76. My advice to you now is this: that you should at least desist from slandering the Catholic Church, by declaiming against the conduct of men whom the Church herself condemns, seeking daily to correct them as wicked children. Then, if any of them by good will and by the help of God are cor- rected, they regain by repentance what they had lost by sin. Those, again, who with wicked will persist in their old vices, or even I [Augustin says nothing of the encouragement given to such pagan practices by men regarded in that age as possessed of almost superhuman sanctity, such as Sulpicius Severus, PauUnus of Nola, etc. He speaks of corruptions as if they were exceptional, whereas thev seem to have been the rule. Yet there is force in his con- tention that Christianity be judged bv its best products rather than by the worst elements associated with it.— A. H. N.]
add to them others still worse, are indeed allowed to remain in the field of the Lord, and to grow along with the good seed; but the time for separating the tares will come.= Or if, from their having at least the Christian name, they are to be placed among the chaff rather than among thistles, there will also come One to purge the floor and to separate the chaff from the wheat, and to assign to each part (according to its desert) the due re ward. 3 CHAP. 35. MARRIAGE AND PROPERTY ALLOWED TO THE BAPTIZED BY THE APOSTLES.
77. Meanwhile, why do you rage? why does party spirit blind your eyes? Why do you entangle yourselves in a long defence of such great error? Seek for fruit in the field, seek for wheat in the floor: they will be found easily, and will present themselves to the in- quirer. Why do you look so exclusively at the dross? Why do you use the roughness of the hedge to scare away the inexperienced from the fatness of the garden? There is a proper entrance, though known to but a few; and by it men come in, though you dis- believe it, or do not wish to find it. In the Catholic Church there are believers without number who do not use the world, and there are those who "use it," in the words of the apostle, " as not using it," •* as was proved in those times when Christians were forced to worship idols. For then, how many wealthy men, how many peasant householders, how many merchants, how many military men, how many leading men in their own cities, and how many senators, people of both sexes, giving up all these empty and transitory things, though while they used them they were not bound down by them, endured death for the salutary faith and religion, and proved to unbelievers that instead of being pos- sessed by all these things they really possessed them?
78. Why do you reproach us by saying that men renewed in baptism ought no longer to beget children, or to possess fields, and houses, and money? Paul allows it. For, as cannot be denied, he wrote to believers, after recounting many kinds of evil-doers who shall not possess the kingdom of God: " And such were you," he says: " but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in 2 [Augustin's ideal representation of Christianity and his iden- tification of the organized Catholic Church with Christianity is quite inconsistent with the practice of the Church which he here seeks to justify. No duty is more distinctly enjoined upon be- lievers in the New Testament than separation from unbelievers and evil doers. But such separation is impracticable in an estab- lished Church such as that to which Augustin rejoiced to belong. — A. H. N.]
Chap. XXXV.] OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." By the washed and sanctified, no one, assuredly, will venture to think any are meant but believers, and those who have renounced this world. But, after showing to whom he writes, let us see whether he allows these things to them. He goes on: "All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful lor me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. INIeat for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God will destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for forni- cation, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. But God raised up the Lord, and will raise us up also by His own power. Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. Know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is made one body? for the twain, saith He, shall be one llesh. But he that is joined to the Lord is one spirit. Flee fornication. Whatever sin a man doeth is without the body: but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his o.vn body. Know ye not tha); your members are the temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a great price: glorify God, and carry Him in your i)ody." ' " But of the things concerning which ye wrote to me: it is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may have leisure for prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment. For I would that all men were even as I my- self: but every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that." = 79. Has the apostle, think you, both shown sufficiently to the strong what is highest, and permitted to the weaker what is next best?
' I Cor. vi. II-20.
= I Cor. vii. 1-7.
