,
is to be traced to the words, " Likewise after supper," etc. For
the Lord might give the name of supper to what they had received, in already
partaking of His body, so that it was after this that they partook of the cup:
as the apostle says in another place, "When ye come together into one
place, this is not to eat the Lord's Supper," giving to the receiving
of the Eucharist to that extent (i.e. the eating of the bread) the name of
the Lord's Supper.
CHAP.
VI. -- As to the question whether upon that day it is right to partake of
food before either
offering
or partaking of the Eucharist, these words in
the Gospel might go far to decide our minds, "As they were eating, Jesus
took bread and blessed it;" taken in connection with the words in the
preceding context, "When the even was come, He sat down with the twelve:
and as they did eat, He said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall
betray Me." For it was after that that He instituted the sacrament; and
it is clear that when the disciples first received the body and blood of the
Lord, they had not been fasting.
8. Must
we therefore censure the universal Church because the sacrament is everywhere
partaken of by persons
fasting? Nay, verily, for from that time
it pleased the Holy Spirit to appoint, for the honour of so great a sacrament,
that the body of the Lord should take the precedence of all other food entering
the mouth of a Christian; and it is for this reason that the custom referred
to is universally observed. For the fact that the Lord instituted the sacrament
after other food had been partaken of, does not prove that brethren should
come together to partake of that sacrament after having dined or supped, or
imitate those whom the apostle reproved and corrected for not distinguishing
between the Lord's Supper and an ordinary meal. The Saviour, indeed, in order
to commend the depth of that mystery more affectingly to His disciples, was
pleased to impress it on their hearts and memories by making its institution
His last act before going from them to His Passion. And therefore He did not
prescribe the order in which it was to be observed, reserving this to be done
by the apostles, through whom He intended to arrange all things pertaining
to the Churches. Had He appointed that the sacrament should be always partaken
of after other food, I believe that no one would have departed from that practice.
But when the apostle, speaking of this sacrament, says, "Wherefore, my
brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another: and if any man
hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation," he
immediately adds, "and the rest will I set in order when I come." Whence
we are given to understand that, since it was too much for him to prescribe
completely in an epistle the method observed by the universal Church throughout
the world, it was one of the things set in order by him in person, for we find
its observance uniform amid all the variety of other customs.
CHAP. VII. -- 9. There are, indeed, some to whom it has seemed right (and
their view is not unreasonable), that it is lawful for the body and blood of
the Lord to be offered and received after other food has been partaken of,
on one fixed day of the year, the day on which the Lord instituted the Supper,
in order to give special solemnity to the service on that anniversary. I think
that, in this case, it would be more seemly to have it celebrated at such an
hour as would leave it in the power of any who have fasted to attend the service
before the repast which is customary at the ninth hour. Wherefore we neither
compel nor do we dare to forbid any one to break his fast before the Lord's
Supper on that day. I believe, however, that the real ground upon which this
custom rests is, that many, nay, almost all, are accustomed in most places
to use the bath on that day. And because some continue to faust, it is offered
in the morning, for those who take food, because they cannot bear fasting and
the use of the bath at the same time; and in: the evening, for those who have
fasted all day.
10. If you ask me whence originated the custom of using the bath on that day,
nothing occurs to me, when I think of it, as more likely than that it was to
avoid the offence to decency which must have been given at the baptismal font,
if the bodies of those to whom that rite was to be administered were not washed
on some preceding day from the uncleanness consequent upon their strict abstinence
from ablutions during Lent; and that this particular day was chosen for the
purpose because of its being the anniversary of the institution of the Supper.
And this being granted to those who were about to receive baptism, many others
desired to join them in the luxury of a bath, and in relaxation of their fast.
Having discussed these questions to the best of my ability, I exhort you to
observe, in so far as you may be able, what I have laid down, as becomes a
wise and peace-loving son of the Church. The remainder of your questions I
purpose, if the Lord will, to answer at another time.
LETTER LV.
or Book II. of Replies to Questions of Januarius.
(A.D. 400.)
