3 Gal. ii. 14.
4 Heb. Hi. 5.
Look XXII.]
REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.
299 mire, and to the best of our power imitate, coming indeed far short of his merits, though we have killed no Egyptian, nor plundered any one, nor carried on any war; which ac- tions of Moses were in one case prompted by the zeal of the future champion of his peo- ple, and in the other cases commanded by God.
70. It might be shown that, though Moses slew the Egyptian, without being commanded by God, the action was divinely permitted, as, from the prophetic character of Moses, it prefigured something in the future. Now, however, I do not use this argument, but view the action as having no symbolical mean- ing. In the light, then, of the eternal law, it was wrong for one who had no legal authority to kill the man, even though he was a bad character, besides being the aggressor. But in minds where great virtue is to come, there is often an early crop of vices, in which we may still discern a disposition for some par- ticular virtue, which will come when the mind is dul}^ cultivated. For as farmers, when they see land bringing forth huge crops, though of weeds, pronounce it good for corn; or when they see wild creepers, which have to be rooted out, still consider the land good for useful vines; and when they see a hill covered with wild olives, conclude that with culture it will produce good fruit: so the disposition of mind which led Moses to take the law into his own hands, to prevent the wrong done to his brother, living among strangers, by a wicked citizen of the country from being un- requited, was not unfit for the production of virtue, but from want of culture gave signs of its productiveness in an unjustifiable manner. He who afterwards, by His angel, called Moses on Mount Sinai, with the divine com- mission to liberate the people of Israel from Egypt, and who trained him to obedience by the miraculous appearance in the bush burn- ing but not consumed, and by instructing him in his ministry, was the same who, by the call addressed from heaven to Saul when persecuting the Church, humbled him, raised him up, and animated him; or in fig- urative words, by this stroke He cut off the branch, grafted it, and made it fruitful. For the fierce energy of Paul, when in his zeal for hereditary traditions he persecuted the Church, thinking that he was doing God ser- vice, was like a crop of weeds showing great signs of productiveness. It was the same in Peter, when he took his sword out of its sheath to defend the Lord, and cut off the right ear of an assailant, when the Lord rebuked him with something like a threat, saying, " Put up thy sword into its sheath; for he t'nat taketh the sword shall perish by the sword."' To take the sword is to use weapons against a man's life, without the sanction of the con- stituted authority. The Lord, indeed, had told His disciples to carry a sword; but He did not tell them to use it. But that after this sin Peter should become a pastor of the Church was no more improper than that Moses, after smiting the Egyptian, should be- come the leader of the congregation. In both cases the trespass originated not in in- veterate cruelty, but in a hasty zeal which admitted of correction. In both cases there was resentment against injury, accompanied in one case by love for a brother, and in the other by love, though still carnal, of the Lord. Here was evil to be subdued or rooted out; but the heart with such capacities needed only, like good soil, to be cultivated to make it fruitful in virtue.
71. Then, as for Faustus' objection to the spoiling of the Egyptians, he knows not what he says. In this Moses not only did not sbn, but it would have been sin not to do it. It was by the command of God,'^ who, from His knowledge both of the actions and of the hearts of men, can decide on what every one should be made to suffer, and through whose agency. The people at that time were still carnal, and engrossed with earthly affections; while the Egyptians were in open rebellion against God, for they used the gold, God's creature, in the service of idols, to the dis- honor of the Creator, and they had griev- ously oppressed strangers by making them work without pay. Thus the Egyptians de- served the punishment, and the Israelites were suitably emplo3''ed in inflicting it. Per- haps, indeed, it was not so much a command as a permission to the Hebrews to act in the matter according to their own inclinations; and God, in sending the message by Moses, only wished that they should thus be informed of His permission. There may also have been mysterious reasons for what God said to the people on this matter. At any rate, God's commands are to be submissively received, not to be argued against. The apostle says, "Who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been His counsellor?" ^ Whether, then, the reason was what I have said, or whether in the secret appointment of God, there was some unknown reason for His telling the peo- ple by Moses to borrow things from the Egyptians, and to take them away with them, this remains certain, that this was said for some good reason, and that Moses could not lawfully have done otherwise than God told ^,oo THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.
[Book XXII.
him, leaving to God the reason of the com- mand, while the servant's duty is to obey.