Not to touch a woman he shows is highest when he says, " I would that all men were even as I myself." But next to this highest is conjugal chastity, that man may not be the prey of fornication. Did he say that these people were not yet believers because they were married? Indeed, by this conjugal chastity he says that those who are united are sanctified by one another, if one of them is an unbeliever, and that their children also are sanctified. " The unbelieving husband,'' he says, " is sanctified by the believing wife, and the unbelieving woman by the believing husband: otherwise your children would be unclean; but now are they holy."^ Why do you persist in opposition to such plain truth? Why do you try to darken the light of Script- ure by vain shadows?
80. Do not say that catechumens are al- lowed to have wives, but not believers; that catechumens may have money, but not believers. For there are many who use as not using. And in that sacred washing the renewal of the new man is begun so as grad- ually to reach perfection, in some more quickly, in others more slowly. The pro- gress, however, to a new life is made in the case of many, if we view the matter without hostility, but attentively. As the apostle says of himself, "Though the outward man perish, the inward man is renewed day by day."'' The apostle says that the inward man is renewed day by day that it may reach perfection; and you wish it to begin with perfection! And it were well if you did wish it. In reality, you aim not at raising the weak, but at misleading the unwary. You ought not to have spoken so arrogantly, even if it were known that you are perfect in your childish precepts. But when your conscience knows that those whom you bring into your sect, when they come to a more intimate ac- quaintance with you, will find many things in you which nobody hearing you accuse others would suspect, is it not great impertinence to demand perfection in the weaker Catholics, to turn away the inexperienced from the Catholic Church, while you show nothing of the kind in yourself to those thus turned away? But not to seem to inveigh against you without reason, I will now close this volume, and will proceed at last to set forth the precepts of your life and your notable customs.
3 I Cor. vii. 14.
4 2 Cor. iv. 16.
^ ST. AUGUSTIN: ON THE MORALS OF THE MANICH.EANS.
[DE MORIBUS MANICH.*:ORUM].
A.D. 388.
TRANSLATED BY REV. RICHARD STOTHERT, M.A., BOMBAY.
COXTENTS OF THE MORALS OF THE MANICH.EANS.
PAGE Chap. I. — The supreme good is that which is possessed of supreme existence 69 Chai'. II. — What evil is. That evil is that which is against nature. In allowing this, the Manichreans refute themselves 69 CTiAP. in. — If evil is defined as that which is hurtful, this implies another refutation of the Manichaeans. 70 Ch.\I'. IV. — The difference between what is good in itself and what is good by participation 70 Chap. V. — If evil is defined to be corruption, this completely refutes the Manichnean heresy 71 Cn.\P. VI. — What corruption affects, and what it is 71 Chap. VII. — The goodness of God prevents corruption from bringing anvthing to non-existence. The ^ difference between creating and forming 71 < HAP. VIII. — Evil is not a substance, but a disagreement hostile to substance 72 Chap. IX. — The Manichaean fictions about things good and evil are not consistent with themselves...73 Chap. X. — Three moral symbols devised by the Manichseans for no good 74 Chap. XI. — The value of the symbol of the mouth among the Manichxans, who are found guilty of blaspheming God 75 Chap. XII. — Manichoean subterfuge 76 Chap. XIII. — -Actions to be judged of from their motive, not from externals, Manichzean abstinence to be tried by this principle 76 Chap. XIV. — Three good reasons for abstaining from certain kinds of food 77 Chap. XV. — Why the Manichseans prohibit the use of flesh 79 Chap. X\T. — Disclosure of the monstrous tenets of the Manichreans 79 Chap..WII. — Description of the symbol of the hands among the Manichteans S3 Chap. XVIII. — Of the symbol of the breast, and of the shameful mysteries of the Manichx'ans...S6 Chap. XIX. — Crimes of the Manichseans S7 Chap. XX. — Disgraceful conduct discovered at Rome 89 i ON THE MORALS OF THE MANICH^ANS.
[DE MORIBUS MANICHyEORUM.] A. D. 388.
