existent; and since, after setting before for what has not been given to it (and from yourself existence and non-existence, you not having what we seek for, this is the lowest have observed that the more a visible ob- form of beauty); and in that which has been ject increases the more it tends towards given to it, let us praise God, because He has existence, while the more it is corrupted bestowed this great good of visible form even the more it tends towards non-existence, why are you at a loss to tell regarding any nature what in it is from God, and what from nothing; seeing that visible form is natural, and corruption against nature? The increase of form leads to existence, and we acknowledge God as supreme existence; the increase of corruption leads to non-existence, and we know that what is non-existent is nothing. Why then, I say, are you at a loss to tell regarding a corruptible nature, when you have both the words nature and corruptible, what is from God, and what from nothing? And why do you inquire for a nature contrary to God, since, if you confess that He is the supreme existence, it follows that non-existence is contrary to Him?1 CHAP. 41.—CORRUPTION IS BY GOD'S PERMIS- 47. You ask, Why does corruption take from nature what God has given to it? It takes nothing but where God permits; and He permits in righteous and well-ordered judgment, according to the degrees of nonintelligent and the deserts of intelligent creatures. The word uttered passes away as an object of sense, and perishes in silence; and yet the coming and going of these passing words make our speech, and the regular intervals of silence give pleasing and appropriate distinction; and so it is with temporal natures which have this lowest form of beauty, that transition gives them being, and the death of what they give birth to gives them individuality. And if our sense and memory could rightly take in the order and proportions of this beauty, it would so please us, that we should not dare to give the name of corruptions to those imperfections which give rise to the distinction. And when distress comes to us through their peculiar beauty, by the loss of beloved temporal things passing away, we both pay the penalty of our sins, and are exhorted to set our affection on eternal things. on the lowest degree of beauty. And let us not cleave as lovers to this beauty, but as praisers of God let us rise above it; and from this superior position let us pronounce judg ment on it, instead of so being bound up in it as to be judged along with it. And let us hasten on to that good which has no motion in space or advancement in time, from which all natures in space and time receive their sensible being and their form. To see this good let us purify our heart by faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, who says, "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.” * For the eyes needed in order to see this good are not those with which we see the light spread through space, which has part in one place and part in another, instead of being all in every place. The sight and the discernment we are to purify is that by which we see, as far as is allowed in this life, what is just, what is pious, what is the beauty of wisdom. He who sees these things, values them far above the fullness of all regions in space, and finds that the vision of these things requires not the extension of his perception through distances in space, but its invigoration by an immaterial influence.3 CHAP. 43. CONCLUSION. 49. And as this vision is greatly hindered by those fancies which are originated by the carnal sense, and are retained and modified by the imagination, let us abhor this heresy which has been led by faith in its fancies to represent the divine substance as extended and diffused through space, even through infinite space, and to cut short one side so as to make room for evil,-not being able to perceive that evil is not nature, but against nature; and to beautify this very evil with such visible appearance, and forms, and consistency of parts prevailing in its several natures, not being able to conceive of any nature without those good things, that the evils found fault with in it are buried under a countless abundance of good things. Here let us close this part of the treatise. -EXHORTATION TO THE CHIEF GOOD. The other absurdities of Manichæus will be 42/EX CHAP. 42 48. Let us, then, not seek in this beauty exposed in what follows, by the permission 1 [We have already encountered in the treatise Concerning two Souls, substantially the same course of argumentation here pursued. The doctrine of the negativity of evil may be said to have been fundamental with Augustin, and he uses it very effectually against Manichæan dualism.-A. H. N.] and help of God." 2 Matt. v. 8. 3 [The Neo-Flatonic quality of this section cannot escape the attention of the philosophical student.--A. H. N.] 4 ide Preface. ST. AUGUSTIN: REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICHEAN. [CONTRA FAUSTUM MANICHÆUM]. A.D. 400. TRANSLATED BY REV. RICHARD STOTHERT, M.A., BOMBAY. CONTENTS OF REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICHÆAN. PAGE BOOK I. Who Faustus was. Faustus polemical treatise, and Augustin's remarks thereon. BOOK II. Faustus claims to believe the gospel, yet refuses to accept the genealogies. Augustin demurs. BOOK III. Faustus objects to the incarnation of God on the ground that the evangelists are at variance with each other, and that incarnation is unsuitable to Deity. Augustin attempts to remove the difficulties. BOOK IV. Faustus's reasons for rejecting the O. T., and Augustin's animadversions thereon. BOOK V. Faustus seeks to show that the Manichæans and not the Catholics are consistent believers in the gospel, by comparing Manichæan and Catholic obedience to the precepts of the gospel. Augustin exposes the hypocrisy of the Manichæans and praises the