CHAP. I. -- 1. Having read the letter in which you have put me in mind of
my obligation to give answers to the remainder of those questions which you
submitted to me a long time ago, I cannot bear to defer any longer the gratification
of that desire for instruction which it gives me so much pleasure and comfort
to see in you; and although encompassed by an accumulation of engagements,
I have given the first place to the work of supplying you with the answers
desired. I will make no further comment on the contents of your letter, lest
my doing so should prevent me from paying at length what I owe.
2. You
ask, "Wherefore does the anniversary on which we celebrate the
Passion of the Lord not fall, like the day which tradition has handed down
as the day of His birth, on the same day every year?" and you add, "If
the reason of this is connected with the week and the month, what have we to
do with the day of the week or the state of the moon in this solemnity?" The
first thing which you must know and remember here is, that the observance of
the Lord's natal day is not sacramental, but only commemorative of His birth,
and that therefore no more was in this case necessary, than that the return
of the day on which the event took place should be marked by an annual religious
festival. The celebration of an event becomes sacramental in its nature, only
when the commemoration of the event is so ordered that it is understood to
be significant of something which is to be received with reverence as sacred.
Therefore we observe Easter in such a manner as not only to recall the facts
of the death and resurrection of Christ to remembrance, but also to find a
place for all the other things which, in connection with these events, give
evidence as to the import of the sacrament. For since, as the apostle wrote, "He
was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification," a
certain transition from death to life has been consecrated in that Passion
and Resurrection of the Lord. For the word Pascha itself is not, as is commonly
thought, a Greek word: those who are acquainted with both languages affirm
it to be a Hebrew word. It is not derived, therefore, from the Passion, because
of the Greek word <greek>paskein</greek>, signifying to suffer,
but it takes its name from the transition, of which I have spoken, from death
to life; the meaning of the Hebrew word Pascha being, as those who are acquainted
with it assure us, a passing over or transition. To this the Lord Himself designed
to allude, when He said," He that believeth in Me is passed from death
to life." And the same evangelist who records that saying is to be understood
as desiring to give emphatic testimony to this, when, speaking of the Lord
as about to celebrate with His disciples the passover, at which He instituted
the sacramental supper, he says, "When Jesus knew that His hour was come,
that He should depart from this world unto the Father." This passing over
from this mortal life to the other, the immortal life, that is, from death
to life, is set forth in the Passion and Resurrection of the Lord.
CHAP.
II. -- 3. This passing from death to life is meanwhile wrought in us by faith,
which we have for
the
pardon of our sins and the hope of eternal
life, when we love God and our neighbour; "for faith worketh by love," and "the
just shall hive by his faith;" "and hope that is seen is not hope:
for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we
see not, then do we with patience wait for it." According to this faith
and hope and love, by which we have begun to be "under grace," we
are already dead together with Christ, and buried together with Him by baptism
into death; as the apostle hath said, "Our old man is crucified with Him
;" and we have risen with Him, for "He hath raised us up together,
and made us sit with Him in heavenly places." Whence also he gives this
exhortation: "If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which
are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection
on things above, not on things on the earth." In the next words, "For
ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God; when Christ, who is our
life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with Him in glory," he plainly
gives us to understand that our passing in this present time from death to
life by faith is accomplished in the hope of that future final resurrection
and glory, when "this corruptible," that is, this flesh in which
we now groan, "shall put on incorruption, and this mortal shall put on
immortality." For now, indeed, we have by faith "the first-fruits
of the Spirit;" but still we "groan within ourselves, waiting for
the adoption, to wit, the redemption of the body: for we are saved by hope." While
we are in this hope, "the body indeed is dead because of sin, but the
spirit is life because of righteousness." Now mark what follows: "But
if the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He that
raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His
Spirit that dwelleth in you." The whole Church, therefore, while here
in the conditions of pilgrimage and mortality, expects that to be accomplished
in her at the end of the world which has been shown first in the body of our
Lord Jesus Christ, who is "the first-begotten from the dead," seeing
that the body of which He is the Head is none other than the Church.
CHAP.
