Origen De Principiis V. 3
by
Origen
Return to www.BrainFly.Net
Book 3
Preface of Rufinus
Reader, remember me in your prayers, that we too may deserve to
be made emulators of the spirit. The two former books on The Principles
I translated not only at your instance, but even under pressure from
you during the days of Lent;[1] but as you, my devout brother Macarius,
were not only living near me during that time, but had more leisure at
your command than now, so I also worked the harder; whereas I have been
longer in explaining these two latter books, seeing you came less
frequently from a distant extremity of the city to urge on my labour.
Now if you remember what I warned you of in my former preface,—that
certain persons would be indignant, if they did not hear that we spoke
some evil of Origen,—that, I imagine, you have forthwith experienced,
has come to pass. But if those demons[2] who excite the tongues of men
to slander were so infuriated by that work, in which he had not as yet
fully unveiled their secret proceedings, what, think you, will be the
case in this, in which he will expose all those dark and hidden ways,
by which they creep into the hearts of men, and deceive weak and
unstable souls? You will immediately see all things thrown into
confusion, seditions stirred up, clamours raised throughout the whole
city, and that individual summoned to receive sentence of condemnation
who endeavoured to dispel the diabolical darkness of ignorance by means
of the light of the Gospel lamp.[3] Let such things, however, be
lightly esteemed by him who is desirous of being trained in divine
learning, while retaining in its integrity the rule of the Catholic
faith.[4] I think it necessary, however, to remind you that the
principle observed in the former books has been observed also in these,
viz., not to translate what appeared contrary to Origen's other
opinions, and to our own belief, but to pass by such passages as being
interpolated and forged by others. But if he has appeared to give
expression to any novelties regarding rational creatures (on which
subject the essence of our faith does not depend), for the sake of
discussion and of adding to our knowledge, when perhaps it was
necessary for us to answer in such an order some heretical opinions, I
have not omitted to mention these either in the present or preceding
books, unless when he wished to repeat in the following books what he
had already stated in the previous ones, when I have thought it
convenient, for the sake of brevity, to curtail some of these
repetitions. Should any one, however, peruse these passages from a
desire to enlarge his knowledge, and not to raise captious objections,
he will do better to have them expounded by persons of skill. For it is
an absurdity to have the fictions of poetry and the ridiculous plays of
comedy[5] interpreted by grammarians, and to suppose that without a
master and an interpreter any one is able to learn those things which
are spoken either of God or of the heavenly virtues, and of the whole
universe of things, in which some deplorable error either of pagan
philosophers or of heretics is confuted; and the result of which is,
that men would rather rashly and ignorantly condemn things that are
difficult and obscure, than ascertain their meaning by diligence and
study.
TRANSLATED FROM LATIN OF RUFINUS.
CHAP. I.—ON THE FREEDOM OF THE WILL.[1]
1. Some such opinions, we believe, ought to be entertained
regarding the divine promises, when we direct our understanding to the
contemplation of that eternal and infinite world, and gaze on its
ineffable joy and blessedness. But as the preaching of the Church
includes a belief in a future and just judgment of God, which belief
incites and persuades men to a good and virtuous life, and to an
avoidance of sin by all possible means; and as by this it is
undoubtedly indicated that it is within our own power to devote
ourselves either to a life that is worthy of praise, or to one that is
worthy of censure, I therefore deem it necessary to say a few words
regarding the freedom of the will, seeing that this topic has been
treated by very many writers in no mean style. And that we may
ascertain more easily what is the freedom of the will, let us inquire
into the nature of will and of desire.[3]
2. Of all things which move, some have the cause of their motion
within themselves, others receive it from without: and all those things
only are moved from without which are without life, as stones, and
pieces of wood, and whatever things are of such a nature as to be held
together by the constitution of their matter alone, or of their bodily
substance.[5] That view must indeed be dismissed which would regard the
dissolution of bodies by corruption as motion, for it has no bearing
upon our present purpose. Others, again, have the cause of motion in
themselves, as animals, or trees, and all things which are held
together by natural life or soul; among which some think ought to be
classed the veins of metals. Fire, also, is supposed to be the cause of
its own motion, and perhaps also springs of water. And of those things
which have the causes of their motion in themselves, some are said to
be moved out of themselves, others by themselves. And they so
distinguish them, because those things are moved out of themselves
which are alive indeed, but have no soul;[7] whereas those things which
have a soul are moved by themselves, when a phantasy,[8] i.e., a desire
or incitement, is presented to them, which excites them to move towards
something. Finally, in certain things endowed with a soul, them is such
a phantasy, i.e., a will or feeling,[9] as by a kind of natural
instinct calls them forth, and arouses them to orderly and regular
motion; as we see to be the case with spiders, which are
TRANSLATION FROM THE GREEK.
