5. Where, however, the ambiguity cannot be cleared up, either by the rule of faith or by the context, there is nothing to hinder us to point the sentence according to any method we choose of those that suggest themselves. As is the case in that passage to the Corin- thians: "Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthine&s of the flesh and spirit, perfect- ing holiness in the fear of God. Receive us; we have wronged no man."8 It is doubtful whether we should read, mundemus nos ab omni coinquinationc camis et spiritus " [let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit], in accordance with the passage, "that she may be holy both in body and in spirit," 9 or, ' ' mundemus nos ab omni coinqui?iatione car- nis " [let us cleanse ourselves from all filthi- ness of the flesh], so as to make the next sen- tence, " et spiritus perficientes sanctificationem in timore Dei capite nos " [and perfecting holi- ness of spirit in the fear of God, receive us]. Such ambiguities of punctuation, therefore, are left to the reader's discretion.
CHAP. 3. HOW PRONUNCIATION SERVES TO RE- MOVE AMBIGUITY. DIFFERENT KINDS OF IN- TERROGATION.
6. And all the directions that I have given about ambiguous punctuations are to be ob- served likewise in the case of doubtful pro- nunciations. For these too, unless the fault lies in the carelessness of the reader, are cor- rected either by the rule of faith, or by a ref- erence to the preceding or succeeding context; or if neither of these methods is applied with success, they will remain doubtful, but so that the reader will not be in fault in whatever way he may pronounce them. For example, if our faith that God will not bring any charges against His elect, and that Christ will not con- demn His elect, did not stand in the way, this passage, "Who shall lay anything to the charge 8 2 Cor. vii. 1, 2.
9 1 Cor. vii. 34.
553 ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.
[Book III.
of God's elect?" might be pronounced in such a way as to make what follows an answer to this question, "God who justifieth," and to make a second question, " Who is he that condemneth? " with the answer, "Christ Jesus who died. ' ' '' But as it would be the height of madness to believe this, the passage will be pronounced in such a way as to make the first part a question of inquiry,2 and the second a rhetorical interrogative.3 Now the ancients said that the difference between an inquiry and an interrogative was this, that an inquiry admits of many answers, but to an interroga- tive the answer must be either "No" or "Yes."4 The passage will be pronounced, then, in such a way that after the inquiry, "Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? " what follows will be put as an interrogative: "Shall God who justifieth?' — the answer" No" being understood. And in the same way we shall have the inquiry, "Who is he that condemneth?" and the an- swer here again in the form of an interroga- tive, " Is it Christ who died? yea, rather, who is risen again? who is even at the right hand of God? who also maketh intercession for us? " — the answer " No " being understood to every one of these questions. On the other hand, in that passage where the apostle says, " What shall we say then? That the Gentiles which followed not after righteousness have attained to righteousness;"5 unless after the inquiry, "What shall we say then?" what fol- lows were given as the answer to this ques- tion: " That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to right- eousness;" it would not be in harmony with the succeeding context. But with whatever tone of voice one may choose to pronounce that saying of Nathanael's, "Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? " 6 — whether with that of a man who gives an affirmative an- swer, so that "out of Nazareth " is the only part that belongs to the interrogation, or with that of a man who asks the whole question with doubt and hesitation,— I do not see how a difference can be made. But neither sense is opposed to faith.
7. There is, again, an ambiguity arising out of the doubtful sound of syllables; and this of course has relation to pronunciation. For example, in the passage, " My bone [os meum\ was not hid from Thee, which Thou didst make in secret,"7 it is not clear to the 4 The English language has no two words expressing the shades of meaning assigned by Augustin to percontatio and inter- rogatio respectively.
7 Ps. cxxxix. 16. " My substance was not hid from Thee when I was made in secret" (A. V.).
reader whether he should take the word os as short or long. If he make it short, it is the singular of ossa [bones]; if he make it long, it is the singular of ora [mouths]. Now diffi- culties such as this are cleared up by looking into the original tongue, for in the Greek we find not oToj.ia [mouth], but oartov [bone]. And for this reason the vulgar idiom is fre- quently more useful in conveying the sense than the pure speech of the educated. For I would rather have the barbarism, non est ab- sconditum a te ossiim meum* than have the passage in better Latin, but the sense less clear. But sometimes when the sound of a syllable is doubtful, it is decided by a word near it belonging to the same sentence. As, for example, that saying of the apostle, " Of the which I tell you before \prcedico\ as I have also told you in time past \prccdixi\ that they which do such things shall not in- herit the kingdom of God." 9 Now if he had only said, "Of the which I tell you before \qucz prcedico vobis\" and had not added, " as I have also told you in time past \sicut proe- dixt\" we could not know without going back to the original whether in the word prcedico the middle syllable should be pronounced long or short. But as it is, it is clear that it should be pronounced long; for he does not say, sicut prmdicavi, but sicut prczdixi.