III. -- 4. Some, indeed, studying the words so frequently used by the apostle,
about our being
dead
with Christ and raised together with Him, and
misunderstanding the sense in which they are used, have thought that the resurrection
is already past, and that no other is to be hoped for at the end of time: "Of
whom," he says, "are Hymenaeus and Philetus; who concerning the truth
have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the
faith of some." The same apostle who thus reproves and testifies against
them, teaches nevertheless that we are risen with Christ. How is the apparent
contradiction to be removed, unless he means that this is accomplished in us
by faith and hope and love, according to the first-fruits of the Spirit? But
because "hope which is seen is not hope," and therefore "if
we hope for that we see not, we do with patience wait for it," it is beyond
question that there remains, as still future, the redemption of the body, in
longing for which we "groan within ourselves." Hence also that saying, "Rejoicing
in hope, patient in tribulation."
5. This
renewal, therefore, of our life is a kind of transition from death to life
which is made first
by
faith, so that we rejoice in hope and are patient
in tribulation, while still "our outward man perisheth, but the inward
man is renewed day by day." It is because of this beginning of a new life,
because of the new man which we are commanded to put on, putting off the old
man, "purging out the old leaven, that we may be a new lump, because Christ
our passover is sacrificed for us;" it is, I say, because of this newness
of life in us, that the first of the months of the year has been appointed
as the season of this solemnity. This very name is given to it, the month Abib,
or beginning of months. Again, the resurrection of the Lord was upon the third
day, because with it the third epoch of the world began. The first Epoch was
before the Law, the second under the Law, the third under Grace, in which there
is now the manifestation of the mystery which was formerly hidden under dark
prophetic sayings. This is accordingly signified also in the part of the month
appointed for the celebration; for, since the number seven is usually employed
in Scripture as a mystical number, indicating perfection of some kind, the
day of the celebration of Easter is within the third week of the month, namely,
between the fourteenth and the twenty-first day.
Chap.
IV. -- 6. There is in this another mystery, and you are not to be distressed
if perhaps it
be not so
readily perceived by you, because of your being less
versed in such studies; nor are you to think me any better than you, because
I learned these things in early years: for the Lord saith, "Let him that
glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth Me, that I am the
Lord." Some men who give attention to such studies, have investigated
many things concerning the numbers and motions of the heavenly bodies. And
those who have done this most ably have found that the waxing and waning of
the moon are due to the turning of its globe, and not to any such actual addition
to or diminution of its substance as is supposed by the foolish Manichaeans,
who say that as a ship is filled, so the moon is filled with a fugitive portion
of the Divine Being, which they, with impious heart and lips, do not hesitate
to believe and to declare to have become mingled with the rulers of darkness,
and contaminated with their pollution. And they account for the waxing of the
moon by saying that it takes place when that lost portion of the Deity, being
purified from contamination by great labours, escaping from the whole world,
and from all foul abominations, is restored to the Deity, who mourns till it
returns; that by this the moon is filled up till the middle of the month, and
that in the latter half of the month this is poured back into the sun as into
another ship. Amid these execrable blasphemies, they have never succeeded in
devising any way of explaining why the moon in the beginning or end of its
brightness shines with its light in the shape of a horn, or why it begins at
the middle of the month to wane, and does not go on full until it pour back
its increase into the sun.
7. Those,
however, to whom I refer have inquired into these things with trustworthy
calculations,
so that they
can not only state the reason of eclipses, both
solar and lunar, but also predict their occurrence long before they take place,
and are able to determine by mathematical computation the precise intervals
at which these must happen, and to state the results in treatises, by reading
and understanding which any others may foretell as well as they the coming
of these eclipses, and find their prediction verified by the event. Such men,
-- and they deserve censure, as Holy Scripture teaches, because "though
they had wisdom enough to measure the periods of this world, they did not much
more easily come," as by humble piety they might have done, "to the
knowledge of its Lord," -- such men, I say, have inferred from the horns
of the moon, which both in waxing and in waning are turned from the sun, either
that the moon is illuminated by the sun, and that the farther it recedes from
the sun the more fully does it lie exposed to its rays on the side which is
visible from the earth; but that the more it approaches the sun, after the
middle of the month, on the other half of its orbit, it becomes more fully
illuminated on the upper part, and less and less open to receive the sun's
rays on the side which is turned to the earth, and seems to us accordingly
to decrease: or, that if the moon has light in itself, it has this light in
the hemisphere on one side only, which side it gradually turns more to the
earth as it recedes from the sun, until it is fully displayed, thereby exhibiting
an apparent increase, not by the addition of what was deficient, but by disclosing
what was already there; and that, in like manner, going towards the sun, the
moon again gradually turns from our view that which had been disclosed, and
so appears to decrease. Whichever of these two theories be correct, this at
least is plain, and is easily discovered by any careful observer, that the
moon does not to our eyes increase except when it is receding from the sun,
nor decrease except when returning towards the sun.