CHAP. I.—ON THE FREEDOM OF THE WILL,[2] WITH AN EXPLANATION AND
INTERPRETATION OF THOSE STATEMENTS OF SCRIPTURE WHICH APPEAR TO NULLIFY
IT.
1. Since in the preaching of the Church there is included the
doctrine respecting a just judgment of God, which, when believed to be
true, incites those who hear it to live virtuously, and to shun sin by
all means, inasmuch as they manifestly acknowledge that things worthy
of praise and blame are within our own power, come and let us discuss
by themselves a few points regarding the freedom of the will—a question
of all Others most necessary. And that we may understand what the
freedom of the will is, it is necessary to unfold the conception of
it,[4] that this being declared with precision, the subject may be
placed before us.
2. Of things that move, some have the cause of their motion
within themselves; others, again, are moved only from without. Now only
portable things are moved from without, such as pieces of wood, and
stones, and all matter that is held together by their constitution
alone.[6] And let that view be removed from consideration which calls
the flux of bodies motion, since it is not needed for our present
purpose. But animals and plants have the cause of their motion within
themselves, and in general whatever is held together by nature and a
soul, to which class of things they say that metals also belong. And
besides these, fire too is self-moved, and perhaps also fountains of
water. Now, of those things which have the cause of their movement
within themselves, some, they say, are moved out of themselves, others
from themselves: things without life, out of themselves; animate
things, from themselves. For animate things are moved from themselves,
a phantasy[10] springing up in FROM THE LATIN.
stirred up in a most orderly manner by a phantasy, i.e., a sort of wish
and desire for weaving, to undertake the production of a web, some
natural movement undoubtedly calling forth the effort to work of this
kind. Nor is this very insect found to possess any other feeling than
the natural desire of weaving; as in like manner bees also exhibit a
desire to form honeycombs, and to collect, as they say, aerial honey.[2]
3. But since a rational animal not only has within itself these
natural movements, but has moreover, to a greater extent than other
animals, the power of reason, by which it can judge and determine
regarding natural movements, and disapprove and reject some, while
approving and adopting others, so by the judgment of this reason may
the movements of men be governed and directed towards a commendable
life. And from this it follows that, since the nature of this reason
which is in man has within itself the power of distinguishing between
good and evil, and while distinguishing possesses the faculty of
selecting what it has approved, it may justly be deemed worthy of
praise in choosing what is good, and deserving of censure in following
that which is base or wicked. This indeed must by no means escape our
notice, that in some dumb animals there is found a more regular
movement[4] than in others, as in hunting-dogs or war-horses, so that
they may appear to some to be moved by a kind of rational sense. But we
must believe this to be the result not so much of reason as of some
natural instinct,[6] largely bestowed for purposes of that kind. Now,
as we had begun to remark, seeing that such is the nature of a rational
animal, some things may happen to us human beings from without; and
these, coming in contact with our sense of sight, or hearing, or any
other of our senses, may incite and arouse us to good movements, or the
contrary; and seeing they come to us from an external source, it is not
within our own power to prevent their coming. But to determine and
approve what use we ought to make of those things which thus happen, is
the duty of no other than of that reason within us, i.e., of our own
judgment; by the decision of which reason we use the incitement, which
comes to us from without for that purpose, which reason approves, our
natural movements being determined by its authority either to good
actions or the reverse.