72. But, says Faustus, it cannot be ad- mitted that the true God, who is also good, ever gave such a command. I answer, such a command can be rightly given by no other than the true and good God, who alone knows the suitable command in every case, and who alone ^s incapable of inflicting unmerited suf- fering^on any one. This ignorant and spuri- ous goodness of the human heart may as well denv what Christ says, and object to the wicked being made to suffer by the good God, when He shall say to the angels, " Gather first the tares into bundles to burn them." The servants, however, were stopped when they wished to do this prematurely: " Lest by chance, when ye would gather the tares, ye root up the wheat also with them." ' Thus the true and good God alone knows when, to whom, and by whom to order anything, or to permit anything. In the same way, this human goodness, or folly rather, might object to the Lord's permitting the devils to enter the swine, which they asked to be allowed to do with a mischievous intent, "" especially as the Manichaeans believe that not only pigs, but the vilest insects, have human souls. But setting aside these absurd notions, this is un- deniable, that our Lord Jesus Christ, tli« onl^ son of God, and therefore the true and good God, permitted the 'destruction of swine be- longing to strangers, implying loss of life and of a great amount of property, at the request of devils. No one can be so insane as to sup- pose that Christ could not have driven the devils out of the men without gratifying their malice by the destruction of the swine. If, tnen, the Creator and Governor of all natures, in His superintendence, which, though mys- terious, is ever just, indulged the violent and unjust inclination of those lost spirits already doomed to eternal fire, why should not the Egyptians, who were unrighteous oppressors, be spoiled by the Hebrews, a free people, who would claim payment for their enforced and painful toil, especially as the earthly pos- sessions which they thus lost were used by the Egyptians in their impious rites, to the dishonor of the Creator? Still, if Moses had originated this order, or if the people had done it spontaneously, undoubtedly it would have been sinful; and perhaps the people did sin, not in doing what God commanded or permitted, but in some desire of their own for what they took. The permission given to this action by divine authority was in ac- cordance with the just and good counsel of ' Matt. xiii. 29, Matt. viii. 31, Him who uses punishments both to restrain the wicked and to educate His own people; who knows also how to give more advanced precepts to those able to bear them, while He begins on a lower scale in the treatment of the feeble. As for Moses, he can be blamed neither for coveting the property, nor for dis- puting, in any instance, the divine authority.
73. According to the eternal law, which re- quires the preservation of natural order, and forbids the transgression of it, some actions have an indifferent character, so that men are blamed for presumption if they do them with- out being called upon, while they are de- servedly praised for doing them when re- quired. The act, the agent, and the author- ity for the action are all of great importance in the order of nature. For Abraham to sac- rifice his son of his own accord is shocking madness. His doing so at the command of God proves him faithful and submissive. This is so loudly proclaimed by the very voice of truth, that Faustus, eagerly rummag- ing for some fault, and reduced at last to slanderous charges, has not the boldness to attack this action. It is scarcely possible that he can have forgotten a deed so famous, that it recurs to the mind of itself without any study or reflection, and is in fact repeated by so many tongues, and portrayed in so many places, that no one can pretend to shut his eyes or his ears to it. If, therefore, while Abraham's killing his son of his own accord would have been unnatural, his doing it at the command of God shows not only guiltless but praiseworthy compliance, why does Faustus blame Moses for spoiling the Egyptians? Your feeling of disapproval for the mere hu- man action should be restrained by a regard for the divine sanction. Will you venture to blame God Himself for desiring such actions? Then "Get thee behind me, Satan, for thou understandest not the things which be of God, but those which be of men." Would that this rebuke might accomplish in you what it did in Peter, and that you might hereafter preach the truth concerning God, which you now, judging by feeble sense, find fault with! as Peter became a zealous messenger to an- nounce to the Gentiles what he objected to at first, when the Lord spoke of it as His inten- tion.
74. Now, if this explanation suffices to sat- isfy human obstinacy and perverse misinter- pretation of right actions of the vast difference between the indulgence of passion and pre- sumption on the part of men, and obedience to the command of God, who knows what to permit or to order, and also the time and the persons, and the due action or suffering in Book XXII.]
REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH^AN.