CHAP.
V. -- 8. Now mark what is said in Proverbs: "The wise man is fixed
like the sun; but the fool changes like the moon." And who is the wise
that has no changes, but that Sun of Righteousness of whom it is said, "The
Sun of righteousness has risen upon me," and of which the wicked shall
say, when mourning in the day of judgment that it has not risen upon them, "The
light of righteousness hath not shone upon us, and the sun hath not risen upon
us "? For that sun which is visible to the eye of sense, God makes to
rise upon the evil and the good alike, as He sendeth rain upon the just and
the unjust;9 but apt similitudes are often borrowed from things visible to
explain things invisible. Again, who is the "fool" who "changes
like the moon," if not Adam, in whom all have sinned ? For the soul of
man, receding from the Sun of righteousness, that is to say, from the internal
contemplation of unchangeable truth, turns all its strength towards external
things, and becomes more and more darkened in its deeper and nobler powers;
but when the soul begins to return to that unchangeable wisdom, the more it
draws near to it with pious desire, the more does the outward man perish, but
the inward man is renewed day by day, and all that light of the soul which
was inclining to things that are beneath is turned to the things that are above,
and is thus withdrawn from the things of earth; so that it dies more and more
to this world, and its life is hid with Christ in God.
9. It
is therefore for the worse that the soul is changed when it moves in the
direction of external
things,
and throws aside that which pertains to the
inner life; and to the earth, i.e. to those who mind earthly things, the soul
looks better in such a case, for by them the wicked is commended for his heart's
desire, and the unrighteous is blessed. But it is for the better that the soul
is changed, when it gradually turns away its aims and ambition from earthly
things, which appear important in this world, and directs them to things nobler
and unseen; and to the earth, i.e. to men who mind earthly things, the soul
in such a case seems worse. Hence those wicked men who at last shall in vain
repent of their sins, will say this among other things: "These are the
men whom once we derided and reproached; we in our folly esteemed their way
of life to be madness." Now the Holy Spirit, drawing a comparison from
things visible to things invisible, from things corporeal to spiritual mysteries,
has been pleased to appoint that the feast symbolical of the passing from the
old life to the new, which is signified by the name Pascha, should be observed
between the 14th and 21st days of the month, -- after the 14th, in order that
a twofold illustration of spiritual realities might be gained, both with respect
to the third epoch of the world, which is the reason of its occurrence in the
third week, as I have already said, and with respect to the turning of the
soul from external to internal things, -- a change corresponding to the change
in the moon when on the wane; not later than the 21st, because of the number
7 itself, which is often used to represent the notion of the universe, and
is also applied to the Church on the ground of her likeness to the universe.
CHAP.
VI.-- 10. For this reason the Apostle John writes in the Apocalypse to seven
churches. The Church,
moreover, while it remains under the conditions
of our mortal life in the flesh, is, on account of her liability to change,
spoken of Scripture by the name of the moon; e.g., "They have made ready
their arrows in the quiver, that they may, while the moon is obscured, wound
those who are upright in heart." For before that comes to pass of which
the apostle says, "When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall
ye also appear with Him in glory," the Church seems in the time of her
pilgrimage obscured, groaning under many iniquities; and at such a time, the
snares of those who deceive and lead astray are to be feared, and these are
intended by the word "arrows" in this passage. Again, we have another
instance in Psalm lxxxix.,5 where, because of the faithful witnesses which
she everywhere brings forth on the side of truth, the Church is called "the
moon, a faithful witness in heaven." And when the Psalmist sang of the
Lord's kingdom, he said, "In His days shall be righteousness and abundance
of peace, until the moon be destroyed;" i.e. abundance of peace shall
increase so greatly, until He shall at length take away all the changeableness
incidental to this mortal condition. Then shall death, the last enemy, be destroyed;
and whatever obstacle to the perfection of our peace is due to the infirmity
of our flesh shall be utterly consumed when this corruptible shall have put
on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality. We have another
instance in this, that the walls of the town named Jericho -- which in the
Hebrew tongue is said to signify "moon " -- fell when they had been
compassed for the seventh time by the ark of the covenant borne round the city.