4. If any one now were to say that those things which happen to
us from an external cause, and call forth our movements, are of such a
nature that it is impossible to resist them, whether they incite us to
good or evil, let the holder of this opinion turn his attention for a
little upon himself, and carefully inspect the movements of his own
FROM THE GREEK.
them which incites to effort. And again, in certain animals phantasies
are formed which call forth an effort, the nature of the phantasy[1]
stirring up the effort in an orderly manner, as in the spider is formed
the phantasy of weaving; and the attempt to weave follows, the nature
of its phantasy inciting the insect in an orderly manner to this alone.
And besides its phantasial nature, nothing else is believed to belong
to the insect.[3] And in the bee there is formed the phantasy to
produce wax.
3. The rational animal, however, has, in addition to its
phantasial nature, also reason, which judges the phantasies, and
disapproves of some and accepts others, in order that the animal may be
led according to them. Therefore, since there are in the nature of
reason aids towards the contemplation of virtue and vice, by following
which, after beholding good and evil, we select the one and avoid the
other, we are deserving of praise when we give ourselves to the
practice of virtue, and censurable when we do the reverse. We must not,
however, be ignorant that the greater part of the nature assigned to
all things is a varying quantity[5] among animals, both in a greater
and a less degree; so that the instinct in hunting-dogs and in
war-horses approaches somehow, so to speak, to the faculty of reason.
Now, to fall under some one of those external causes which stir up
within us this phantasy or that, is confessedly not one of those things
that are dependent upon ourselves; but to determine that we shall use
the occurrence in this way or differently, is the prerogative of
nothing else than of the reason within us, which, as occasion
offers,[7] arouses us towards efforts inciting to what is virtuous and
becoming, or turns us aside to what is the reverse.
4. But if any one maintain that this very external cause is of
such a nature that it is impossible to resist it when it comes in such
a way, let him turn his attention to his own feelings and movements,
(and see) whether there FROM THE LATIN.
mind, unless he has discovered already, that when an enticement to any
desire arises, nothing is accomplished until the assent of the soul is
gained, and the authority of the mind has granted indulgence to the
wicked suggestion; so that a claim might seem to be made by two parties
on certain probable grounds as to a judge residing within the tribunals
of our hurt, in order that, after the statement of reasons, the decree
of execution may proceed from the judgment of reason.[2] For, to take
an illustration: if, to a man who has determined to live continently
and chastely, and to keep himself free from all pollution with women, a
woman should happen to present herself, inciting and alluring him to
act contrary to his purpose, that woman is not a complete and absolute
cause or necessity of his transgressing,[4] since it is in his power,
by remembering his resolution, to bridle the incitements to lust, and
by the stern admonitions of virtue to restrain the pleasure of the
allurement that solicits him; so that, all feeling of indulgence being
driven away, his determination may remain firm and enduring. Finally,
if to any men of learning, strengthened by divine training, allurements
of that kind present themselves, remembering forthwith what they are,
and calling to mind what has long been the subject of their meditation
and instruction, and fortifying themselves by the support of a holier
doctrine, they reject and repel all incitement to pleasure, and drive
away opposing lusts by the interposition of the reason implanted within
them.