301 each case, the account of the wars of Moses will not excite surprise or abhorrence, for in wars carried on by divine command, he showed not ferocity but obedience; and God, in giving the command, acted not in cruelty, but in righteous retribution, giving to all what they deserved, and warning those who needed warning. What is the evil in war? Is it the death of some who will soon die in any case, that others may live in peaceful subjection? This is mere cowardly dislike, not any relig- ious feeling. The real evils in war are love of violence, revengeful cruelty, fierce and im- placable enmity, wild resistance, and the lust of power, and such like; and it is generally to punish these things, when force is required to inflict the punishment, that, in obedience to God or some lawful authority, good men undertake wars, when they find themselves in such a position as regards the conduct of human affairs, that right conduct requires them to act, or to make others act in this way. Otherwise John, when the soldiers who came to be baptized asked. What shall we do? would have replied, Throw away your arms; give up the service; never strike, or wound, or disable any one. But knowing that such actions in battle were not murderous, but authorized by law, and that the soldiers did not thus avenge themselves, but defend the public safety, he replied, " Do violence to no man, accuse no man falsely, and be content with your wages." ' But as the Man- ichseans are in the habit of speaking evil of John, let them hear the Lord Jesus Christ Himself ordering this money to be given to Caesar, which John tells the soldiers to be content with. "Give," ^e says, "to Caesar the things that are Caesar's.''^ For tribute- money is given on purpose to pay the soldiers for war. Again, in the case of the centurion who said, " I am a man under authority, and have soldiers under me: and I say to one. Go, and he goeth; and to' another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it," Christ gave due praise to his faith; 3 He did not tell him to leave the service. But there is no need here to enter on the long discussion of just and unjust wars.
75. A great deal depends on the causes for which men undertake wars, and on the au- thority they have for doing so; for the natu- ral order which seeks the peace of mankind, ordains that the monarch shouid have the power of undertaking war if he thinks it ad- visal:)le, and that the soldiers should perform their military duties in behalf of the peace ' Luke iii. 14.
- Matt. xxii. 21.
and safety of the community. When war is undertaken in obedience to God, who would rebuke, or humble, or crush the pride of man, it must be allowed to be a righteous war; for even the wars which arise from human pas- sion cannot harm the eternal well-being of God, nor even hurt His saints; for in the trial of their patience, and the chastening of their spirit, and in bearing fatherly correction, they are rather benefited than injured. No one can have any power against them but what is given him from above. For there is no power but of God, ■* who either orders or permits. Since, therefore, a righteous man, serving it may be under an ungodly king, may do the duty belonging to his position in the State in fighting by the order of his sovereign, — for in some cases it is plainly the will of God that he should fight, and iw others, where this is not so plain, it may be an unrighteous com- mand on the part of the king, while the sol- dier is innocent, because his position makes obedience a duty, — how much more must the man be blameless who carries on war on the authority of God, of whom every one who serves Him know'S that He can never require what is wrong?
76. If it is supposed that God could not enjoin warfare, because in after times it was said by the Lord Jesus Christ, "I say unto you. That ye resist not evil: but if any one strike thee on the right cheek, turn to him the left also," ^ the answer is, that what is here required is not a bodily action, but an inward disposition. The sacred seat of virtue is the heart, and such were the hearts of our fathers, the righteous men of old. But order required such a regulation of events, and such a distinction of times, as to show first of all that even earthly blessings (for so temporal kingdoms and victory over enemies are con- sidered to be, and these are the things which the community of the ungodly all over the world are continually begging from idols and devils) are entirely under the control and at the disposal of the one true God. Thus, un- der the Old Testament, the secret of the kingdom of heaven, which was to be disclosed in due time, was veiled, and so far obscured, in the disguise of earthly promises. But when the fullness of time came for the revela- tion of the New Testament, which was hidden under the types of the Old, clear testmiony was to be borne to the truth, that there is another life for which this life ought to be disregarded, and another kingdom for which the opposition of all earthly kingdoms should be patiently borne. Thus the name martyrs, 4 Rom. xiii. i.
5 Matt. V.
^9- \02 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.
[DooK XXII.