For what else is conveyed by the promise of the coming of the heavenly kingdom,
which was symbolized in the carrying of the ark round Jericho, than that all
the strongholds of this mortal life, i.e. every hope pertaining to this world
which resists the hope of the world to come, must be destroyed, with the soul's
free consent, by the sevenfold gift of the Holy Spirit. Therefore it was, that
when the ark was going round, those walls fell, not by violent assault, but
of themselves. There are, besides these, other passages in Scripture which,
speaking of the moon, impress upon us under that figure the condition of the
Church while here, amid cares and labours, she is a pilgrim under the lot of
mortality, and far from that Jerusalem of which the holy angels are the citizens.
11. These foolish men who refuse to be changed for the better have no reason,
however, to imagine that worship is due to those heavenly luminaries because
a similitude is occasionally borrowed from them for the representation of divine
mysteries; for such are borrowed from every created thing. Nor is there any
reason for our incurring the sentence of condemnation which is pronounced by
the apostle on some who worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator,
who is blessed for ever.' We do not adore sheep or cattle, although Christ
is called both a Lamb,: and by the prophet a young bullock; 3 nor any beast
of prey, though He is called the Lion of the tribe of Judah; 4 nor a stone,
although Christ is called a Rock; s nor Mount Zion, though in it there was
a type of the Church.6 And, in like manner, we do not adore the sun or the
moon, although, in order to convey instruction in holy mysteries, figures of
sacred things are borrowed from these celestial works of the Creator, as they
are also from many of the things which He hath made on earth.
CHAP.
VII.-- 12. We are therefore bound to denounce with abhorrence and contempt
the ravings of the
astrologers,
who, when we find fault with the empty inventions
by which they cast other men down into the delusions where-into they themselves
have fallen, imagine that they answer well when they say, "Why, then,
do you regulate the time of the observance of Easter by calculation of the
positions of the sun and moon?"--as if that with which we find fault was
the arrangements of the heavenly bodies, or the succession of the seasons,
which are appointed by God in His infinite power and goodness, and not their
perversity in abusing, for the support of the most absurd opinions, those things
which God has ordered in perfect wisdom. If the astrologer may on this ground
forbid us from drawing comparisons from the heavenly bodies for the mystical
representation of sacramental realities, then the augurs may with equal reason
prevent the use of these words of Scripture, "Be harmless as doves;" and
the snake-charmers may forbid that other exhortation, "Be wise as serpents; "7
while the play-actors may interfere with our mentioning the harp in the book
of Psalms. Let them therefore say, if they please, that, because similitudes
for the exhibition of the mysteries of God's word are taken from the things
which I have named, we are chargeable either with consulting the omens given
by the flight of birds, or with concocting the poisons of the charmer, or with
taking pleasure in the excesses of the theatre, -- a statement which would
be the clime of absurdity.
13. We
do not forecast the issues of our enterprises by studying the sun and moon,
and the times
of the year
or of the month, lest in the most trying emergencies
of life, we, being dashed against the rocks of a wretched bondage, shall make
shipwreck of our freedom of will; but with 'the most pious devoutness of spirit,
we accept similitudes adapted to the illustration of holy things, which these
heavenly bodies furnish, just as from all other works of creation, the winds,
the sea, the land, birds, fishes, cattle, trees, men, etc., we borrow in our
discourses manifold figures; and in the celebration of sacraments, the very
few things which the comparative liberty of the Christian dispensation has
prescribed, such as water, bread, wine, and oil. Under the bondage, however,
of the ancient dispensation many rites were prescribed, which are made known
to us only for our instruction as to their meaning. We do not now observe years,
and months, and seasons, lest the words of the apostle apply to us, "I
am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon your labour in vain."8. For
he blames those who say, "I will not set out to-day, because it is an
unlucky day, or because the moon is so and so;" or, "I will go to-day,
that things may prosper with me, because the position of the stars is this
or that; I will do no business this month, because a particular star rules
it;" or, "I will do [business, because another star has succeeded
in its place; I will not plant a vineyard this year, 'because it is leap year." No
man of ordinary 'sense would, however, suppose that those men . deserve reproof
for studying the seasons, who say, e.g., "I will not set out to-day, because
a storm has begun;" or, "I will not put to sea, because the winter
is not yet past;" or, "It is time to sow my seed, for the earth has
been saturated with the showers of autumn;" and so on, in regard to any
other natural effects of the motion and moisture of the atmosphere which have
been observed in connection with that consummately ordered revolution of the
heavenly bodies concerning which it was said when they were made, "Let
them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and for years."9 And
in like .manner, whensoever illustrative symbols are borrowed,. for the declaration
of spiritual mysteries, from created things, not only from the heaven and its
orbs, but also from meaner creatures, this is done to give to the doctrine
of salvation an eloquence adapted to raise the affections of those who receive
it from things seen, corporeal and temporal, to things unseen, spiritual and
eternal.