asceticism of the Catholics. BOOK VI. Faustus avows his disbelief in the O. T., and his neglect of its precepts, and accuses Catholics of inconsistency in neglecting its ordinances, while claiming to accept it. Augustin explains the relation of the OT. to the N. BOOK VII. The genealogical question is again taken up and argued on both sides. BOOK VIII. Faustus maintains that to hold to the O. T. after the giving of the N., is putting new cloth on an old garment. Augustin further explains the relation of the O. T. to the N., and reproaches the Manichæans with carnality. BOOK IX. Faustus argues wat if the apostles born under the old covenant could lawfully depart from it, much more can he, a Gentile. Augustin explains the relation of Jews and Gentiles alike to the gospel. BOOK X. 155 150 159 161 162 167 174 175 175 Faustus insists that the O. T. promises are radically different from those of the N. difference, but maintains that the moral precepts are the same in both. Augustin admits a 176 BOOK XI. Faustus quetes passages to show that the Apostle Paul abandoned belief in the incarnation, to which he earlier hela. Augustin shows that the apostle was consistent with himself in the utterances quoted. BOOK XII. Faustus denies that the prophets predicted Christ. Augustin expounds the types of Christ in the O. T. Faustus asserts that even if the O. T. could be shown to contain predictions, it would be of interest BOOK XIV. Faustus abhors Moses for cursing Christ. Augustin expounds the doctrine of the suffering Saviour. BOOK XV. Faustus rejects the O. T. because it leaves no room for Christ. Christ the one bridegroom suffices for his bride, the Church. Augustin reproves the Manichæans for claiming to be the bride of Christ. BOOK XVI. Faustus willing to believe not only that the Jewish but that all Gentile prophets wrote of Christ, if proved, Faustus rejects Christ's declaration that he came not to destroy, but to fulfill, as found only in Matthew, 177 183 199 207 212 219 234 BOOK XVIII. The relation of Christ to prophecy, continued. BOOK XIX. PAGE 237 Faustus is willing to admit that Christ may have said that he came not to destroy the law and the prophets, but to fulfill them; but if he did, it was to pacify the Jews and in a modified sense. Augustin replies, and still further elaborates the Catholic view of prophecy and its fulfillment. BOOK XX. Faustus repels the charge of sun-worship, and maintains that while the Manichæans believe that God's power dwells in the sun, and His wisdom in the moon, they yet worship one Deity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They are not a schism.of the Gentiles, nor a sect. Augustin emphasizes the charge of polytheism, and goes into an elaborate comparison of Manichæan and pagan mythology. BOOK XXI. Faustus denies that Manichæans believe in two gods. Hyle no god. Augustin discusses at large the doctrine of God and Hyle, and fixes the charge of dualism upon the Manichæans. 239 252 264 BOOK XXII. Faustus states his objections to the morality of the law and the prophets, and Augustin seeks by the application of the type and the allegory to explain away the moral difficulties of the O. T. 272 BOOK XXIII. Faustus recurs to the genealogical difficulty, and insists that even according to Matthew Jesus was not Son of God until his baptism. Augustin sets forth the Catholic view of the relation of the divine and the human in the person of Christ. BOOK XXIV. Faustus explains the Manichæan denial that man was made by God as applying to the fleshly man not to the spiritual. Augustin elucidates the apostle Paul's contrasts between flesh and spirit, so as to exclude the Manichæan view. BOOK XXV. Faustus ridicules the orthodox claim to believe in the infinity of God by caricaturing the anthropomorphic representations of the O. T. Augustin despairs of being able to induce the Manichæans to adopt right views of the infinitude of God so long as they regard the soul and God as extended in space. BOOK XXVI. Faustus insists that Jesus might have died though not born, by the exercise of divine power, yet he rejects birth and death alike. Augustin maintains that there are some things that even God cannot do, one of which is to die. He refutes the docetism of the Manichæans. 313 316 319 320 BOOK XXVII. Faustus warns against pressing too far the argument, that if Jesus was not born he cannot have suffered. 324 BOOK XXVIII. Faustus recurs to the genealogy and insists upon examining it as regards its consistency with itself. Augustin takes his stand on Scripture authority and maintains that Matthew's statements as to the birth of Christ must be accepted as final. 324 BOOK XXIX. 326 Faustus seeks to justify docetism. Augustin insists that there is nothing disgraceful in being born. Faustus denies that Paul's prophecy about those that should forbid to marry, abstain from meats, etc.. BOOK XXXI. The Scripture passage, "To the pure all things are pure, but to the impure and defiled is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience are defiled," is discussed from both points of view, Faustus objecting to its application to his party and Augustin insisting on its application. BOOK XXXII. Faustus fails to understand why he should be required either to accept or reject the N. T. as a whole, while the Catholics accept or reject the various parts of the O. T. at pleasure. Augustin denies that the Catholics treat the O. T. arbitrarily, and explains their attitude towards it. BOOK XXXIII. Faustus does not think it would be an honor to sit down with the Patriarchs, whose moral characters as set forth in the O. T. he detests. He justifies his subjective criticism of Scripture. Augustin sums up the argument, claims the victory, and exhorts the Manichæans to abandon their opposition to the O. T., notwithstanding the difficulties that it presents, and to recognize the authority of the Catholic Church. 318 331 332 340 |