CONTAINING A PARTICULAR REFUTATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF THESE HERETICS REGARDING THE ORIGIN AND NATURE OF EVIL; AN EXPOSURE OF THEIR PRETENDED SYMBOLICAL CUSTOMS OF THE MOUTH, OF THE HANDS, AND OF THE BREAST; AND A CONDEMNATION OF THEIR SUPERSTITIOUS ABSTINENCE AND UNHOLY MYSTERIES. LASTLY, SOME CRIMES BROUGHT TO LIGHT AMONG THE MANICH^ANS ARE MENTIONED.
CHAP. I. THE SUPREME GOOD IS THAT WHICH IS POSSESSED OF SUPREME EXISTENCE.
I. Every one, I suppose, will allow that the question of things good and evil belongs to moral science, in which such terms are in common use. It is therefore to be wished that men would bring to these inquiries such a clear intellectual perfection as might enable them to see the chief good, than which noth- j ing is better or higher, next in order to which comes a rational soul in a state of purity and perfection.' If this were clearly understood, it would also become evident that the chief good is that which is properly described as having supreme and original existence. For that exists in the highest sense of the word which continues always the same, which is throughout like itself, which cannot in any jxirt be corrupted or changed, which is not riubject to time, which admits of no variation in its present as compared with its former condition. This is existence in its true sense. For in this signification of the word existence there is implied a nature which is self- contained, and which continues immutably. Such things can be said only of God, to whom there is nothing contrary in the strict sense of the word. For the contrary of existence is non-existence. There is therefore no nature contrary to God. But since the minds with which we approach the study of these snb- ' [This statement has a complete parallel in Clement of Alex- andria, and along with what follows, is Neo-Platonic. — A. H. N.J jects have their vision damaged and dulled by silly notions, and by perversity of will, let us try as we can to gain some little knowl- edge of this great matter by degrees and with caution, making our inquiries not like men able to see, but like men groping the dark.
CHAP. 2. WHAT EVIL IS. THAT EVIL IS THAT WHICH IS AGAINST NATURE. IN ALLOWING THIS, THE MANICHiEANS REFUTE THEMSELVES.
2. You Manichaeans often, if not in every case, ask those whom you try to bring over to your heresy. Whence is evil? Suppose I had now met you for the first time, I would ask you, if you please, to follow my example in putting aside for a little the explanation you suppose yourselves to have got of these subjects, and to commence this great inquiry with me as if for the first time. You ask me, Whence is evil? I ask you in return, Wliat is evil? Which is the more reasonable ques- tion? Are those right who ask whence a thing is, when they do not know what it is; or he who thinks it necessary to inquire first what it is, in order to avoid the gross absurd- ity of searching for the origin of a thing un- known? Your answer is quite correct, when you say that evil is that which is contrary to nature; for no one is so mentally blind as not to see that, in every kind, evil is that which is contrary to the nature of the kind. But the establishment of this doctrine is the over- throw of your heresy. For evil is no nature, I 70 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.
[Chap. IV.
if it is contrary to nature. Now, according to you, evil is a certain nature and substance. Moreover, whatever is contrary to nature must oppose nature and seek its destruction. For nature means nothing else than that which anything is conceived of as being in its own kind. Hence is the new word which we now use derived from the word for being, — essence namely, or, as we usually say, substance, — while before these words were in use, the word nature was used instead. Here, then, if you will consider the matter without stub- bornness, we see that evil is that which falls away from essence and tends to non-exis- tence.
3. Accordingly, when the Catholic Church declares that God is the author of all natures and substances, those who understand this understand at the same time that God is not the author of evil. For how can He who is the cause of the being of all things be at the same time the cause of their not being, — that is, of their falling off from essence and tend- ing to non-existence? For this is what reason plainly declares to be the definition of evil. Now, how can that race of evil of yours, which you make the supreme evil, be against na- ture, that is, against substance, when it, ac- cording to you, is itself a nature and sub- stance? For if it acts against itself, it des- troys its own existence; and when that is completely done, it will come at last to be the supreme evil. But this cannot be done, because you will have it not only to be, but to be everlasting. That cannot then be the chief evil which is spoken of as a substance. ^ 4. But what am I to do? I know that many of you can understand nothing of all this. ^ know, too, that there are some who have a good understanding and can see these things, and yet are so stubborn in their choice of evil, — a choice that will ruin their understanding as well, — that they try rather to find what re- ply they can make in order to impose upon inactive and feeble minds, instead of giving their assent to the truth. Still I shall not re- gret having written either what one of you may come some day to consider impartially, and be led to abandon your error, or what men of understanding and in allegiance to God, and who are still untainted with your errors, may read and so be kept from being led astray by your addresses.