CHAP. 4. — HOW AMBIGUITIES MAY BE SOLVED. ' 8. And not only these, but also those am- biguities that do not relate either to punctua- tion or pronunciation, are to be examined in the same way. For example, that one in the Epistle to the Thessalonians: Propterea conso- lati sumus fratres in vobis.10 Now it is doubt- ful whether fratres [brethren] is in the voca- tive or accusative case, and it is not contrary to faith to take it either way. But in the Greek language the two cases are not the same in form; and accordingly, when we look into the original, the case is shown to be vocative. Now if the translator had chosen to say, propterea consolationem habuimus fratrek in vobis, he would have followed the words less literally, but there would have been less doubt about the meaning; or, indeed, if he had added nostri, hardly any one would have doubted that the vocative case was meant when he heard propterea consolati sumus fratres nostri in vobis. But this is a rather dangerous liberty to take. It has been taken, however, in that passage to the Corinthians, where the apostle says, "I protest by your My bone was not hid from Thee. 9 Gal. v. 21..1 10 1 Thess. iii. 7. " Therefore, brethren, we were comforted over you " (A. V.).
Chai\ VII.]
ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.
559 rejoicing [per vestram gloriaiti\ which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily." * For one translator has it, j>er vestram juro gloria///, the form of adjuration appearing in the Greek without any ambiguity. It is therefore very rare and. very difficult to find any ambiguity in the case of proper words, as far at least as Holy Scripture is concerned, which neither the context, showing the design of the writer, nor a comparison of translations, nor a refer- ence to the original tongue, will suffice to explain.
CHAP. 5. IT IS A WRETCHED SLAVERY WHICH TAKES THE FIGURATIVE EXPRESSIONS OF SCRIPTURE IN A LITERAL SENSE.
9. But the ambiguities of metaphorical words, about which I am next to speak, de- mand no ordinary care and diligence. In the first place, we must beware of taking a figura- tive expression literally. For the saying of the apostle applies in this case too: " The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. "2 For when what is said figuratively is taken as if it were said literally, it is understood in a carnal manner. And nothing is more fittingly called the death of the soul than when that in it which raises it above the brutes, the intelli- gence namely, is put in subjection to the flesh by a blind adherence to the letter. For he who follows the letter takes figurative words as if they were proper, and does not carry out what is indicated by a proper word into its secondary signification; but, if he hears of the Sabbath, for example, thinks of nothing but the one day out of seven which recurs in constant succession; and when he hears of a sacrifice, does not carry his thoughts beyond the customary offerings of victims from the flock, and of the fruits of the earth. Now it is surely a miserable slavery of the soul to take signs for things, and to be unable to lift the eye of the mind above what is corporeal and created, that it may drink in eternal light.
CHAP. 6. UTILITY OF THE BONDAGE OF THE JEWS.
10. This bondage, however, m the case of the Jewish people, differed widely from what it was in the case of the other nations; be- cause, though the former were in bondage to temporal things, it was in such a way that in all these the One God was put before their minds. And although they paid attention to the signs of spiritual realities in place of the realities themselves, not knowing to what the signs referred, still they had this conviction 1 1 Cor. xv. 31.