5. Seeing, then, that these positions are thus established by a
sort of natural evidence, is it not superfluous to throw back the
causes of our actions on those things which happen to us from without,
and thus transfer the blame from ourselves, on whom it wholly lies? For
this is to say that we are like pieces of wood, or stones, which have
no motion in themselves, but receive the causes of their motion from
without. Now such an assertion is neither true nor becoming, and is
invented only that the freedom of the will may be denied; unless,
indeed, we are to suppose that the freedom of the will consists in
this, that nothing which happens to us from without can incite us to
good or evil. And if any one were to refer the causes of our faults to
the natural disorder s of the body, such a theory is proved to be
contrary to the reason of all teaching.[9] For, as we see in very many
individuals, that after living unchastely and intemperately, and after
being the captives of luxury and lust, if they should happen to be
aroused by the word of teaching and instruction to enter upon a better
course of life, there takes place so great a change, that from being
luxurious and wicked men, they are converted into those who are sober,
and most chaste and gentle; so, again, we see in the case of those who
are quiet and honest, that after associating with restless and
shameless individuals, their good morals are corrupted by evil
conversation, and they
FROM THE GREEK.
is not an approval, and assent, and inclination of the controlling
principle towards some object on account of some specious arguments.[1]
For, to take an instance, a woman who has appeared before a man that
has determined to be chaste, and to refrain from carnal intercourse,
and who has incited him to act contrary to his purpose, is not a
perfects cause of annulling his determination. For, being altogether
pleased with the luxury and allurement of the pleasure, and not wishing
to resist it, or to keep his purpose, he commits an act of
licentiousness. Another man, again (when the same things have happened
to him who has received more instruction, and has disciplined
himself[5]), encounters, indeed, allurements and enticements; but his
reason, as being strengthened to a higher point, and carefully trained,
and confirmed in its views towards a virtuous course, or being near to
confirmation,[6] repels the incitement, and extinguishes the desire.
5. Such being the case, to say that we are moved from without,
and to put away the blame from ourselves, by declaring that we are like
to pieces of wood and stones, which are dragged about by those causes
that act upon them from without, is neither true nor in conformity with
reason, but is the statement of him who wishes to destroy[7] the
conception of free-will. For if we were to ask such an one what was
free-will, he would say that it consisted in this, that when purposing
to do some thing, no external cause came inciting to the reverse. But
to blame, on the other hand, the mere constitution of the body,[10] is
absurd; for the disciplinary reason,[11] taking hold of those who are
most intemperate and savage (if they will follow her exhortation),
effects a transformation, so that the alteration and change for the
better is most extensive,—the most licentious men frequently becoming
better than those who formerly did not seem to be such by nature; and
FROM THE LATIN.
become like those whose wickedness is complete.[1] And this is the case
sometimes with men of mature age, so that such have lived more chastely
in youth than when more advanced years have enabled them to indulge in
a freer mode of life. The result of our reasoning, therefore, is to
show that those things which happen to us from without are not in our
own power; but that to make a good or bad use of those things which do
so happen, by help of that reason which is within us, and which
distinguishes and determines how these things ought to be used, is
within our power.
6. And now, to confirm the deductions of reason by the authority
of Scripture—viz., that it is our own doing whether we live rightly or
not, and that we are not compelled, either by those causes which come
to us from without, or, as some think, by the presence of fate—we
adduce the testimony of the prophet Micah, in these words: "If it has
been announced to thee, O man, what is good, or what the Lord requires
of thee, except that thou shouldst do justice, and love mercy, and be
ready to walk with the Lord thy God."[4] Moses also speaks as follows:
"I have placed before thy face the way of life and the way of death:
choose what is good, and walk in it."[5] Isaiah, moreover, makes this
declaration: "If you are willing, and hear me, ye shall eat the good of
the land. But if you be unwilling, and will not hear me, the sword
shall consume you; for the mouth of the Lord has spoken this."[7] In
the Psalm, too, it is written: "If My people had heard Me, if Israel
had walked in My ways, I would have humbled her enemies to nothing;"[8]
by which he shows that it was in the power of the people to hear, and
to walk in the ways of God. The Saviour also saying, "I say unto you,
Resist not evil;"[9] and, "Whoever shall be angry with his brother,
shall be in danger of the judgment;"[10] and, "Whosoever shall look
upon a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with
her in his heart;"[12] and in issuing certain other commands,—conveys
no other meaning than this, that it is in our own power to observe what
is commanded. And therefore we are rightly rendered liable to
condemnation if we transgress those commandments which we are able to
keep. And hence He Himself also declares: "Every one who hears my
words, and doeth
FROM THE GREEK.