CHAP. 3. — IF EVIL IS DEFINED AS THAT WHICH IS HURTFUL, THIS IMPLIES ANOTHER REFUTA- TION OF THE MANICH.EANS.
5. Let US then inquire more carefully, and.
I [On Augustin's view of negativity of evil and on the relation of this view to Neo-Platonism, see Introduction, chapter IX. Auif possible, more plainly. I ask you again, What is evil? If you say it is that which is hurtful, here, too, you will not answer amiss. But consider, I pray you; be on your guard, I beg of you; be so good as to lay aside party spirit, and make the inquiry for the sake of finding the truth, not of getting the better of it. Whatever is hurtful takes away some good from that to which it is hurtful; for without the loss of good there can be no hurt. What, I appeal to you, can be plainer than this? what more intelligible? What else is required for complete demonstration to one of average understanding, if he is not per- verse? But, if this is granted, the conse- quence seems plain. In that race which you take for the chief evil, nothing can be liable to be hurt, since there is no good in it. But if, as you assert, there are two natures,— the kingdom of light and the kingdom of dark- ness; since you make the kingdom of light to be God, attributing to it an uncompounded nature,^ so that it has no part inferior to an- other, you must grant, however decidedly in opposition to yourselves, you must grant, nevertheless, that this nature, which you not only do not deny to be the chief good, but spend all your strength in trying to show that it is so, is immutable, incorruptible, impene- trable, inviolable, for otherwise it would not be the chief good; for the chief good is that than which there is nothing better, and for such a nature to be hurt is impossible. Again, if, as has been shown, to hurt is to deprive of good, there can be no hurt to the kingdom of darkness, for there is no good in it. And as the kingdom of light cannot be hurt, as it is inviolable, what can the evil you speak of be hurtful to?
CHAP. 4. — THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT IS GOOD IN ITSELF AND WHAT IS GOOD BY PAR- TICIPATION.
6. Now, compare with this perplexity, from which you cannot escape, the consistency of the statements in the teaching of the Catholic Church, according to which there is one good which is good supremely and in itself, and not by the participation of any good, but by its own nature and essence; and another good which is good by participation, and by having something bestowed. Thus it has its being as good from the supreme good, which, how- ever, is still self-contained, and loses nothing.
gustin's view seems to exclude the permanence of evil in the world, and so everlasting punishment and everlasting rebellion against God.— A. H. N.]
= [It is probable that Mani thought of the Kingdom of Light pan- theistically, and that the principles personified in his mythological system were the result of efforts on his part to connect the in- finite with the finite.— A. H. N.]
Chap. VII.]
ON THE MORALS OF THE MANICH^ANS.
71 This second kind of good is called a creature, which is liable to hurt through falling away. But of this falling away God is not the author, for He is author of existence and of being. Here we see the proper use of the word evil; for it is correctly applied not to essence, but to negation or loss. We see, too, what na- ture it is which is liable to hurt. This nature is not the chief evil, for when it is hurt it loses good; nor is it the chief good, for its falling away from good is because it is good not intrinsically, but by possessing the good. And a thing cannot be good by nature when it is spoken of as being made, which shows that the goodness was bestowed. Thus, on the one hand, God is the good, and all things which He has made are good, though not so good as He who made them. For what mad- man would venture to require that the works should equal the workman, the creatures the Creator? What more do you want? Could you wish for anything plainer than this?
CHAP. 5. IF EVIL IS DEFINED TO BE CORRUP- TION, THIS COMPLETELY REFUTES THE MANI- CH.EAN HERESY.