Chap. VIII.--14. None of us gives any consideration to the circumstance that,
at the time at which we observe Easter, the sun is in the Ram, as they call
a certain region of the heavenly bodies, in which the sun is, in fact, found
at the beginning of the months; but whether they, choose to call that part
of the heavens the Ram: or anything else, we have learned this from the Sacred
Scriptures, that God made all the heavenly bodies, and appointed their places
as it pleased Him; and whatever the parts may be into which astronomers divide
the regions set apart and ordained for the different constellations, and whatever
the names by which they distinguish them, the place occupied by the sun in
the first month is that in which the celebration of this sacrament behoved
to find that luminary, because of the illustration of a holy mystery in the
renovation of life, of which I have already spoken sufficiently. If, however,
the name of Ram could be given to that portion of the heavenly bodies because
of some correspondence between their form and the name, the word of God would
not hesitate to borrow from anything of this kind an illustration of a holy
mystery, as it has done not only from other celestial bodies, but also from
terrestrial things, e.g. from Orion and the Pleiades, Mount Zion, Mount Sinai,
and the rivers of which the names are given, Gihon, Pison, Tigris, Euphrates,
and particularly from the river Jordan, which is so often named in the sacred
mysteries.
15. But who can fail to perceive how great is the difference between useful
observations of the heavenly bodies in connection with the weather, such as
farmers or sailors make; or in order to mark the part of the world in which
they are, and the course which they should follow, such as are made by pilots
of ships or men going through I the trackless sandy deserts of southern Africa;
or in order to present some useful doctrine under' a figure borrowed from some
facts concerning heavenly bodies; -- and the vain hallucinations j of men who
observe the heavens not to know the weather, or their course, or to make scientific
calculations, or to find illustrations of spiritual things, but merely to pry
into the future and learn now what fate has decreed?
Chap. IX.-- 16. Let us now direct our minds to observe the reason why, in
the celebration of Easter, care is taken to appoint the day so: that Saturday
precedes it: for this is peculiar to the Christian religion. The Jews keep
the Passover from the 14th to the 21st of the first month, on whatever day
that week begins. But since at the Passover at which the Lord suffered, it
was the case that the Jewish Sabbath came in between His death and His resurrection,
our fathers have judged it right to add this specialty to their celebration
of Easter, both that our feast might be distinguished from the Jewish Passover,
and that succeeding generations might retain in their annual commemoration
of His Passion that which we must believe to have been done for some good reason,
by Him who is before the times, by whom also the times have been made, and
who came in the fulness of the times, and who when He said, Mine hour is not
yet come, had the power of laying down His life and taking it again, and was
therefore waiting for an hour not fixed by blind fate, but suitable to the
holy mystery which He had resolved to commend i to our observation.
17. That which we here hold in faith and hope, and to which by love we labour
to come, is, as I have said above, a certain holy and perpetual rest from the
whole burden of every kind of care; and from this life unto that rest we make
a transition which our Lord Jesus Christ condescended to exemplify and consecrate
in His Passion. This rest, however, is not a slothful inaction, but a certain
ineffable tranquillity caused by work in which there is no painful effort.