the most savage men passing into such a state of mildness,[2] that
those persons who never at any time were so savage as they were, appear
savage in comparison, so great a degree of gentleness having been
produced within them. And we see other men, most steady and
respectable, driven from their state of respectability and steadiness
by intercourse with evil customs, so as to fall into habits of
licentiousness, often beginning their wickedness in middle age, and
plunging into disorder after the period of youth has passed, which, so
far as its nature is concerned, is unstable. Reason, therefore,
demonstrates that external events do not depend on us, but that it is
our own business to use them in this way or the opposite, having
received reason as a judge and an investigator[3] of the manner in
which we ought to meet those events that come from without.
6. Now, that it is our business to live virtuously, and that God
asks this of us, as not being dependent on Him nor on any other, nor,
as some think, upon fate, but as being our own doing, the prophet Micah
will prove when he says: "If it has been announced to thee, O man, what
is good, or what does the Lord require of thee, except to do justice
and to love mercy?"[4] Moses also: "I have placed before thy face the
way of life, and the way of death: choose what is good, and walk in
it."[6] Isaiah too: "If you are willing, and hear me, ye shall eat the
good of the land; but if ye be unwilling, and Will not hear me, the
sword will consume you: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it."[7]
And in the Psalms: "If My people had heard Me, and Israel had walked in
My ways, I would have humbled their enemies to nothing, and laid My
hand upon those that afflicted them;"[11] showing that it was in the
power of His people to hear and to walk in the ways of God. And the
Saviour also, when He commands, "But I say unto you, Resist not
evil;"[9] and, "Whosoever shall be angry with his brother, shall be in
danger of the judgment;"[10] and, "Whosoever shall look upon a FROM THE
LATIN.
them, I will show to whom he is like: he is like a wise man who built
his house upon a rock," etc.[1] So also the declaration: "Whoso heareth
these things, and doeth them not, is like a foolish man, who built his
house upon the sand," etc.[3] Even the words addressed to those who are
on His right hand, "Come unto Me, all ye blessed of My Father," etc.;
"for I was an hungered, and ye gave Me to eat; I was thirsty, and ye
gave Me drink,"[5] manifestly show that it depended upon themselves,
that either these should be deserving of praise for doing what was
commanded and receiving what was promised, or those deserving of
censure who either heard or received the contrary, and to whom it was
said, "Depart, ye cursed, into everlasting fire." Let us observe also,
that the Apostle Paul addresses us as having power over our own will,
and as possessing in ourselves the causes either of our salvation or of
our ruin: "Dost thou despise the riches of His goodness, and of His
patience, and of His long-suffering, not knowing that the goodness of
God leadeth thee to repentance? But, according to thy hardness and
impenitent heart, thou art treasuring up for thyself wrath on the day
of judgment and of the revelation of the just judgment of God, who will
render to every one according to his work: to those who by patient
continuance in well-doing seek for glory and immortality, eternal
life;[8] while to those who are contentious, and believe not the truth,
but who believe iniquity, anger, indignation, tribulation, and
distress, on every soul of man that worketh evil, on the Jew first, and
(afterwards) on the Greek; but glory, and honour, and peace to every
one that doeth good, to the Jew first, and (afterwards) to the
Greek."[11] You will find also innumerable other passages in holy
Scripture, which manifestly show that we possess freedom of will.
Otherwise there would be a contrariety in commandments being given us,
by observing which we may be saved, or by transgressing which we may be
condemned, if the power of keeping them were not implanted in us. 7.