7. I ask a third time. What is evil? Per- haps you will reply, Corruption. Undeniably this is a general definition of evil; for cor- ruption implies opposition to nature, and also hurt. But corruption exists not by itself, but in some substance which it corrupts; for corruption itself is not a substance. So the thing which it corrupts is not corruption, is not evil; for what is corrupted suffers the loss of integrity and purity. So that which has no purity to lose cannot be corrupted; and what has, is necessarily good by the participation of purity. Again, what is cor- rupted is perverted; and what is perverted suffers the loss of order, and order is good. To be corrupted, then, does not imply the absence of good; for in corruption it can be I deprived of good, which could not be if there was the absence of good. Therefore that race of darkness, if it was destitute of all good, IS you say it was, could not be corrupted, lor it had nothing which corruption could I take from it; and if corruption takes nothing I away, it does not corrupt. Say now, if you tiare, that God and the kingdom of God can j be corrupted, when you cannot show how the ' kingdom of the devil, such as you make it, can be corrupted.
'CHAP. 6. — WHAT CORRUPTION AFFECTS AND WHAT IT IS.
8. What further does the Catholic light say? What do you suppose, but what is the actual truth, that it is the created substance which can be corrupted, for the uncreated, which is the chief good, is incorruptible; and corruption, which is the chief evil, cannot be corrupted; besides, that it is not a substance? But if you ask what corruption is, consider to what it seeks to bring the things which it corrupts; for it affects those things according to its own nature. Now all things by cor- ruption fall away from what they were, and are brought to non-continuance, to non-exist- ence; for existence implies continuance. Thus the supreme and chief existence is so called because it continues in itself, or is self- contained. In the case of a thing changing for the better, the change is not from contin- uance, but from perversion to the worse, that is, from falling away from essence; the au- thor of which falling away is not He who is the author of the essence. So in some things there is change for the better, and so a tendency towards existence. And this change is not called a perversion, but rever- sion or conversion; for perversion is opposed to orderly arrangement. Now things which tend towards existence tend towards order, and, attaining order they attain existence, as far as that is possible to a creature. For order reduces to a certain uniformity that which it arranges; and existence is nothing else than being one. Thus, so far as anything acquires unity, so far it exists. For uniform- ity and harmony are the effects of unity, and by these compound things exist as far as they have existence. For simple things exist by themselves, for they are one. But things not simple imitate unity by the agreement of their parts; and so far as they attain this, so far they exist. This arrangement is the cause of existence, disorder of non-existence; and perversion or corruption are the other names for disorder. So whatever is corrupted tends to non-existence. You may now be left to re- flect upon the effect of corruption, that you may discover what is the chief evil; for it is that which corruption aims at accomplishing.
CHAP. 7. — THE GOODNESS OF GOD PREVENTS CORRUPTION FROM BRINGING ANYTHING TO NON-EXISTENCE. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CREATING AND FORMING.
9. But the goodness of God does not per- mit the accomplishment of this end, but so orders all things that fall away that they may exist where their existence is most suitable, till in the order of their movements they return to that from which they fell away.'
' In Retract, i. 7, S r, it Is s.iid: " This must not be understood to mean that all things return to that from which they fell away, 72 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.
[Chap. VIII.
Thus, when rational souls fall away from Gotl. although they possess the greatest amount of free-will. He ranks them in the lower grades of creation, where their proper place is. So they suffer misery by the divine judgment, while they are ranked suitably to their deserts. Hence we see the excellence of that saying which you are always inveigh- [ ing against so strongly, " I make good things, land create evil things.'" To create is to , form and arrange. So in some copies it is written, "I make good things and form evil things." To make is used of things pre- viously not in existence; but to form is to arrange what had some kind of existence, so as to improve and enlarge it. Such are the things which God arranges when He says, " I form evil things,'^ meaning things which are falling off, and so tending to non-exist- ence,— not things which have reached that to which they tend. For it has been said, , Nothing is allowed in the providence of God i to go the length of non-existence.^