For the repose on which one enters at the end of the toils of this life is
of such a nature as consists with lively joy in the active exercises of the
better life. Forasmuch, however, as this activity is exercised in praising
God without bodily toil or mental anxiety, the transition to that activity
is not made through a repose which is to be followed by labour, i.e. a repose
which, at the point where activity begins, ceases to be repose: for in these
exercises there is no return to toil and care; but that which constitutes rest
--namely, exemption from weariness in work and from uncertainty in thought--is
always found in them. Now, since through rest we get back to that original
life which the soul lost by sin, the emblem of this rest is the seventh day
of the week. But that original life itself which is restored to those who return
from their wanderings, and receive in token of welcome the robe which they
had at first,1 is represented by the first day of the week, which we call the
Lord s day. If, in reading Genesis, you search the record of the seven days,
you will find that there was no evening of the seventh day, which signified
that the rest of which it was a type was eternal. The life originally bestowed
was not eternal, because man sinned; but the final rest, of which the seventh
day was an emblem, its eternal, and hence the eighth day also will have eternal
blessedness, because that rest, being eternal, is taken up by the eighth day,
not destoyed by it; for if it were thus destroyed, it would not be eternal.
Accordingly the eighth day, which is the first day of the week, represents
to us that original life, not taken away, but made eternal.
CHAP.
X.- 18. Nevertheless the seventh day was appointed to the Jewish nation as
a day to be observed
by
rest of the body, that it might be a type of sanctification
to which men attain through rest in the Holy Spirit. We do no read of sanctification
in the history given h Genesis of all the earlier days: of the Sabbath alone
it is said that "God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it."'
Now the souls o men, whether good or bad, love rest, but how t attain to that
which they love is to the greater part unknown: and that which bodies seek
for their weight, is precisely what souls seek for their love, namely, a resting-place.
For as, according to its specific gravity, a body descends or rise,, until
it reaches a place where it can rest,-- oil, for example, falling if poured
into the air, but rising if poured into water, --so the soul of man struggles
towards the things which it loves, in order that, by reaching them, it may
rest. There are indeed many things which please the soul through the body,
but its rest in these is not eternal, nor even long continued; and therefore
they rather debase the soul and weigh it down, so as to be a drag upon that
pure imponderability by which it tends towards higher things. When the soul
finds pleasure from itself, it is not yet seeking delight in that which is
unchangeable; and therefore it is still proud, because it is giving to itself
the highest place, whereas God is higher. In such sin the soul is not left
unpunished, for "God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble."2
When, however, the soul delights in God, there it finds the true, sure, and
eternal rest, which in all other objects was sought in vain. Therefore the
admonition is given in the book of Psalms, "Delight thyself in the Lord,
and He shall give thee the desires of thine heart." 3
19. Because,
therefore, "the love of God4 is shed abroad in our hearts
by the Holy Spirit which is given to us," 5 sanctification was associated
with the seventh day, the day in which rest was enjoined. But inasmuch as we
neither are able to do any good work, except as helped by the gift of God,
as the apostle says, "For it is God that worketh in you both to will and
to do of His good pleasure," 6 nor will be able to rest, after all the
good works which engage us in this life, except as sanctified and perfected
by the same gift to eternity; for this reason it .s said of God Himself, that
when He had made all things "very good," He rested "on the seventh
day from all His works which He had made? 7 For He, in so doing, presented
a type of that future rest which He purposed to bestow on us men after our
good works are done; For as in our good works He is said to work in us, by
whose gift we are enabled to work what is good, so in our rest He is said to
rest by whose gift we rest.
CHAP.
XI.-- 20. This, moreover, is the reason why the law of the Sabbath is placed
third among
the three
commandments of the Decalogue which declare our
duty to God (for the other seven relate to our neighbour, that is, to man;
the whole law hanging on these two commandments) .8 The first commandment,
in which we are forbidden to worship any likeness of God made by human contrivance,
we are to understand as referring to the Father: this prohibition being made,
not because God has no image, but because no image of Him but that One which
is the same with Himself, ought to be worshipped; and this One not in His stead,
but along with Him. Then, because a creature is mutable, and therefore it is
said, "The whole creation is subject to vanity," 9 since the nature
of the whole is manifested also in any part of it, lest any one should think
that the Son of God, the Word by whom all things were made, is a creature,
the second commandment is, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy
God in vain." '° And becau