But, seeing there are found in the sacred Scriptures
FROM THE GREEK.
woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in
his heart;"[2] and by any other commandment which He gives, declares
that it lies with ourselves to keep what is enjoined, and that we shall
reasonably[4] be liable to condemnation if we transgress. And therefore
He says in addition: "He that heareth My words, and doeth them, shall
be likened to a prudent man, who built his house upon a rock," etc.,
etc.; "while he that heareth them, but doeth them not, is like a
foolish man, who built his house upon the sand," etc.[6] And when He
says to those on His right hand, "Come, ye blessed of My Father," etc.;
"for I was an hungered, and ye gave Me to eat; I was athirst, and ye
gave Me to drink,"[7] it is exceedingly manifest that He gives the
promises to these as being deserving of praise. But, on the contrary,
to the others, as being censurable in comparison with them, He says,
"Depart, ye cursed, into everlasting fire!"[9] And let us observe how
Paul also converses[10] with us as having freedom of will, and as being
ourselves the cause of ruin or salvation, when he says, "Dost thou
despise the riches of His goodness, and of His patience, and of His
long-suffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to
repentance? But, according to thy hardness and impenitent heart, thou
art treasuring up for thyself wrath on the day of wrath and revelation
of the righteous judgment of God; who will render to every one
according to his works: to those who, by patient continuance in
well-doing, seek for glory and immortality, eternal life; while to
those who are contentious, and believe not the truth, but who believe
iniquity, anger, wrath, tribulation, and distress, on every soul of man
that worketh evil; on the Jew first, and on the Greek: but glory, and
honour, and peace to every one that worketh good; to the Jew first, and
to the Greek."[11] There are, indeed, innumerable passages in the
Scriptures which establish with exceeding clearness the existence of
freedom of will. 7. But, since certain declarations of FROM THE LATIN.
themselves certain expressions occurring in such a connection, that the
opposite of this may appear capable of being understood from them, let
us bring them forth before us, and, discussing them according to the
rule of piety,[1] let us furnish an explanation of them, in order that
from those few passages which we now expound, the solution of those
others which resemble them, and by which any power over the will seems
to be excluded, may become clear. Those expressions, accordingly, make
an impression on very many, which are used by God in speaking of
Pharaoh, as when He frequently says, "I will harden Pharaoh's
heart."[2] For if he is hardened by God, and commits sin in consequence
of being so hardened, the cause of his sin is not himself. And if so,
it will appear that Pharaoh does not possess freedom of will; and it
will be maintained, as a consequence, that, agreeably to this
illustration, neither do others who perish owe the cause of their
destruction to the freedom of their own will. That expression, also, in
Ezekiel, when he says, "I will take away their stony hearts, and will
give them hearts of flesh, that they may walk in My precepts, and keep
My ways,"[4] may impress some, inasmuch as it seems to be a gift of
God, either to walk in His ways or to keep His precepts,[5] if He take
away that stony heart which is an obstacle to the keeping of His
commandments, and bestow and implant a better and more impressible
heart, which is called now[6] a heart of flesh. Consider also the
nature of the answer given in the Gospel by our Lord and Saviour to
those who inquired of Him why He spoke to the multitude in parables.
His words are: "That seeing they may not see; and hearing they may
hear, and not understand; lest they should be converted, and their sins
be forgiven them."[7] The words, moreover, used by the Apostle Paul,
that "it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of
God that showeth mercy;"[8] in another passage also, "that to will and
to do are of God:"[9] and again, elsewhere, "Therefore hath He mercy
upon whom He will, and whom He will He hardeneth. Thou wilt say then
unto me, Why cloth He yet find fault? For who shall resist His will? O
man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say
to him who hath formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the
potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto
honour, and another to dishonour?[10]—these and similar declarations
seem to have no small influence in preventing very many from believing
that every one is to be considered as having freedom over his own will,
and in making it appear to be a consequence of the will of God whether
a man is either saved or lost.