2 2 Cor. iii. 6.
rooted in their minds, that in subjecting themselves to such a bondage they were doing the pleasure of the one invisible God of all. And the apostle describes this bondage as being like to that of boys under the guidance of a schoolmaster.3 And those who clung obstinately to such signs could not endure our Lord's neglect of them when the time for their revelation had come: and hence their leaders brought it as a charge against Him that He healed on the Sabbath, and the people, clinging to these signs as if they were realities, could not believe that one who re- fused to observe them in the way the Jews did was God, or came from God. But those who did believe, from among whom the first Church at Jerusalem was formed, showed clearly how great an advantage it had been to be so guided by the schoolmaster that signs, which had been for a season imposed on the obedient, fixed the thoughts of those who ob- served them on the worship of the One God who made heaven and earth. These men, because they had been very near to spiritual things (for even in the temporal and carnal offerings and types, though they did not clearly apprehend their spiritual meaning, they had learnt to adore the One Eternal God,) were filled with such a measure of the Holy Spirit that they sold all their goods, and laid their price at the apostles' feet to be dis- tributed among the needy,4 and consecrated themselves wholly to God as a new temple, of which the old temple they were serving was but the earthly type.
11. Now it is not recorded that any of the Gentile churches did this, because men who had for their gods idols made with hands had not been so near to spiritual things.
CHAP. 7. THE USELESS BONDAGE OF THE GEN- TILES.
And if ever any of them endeavored to make it out that their idols were only signs, yet still they used them in reference to the worship and adoration of the creature. What difference does it make to me, for instance, that the image of Neptune is not itself to be considered a god, but only as representing the wide ocean, and all the other waters be- sides that spring out of fountains? As it is described by a poet of theirs,5 who says, if I recollect aright, "Thou, Father Neptune, whose hoary temples are wreathed with the resounding sea, whose beard is the mighty ocean flowing forth unceasingly, and whose 3 Gal. iii. 24. The word naiSayutyo'; means strictly not a school- master, but a servant who takes children to school.
56° ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.
[Book III, hair is the winding rivers." This husk shakes its rattling stones within a sweet covering, and yet it is not food for men, but for swine. He who knows the gospel knows what I mean.1 What profit is it to me, then, that the image of Neptune is used with a refer- ence to this explanation of it, unless indeed the result be that I worship neither? For any statue you like to take is as much god to me as the wide ocean. I grant, however, that they who make gods of the works of man have sunk lower than they who make gods of the works of God. But the command is that we should love and serve the One God, who is the Maker of all those things, the images of which are worshipped by the heathen either as gods, or as signs and representations of gods. If, then, to take a sign which has been established for a useful end instead of the thing itself which it was designed to signify, is bondage to the flesh, how much more so is it to take signs intended to represent useless things for the things themselves! For even if you go back to the very things signified by such signs, and engage your mind in the wor- ship of these, you will not be anything the more free from the burden and the livery of bondage to the flesh.
CHAP. 8. — THE JEWS LIBERATED FROM THEIR BONDAGE IN ONE WAY, THE GENTILES IN ANOTHER.
12. Accordingly the liberty that comes by Christ took those whom it found under bond- age to useful signs, and who were (so to speak) near to it, and, interpreting the signs to which they were in bondage, set them free by raising them to the realities of which these were signs. And out of such were formed the churches of the saints of Israel. Those, on the other hand, whom it found in bondage to useless signs, it not only freed from their slavery to such signs, but brought to nothing and cleared out of the way all these signs themselves, so that the Gentiles were turned from the corruption of a multitude of false gods, which Scripture frequently and justly speaks of as fornication, to the worship of the One God: not that they might now fall into bondage to signs of a useful kind, but rather that they might exercise their minds in the spiritual understanding of such.
CHAP. 9. WHO IS IN BONDAGE TO SIGNS, AND WHO NOT.
13. Now he is in bondage to a sign who uses, or pays homage to, any significant ob- 1 Luke xv. 16.
ject without knowing what it signifies: he, on the other hand, who either uses or honors a useful sign divinely appointed, whose force and significance he understands, does not honor the sign which is seen and temporal, but that to which all such signs refer. Now such a man is spiritual and free even at the time of his bondage, when it is not yet ex- pedient to reveal to carnal minds those signs by subjection to which their carnality is to be overcome. To this class of spiritual per- sons belonged the patriarchs and the prophets, and all those among the people of Israel through whose instrumentality the Holy Spirit ministered unto us the aids and consolations of the Scriptures. But at the present time, after that the proof of our liberty has shone forth so clearly in the resurrection of our Lord, we are not oppressed with the heavy burden of attending even to those signs which we now understand, but our Lord Himself, and apostolic practice, have handed down to us a few rites in place of many, and these at once very easy to perform, most majestic in their significance, and most sacred in the ob- servance; such, for example, as the sacra- ment of baptism, and the celebration of the body and blood of the Lord. And as soon as any one looks upon these observances he knows to what they refer, and so reveres them not in carnal bondage, but in spiritual free- dom. Now, as to follow the letter, and to take signs for the things that are signified by them, is a mark of weakness and bondage; so to interpret signs wrongly is the result of being misled by error. He, however, who does not understand what a sign signifies, but yet knows that it is a sign, is not in bond- age. And it is better even to be in bondage to unknown but useful signs than, by inter- preting them wrongly, to draw the neck from under the yoke of bondage only to insert it in the coils of error.