which means witnes.ses, was given to those who, by the will of God, bore this testimony, by their confessions, their sufferings, and their death. The number of such witnesses is so great, that if it pleased Christ — who called Saul by a voice from heaven, and hav- ing changed him from a wolf to a sheep, sent him into the midst of wolves — to unite them all in one army, and to give them success in battle, as He gave to the Hebrews, what na- tion could withstand tliem? what kingdom would remain unsubdued? But as the doc- trine of the New Testament is, that we must serve God not for temporal happiness in this life, but for eternal felicity hereafter, this truth was most strikingly confirmed by the patient endurance of what is commonly called adversity for the sake of that felicity. So in fullness of time the Son of God, made of a woman, made under the law, that He might redeem them that were under the law, made of the seed of David according to the flesh, sends His disciples as sheep into the midst of wolves, and bids them not fear those that can kill the body, but cannot kill the soul, and promises that even the body will be entirely restored, so that not a hair shall be lost.' Peter's sword He orders back into its sheath, restoring as it was before the ear of His en- emy that had been cut off. He says that He could obtain legions of angels to destroy His enemies, but that He must drink the cup which His Father's will had given Him.- He sets the example of drinking this cup, then hands it to His followers, manifesting thus, both in word and deed, the grace of patience. Therefore God raised Him from the dead, and has given Him a name which is above every name; that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and of things in earth, and of things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. 3 The patriarchs and prophets, then, have a kingdom in this world, to show that these kingdoms, too, are given and taken away by God: the apostles and martyrs had no kingdom here, to show the superior desir- ableness of the kingdom of heaven. The prophets, however, could even in those times die for the truth, as the Lord Himself says, "From the blood of Abel to the blood of Zacharia;'^ and in these days, since the com- mencement of the fulfillment of what is pro- phesied in the psalm of Christ, under the fig- ure of Solomon, which means the peace- maker, as Christ is our peace,^ " All kings of =! Matt. xxvi. 52, 53; Luke xxii. 42, 51; John xviii. 11.
3 Phil. ii. (>-ii 4 Matt, xxiii. 35. 5 Eph. ii. 14.
the earth shall bow to Him, all nations shall serve Him,"* we have seen Christian empe- rors, who have put all their confidence in Christ, gaining splendid victories over un- godly enemies, whose hope was in the rites of idolatry and devil-worship. There are public and undeniable proofs of the fact, that on one side the prognostications of devils were found to be fallacious, and on the other, the predictions of saints were a means of sup- port; and we have now writings in which those facts are recorded.
77. If our foolish opponents are surprised at the difference between the precepts given by God to the ministers of the Old Testa- ment, at a time when the grace of the New was still undisclosed, and those given to the preachers of the New Testament, now that the obscurity of the Old is removed, they will find Christ Himself saying one thing at one time, and another at another. " When I sent you," He says, "without scrip, or purse, or shoes, did ye lack anything? And they said. Nothing. Then saith He to them. But now, he that hath a scrip, let him take it, and also a purse; and he that hath not a sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." If the Manichasans found passages in the Old and New Testaments differing in this way, they would proclaim it as a proof that the Testa- ments are opposed to each other. But here the difference is in the utterances of one and the same person. At one time He says, "I sent you without scrip, or purse, or shoes, and ye lacked nothing;" at another, "Now let him that hath a scrip take it, and also a purse; and he that hath a tunic, let him sell it and buy a sword." Does not this show how, without any inconsistency, precepts and counsels and permissions may be changed, as different times require different arrangements? If it is said that there was a symbolical mean- ing in the command to take a scrip and purse, and to buy a sword, why may there not be a symbolical meaning in the fact, that one and the same God commanded the prophets in old times to make war, and forbade the apostles? And we find in the passage that we have quoted from the Gospel, that the words spoken by the Lord were carried into effect by His disciples. For, besides going at first without scrip or purse, and yet lacking nothing, as from the Lord's question and their answer it is plain they did, now that He speaks of buy- ing a sword, they say, " Lo, here are two swords;" and He replied, " It is enough." Hence we find Peter with a weapon when he cut off the assailant's ear, on which occasion fi Ps. Ixxii. II.
Book XXII.]
REPLY TO FAUSTUS THE MANICH.^AN.
303 his spontaneous boldness was checked, be- cause, although he had been told to take a sword, he had not been told to use it.' Doubtless, it was mysterious that the Lord should require them to carry weapons, and forbid the use of them. But it was His part to give the suitable precepts, and it was their part to obey without reserve.
78. It is therefore mere groundless calumny, to charge Moses with making \>'ar, for there! would have been less harm in making war of; his own accord, than in not doing it when j God commanded him. And to dare to find, fault with God Himself for giving such a command, or not to believe it possible that a just and good God did so, shows, to say the least, an inability to consider that in the view i of divine providence, which pervades all things from the highest to the lowest, time can neither add anything nor take away; but all things go, or come, or remain.according to the order of nature or desert in each separate case, while in men a right will is in union with the divine law, and ungoverned passion is re- strained by the order of divine law; so that a good man wills only what is commanded, and a bad man can do only what he is permitted, at the same time that he is punished for what he wills to do unjustly. Thus, in all the things which appear shocking and terrible to human feebleness, the real evil is the injus- tice; the rest is only the result of natural properties or of moral demerit. This injus- tice is seen in every case where a man loves for their own sake things which are desirable