CHAP. IO. HOW WE ARE TO DISCERN WHETHER A PHRASE IS FIGURATIVE.
14. But in addition to the foregoing rule, which guards us against taking a metaphori- cal form of speech as if it were literal, we must also pay heed to that which tells us not to take a literal form of speech as if it were figurative. In the first place, then, we must show the way to find out whether a phrase is literal or figurative. And the way is certainly as follows: Whatever there is in the word of God that cannot, when taken literally, be re- ferred either to purity of life or soundness of doctrine, you may set down as figurative. Purity of life has reference to the love of God Chap. XII.]
ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.
56l and one's neighbor; soundness of doctrine to the knowledge of God and one's neighbor. Every man, moreover, has hope in his own conscience, so far as he perceives that he has attained to the love and knowledge of God and his neighbor. Now all these matters have been spoken of in the first book.
15. But as men are prone to estimate sins, not by reference to their inherent sinfulness, but rather by reference to their own customs, it frequently happens that a man will think nothing blameable except what the men of his own country and time are accustomed to condemn, and nothing worthy of praise or ap- proval except what is sanctioned by the cus- tom of his companions; and thus it comes to pass, that if Scripture either enjoins what is opposed to the customs of the hearers, or condemns what is not so opposed, and if at the same time the authority of the word has a hold upon their minds, they think that the expression is figurative. Now Scripture en- joins nothing except charity, and condemns nothing except lust, and in that way fashions the lives of men. In the same way, if an er-_ roneous opinion has taken possession of the mind, men think that whatever Scripture asserts contrary to this must be figurative. Now Scripture asserts nothing but the catholic faith, in regard to things past, future, and present. It is a narrative of the past, a prophecy of the future, and a description of the present. But all these tend to nourish and strengthen charity, and to overcome and root out lust.
16. I mean by chanty that affection of the mind which aims at the enjoyment of God for His own sake, and the enjoyment of one's self and one's neighbor in subordination to God; by lust I mean that affection of the mind which aims at enjoying one's self and one's neighbor, and other corporeal things, without reference to God. Again, what lust, when unsubdued, does towards corrupting one's own soul and body, is called vice;* but what it does to injure another is called crime.'2 And these are the two classes into which all sins may be divided. But the vices come first; for when these have exhausted the soul, and reduced it to a kind of poverty, it easily slides into crimes, in order to remove hin- drances to, or to find assistance in, its vices. In the same way, what charity does with a view to one's own advantage is prudence; but what it does with a view to a neighbor's ad- vantage is called benevolence. And here pru- dence comes first; because no one can con- fer an advantage on another which he does not himself possess. Now in proportion as the dominion of lust is pulled down, in the same proportion is that of charity built up.
CHAP. II. — RULE FOR INTERPRETING PHRASES WHICH SEEM TO ASCRIBE SEVERITY TO GOD AND THE SAINTS.
17. Every severity, therefore, and ap- parent cruelty, either in word or deed, that is ascribed in Holy Scripture to God or His saints, avails to the pulling down of the do- minion of lust. And if its meaning be clear, we are not to give it some secondary refer- ence, as if it were spoken figuratively. Take, for example, that saying of the apostle: "But, after thy hardness and impenitent heart, treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the right- eous judgment of God; who will render to every man according to his deeds: to them who, by patient continuance in well-doing, seek for glory, and honor, and immortality, eternal life; but unto them that are conten- tious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribu- lation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile." 3 But this is addressed to those who, being unwilling to subdue their lust, are themselves involved in the destruction of their lust. When, however, the dominion of lust is overturned in a man over whom it had held sway, this plain expression is used: " They that are Christ's have crucified the flesh, with the affections and lusts."4 Only that, even in these instances, some words are used figuratively, as for example, " the wrath of God " and " crucified." But these are not so numerous, nor placed in such a way as to obscure the sense, and make it allegorical or enigmatical, which is the kind of expresssion properly called figurative. But in the saying addressed to Jeremiah, " See, I have this day set thee over the nations, and over the king- doms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and' to throw down,"5 there is no doubt the whole of the language is figurative, and to be referred to the end I have spoken of.
CHAP. 12. RULE FOR INTERPRETING THOSE SAYINGS AND ACTIONS WHICH ARE ASCRIBED TO GOD AND THE SAINTS, AND WHICH YET SEEM TO THE UNSKILLFUL TO BE WICKED.
18. Those things, again, whether only say- ings or whether actual deeds, which appear to the inexperienced to be sinful, and which are ascribed to God, or to men whose holiness is 1 Flagitium.
2 Facinus.
3 Rom. ii. 5-9.
4 Gal v. 24.
5 Jer. i. 10.
3G 562 ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.
[Book III.
put before us as an example, are wholly fig- urative, and the hidden kernel of meaning they contain is to be picked out as food for the nourishment of charity. Now, whoever uses transitory objects less freely than is the custom of those among whom he lives, is either temperate or superstitious; whoever, on the other hand, uses them so as to trans- gress the bounds of the custom of the good men about him, either has a further meaning in what he does, or is sinful. In all such matters it is not the use of the objects, but the lust of the user, that is to blame. No- body in his sober senses would believe, for example, that when our Lord's feet were anointed by the woman with precious oint- ment,1 it was for the same purpose for which luxurious and profligate men are accustomed to have theirs anointed in those banquets which we abhor. For the sweet odor means the good report which is earned by a life of good works; and the man who wins this, while following in the footsteps of Christ, anoints His feet (so to speak) with the most precious ointment. And so that which in the case of other persons is often a sin, becomes, when ascribed to God or a prophet, the sign of some great truth. Keeping company with a harlot, for example, is one thing when it is the result of abandoned manners, another thing when done in the course of his prophecy by the prophet Hosea.2 Because it is a shamefully wicked thing to strip the body naked at a banquet among the drunken and licentious, it does not follow that it is a sin to be naked in the baths.
19. We must, therefore, consider carefully what is suitable to times and places and per- sons, and not rashly charge men with sins. For it is possible that a wise man may use the daintiest food without any sin of epicurism or gluttony, while a fool will crave for the vilest food with a most disgusting eagerness of appetite. And any sane man would prefer eating fish after the manner of our Lord, to eating lentiles after the manner of Esau, or barley after the manner of oxen. For there are several beasts that feed on commoner kinds of food, but it does not follow that they are more temperate than we are. For in all matters of this kind it is not the nature of the things we use, but our reason for using them, and our manner of seeking them, that make what we do either praiseworthy or blameable.
20. Now the saints of ancient times were, under the form of an earthly kingdom, fore- shadowing and foretelling the kingdom of heaven. And on account of the necessity for 1 John xii. 3.
2 Hos. i. 2.
a numerous offspring, the custom of one man having several wives was at that time blame- less: and for the same reason it was not proper for one woman to have several hus- bands, because a woman does not in that way become more fruitful, but, on the contrary, it is base harlotry to seek either gain or offspring by promiscuous intercourse. In regard to matters of this sort, whatever the holy men of those times did without lust, Scripture passes over without blame, although they did things which could not be done at the present time, except through lust. And everything of this nature that is there narrated we are to take not only in its historical and literal, but also in its figurative and prophetical sense, and to interpret as bearing ultimately upon the end of love towards God or our neighbor, or both. For as it was disgraceful among the ancient Romans to wear tunics reaching to the heels, and furnished with sleeves, but now it is dis- graceful for men honorably born not to wear tunics of that description: so we must take heed in regard to other things also, that lust do not mix with our use of them; for lust not only abuses to wicked ends the customs of those among whom we live, but frequently also transgressing the bounds of custom, betrays, in a disgraceful outbreak, its own hide- ousness, which was concealed under the cover of prevailing fashions.