FROM THE GREEK.
the Old Testament and of the New lead to the opposite
conclusion—namely, that it does not depend on ourselves to keep the
commandments and to be saved, or to transgress them and to be lost—let
us adduce them one by one, and see the explanations of them, in order
that from those which we adduce, any one selecting in a similar way all
the passages that seem to nullify free-will, may consider what is said
about them by way of explanation. And now, the statements regarding
Pharaoh have troubled many, respecting whom God declared several times,
"I will harden Pharaoh's heart."[3] For if he is hardened by God, and
commits sin in consequence of being hardened, he is not the cause of
sin to himself; and if so, then neither does Pharaoh possess free-will.
And some one will say that, in a similar way, they who perish have not
free-will, and will not perish of themselves. The declaration also in
Ezekiel, "I will take away their stony hearts, and will put in them
hearts of flesh, that they may walk in My precepts, and keep My
commandments,"[4] might lead one to think that it was God who gave the
power to walk in His commandments, and to keep His precepts, by His
withdrawing the hindrance—the stony heart, and implanting a better—a
heart of flesh. And let us look also at the passage in the Gospel—the
answer which the Saviour returns to those who inquired why He spake to
the multitude in parables. His words are: "That seeing they might not
see; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest they should be
converted, and their sins be forgiven them."[11] The passage also in
Paul: "It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of
God that showeth mercy."[8] The declarations, too, in other places,
that "both to will and to do are of God;"[12] "that God hath mercy upon
whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth. Thou wilt say
then, Why doth He yet find fault? For who hath resisted His will?" "The
per- FROM THE LATIN.
8. Let us begin, then, with those words which were spoken to
Pharaoh, who is said to have been hardened by God, in order that he
might not let the people go; and, along with his case, the language of
the apostle also will be considered, where he says, "Therefore He hath
mercy on whom He will, and whom He will He hardeneth."[3] For it is on
these passages chiefly that the heretics rely, asserting that salvation
is not in our own power, but that souls are of such a nature as must by
all means be either lost or saved; and that in no way can a soul which
is of an evil nature become good, or one which is of a virtuous nature
be made bad. And hence they maintain that Pharaoh, too, being of a
ruined nature, was on that account hardened by God, who hardens those
that are of an earthly nature, but has compassion on those who are of a
spiritual nature. Let us see, then, what is the meaning of their
assertion; and let us, in the first place, request them to tell us
whether they maintain that the soul of Pharaoh was of an earthly
nature, such as they term lost. They will undoubtedly answer that it
was of an earthly nature. If so, then to believe God, or to obey Him,
when his nature opposed his so doing, was an impossibility. And if this
were his condition by nature, what further need was there for his heart
to be hardened, and this not once, but several times, unless indeed
because it was possible for him to yield to persuasion? Nor could any
one be said to be hardened by another, save him who of himself was not
obdurate. And if he were not obdurate of himself, it follows that
neither was he of an earthly nature, but such an one as might give way
when overpowered[5] by signs and wonders. But he was necessary for
God's purpose, in order that, for the saving of the multitude, He might
manifest in him His power by his offering resistance to numerous
miracles, and struggling against the will of God, and his heart being
by this means said to be hardened. Such are our answers, in the first
place, to these persons; and by these their assertion may be
overturned, according to which they think that Pharaoh was destroyed in
consequence of his evil nature.[7] And with regard to the language of
the Apostle Paul, we must answer them in a similar way. For who are
they whom God hardens, according to your view? Those, namely, whom you
term of a ruined nature, and who, I am to
FROM THE GREEK.
suasion is of Him that calleth, and not of us."[1] "Nay, O man, who art
thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that
hath formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power
over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and
another unto dishonour?"[2] Now these passages are sufficient of
themselves to trouble the multitude, as if man were not possessed of
free-will, but as if it were God who saves and destroys whom He will.
8. Let us begin, then, with what is said about Pharaoh—that he
was hardened by God, that he might not send away the people; along with
which will be examined also the statement of the apostle, "Therefore
hath He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He
hardeneth."[4] And certain of those who hold different opinions misuse
these passages, themselves also almost destroying free-will by
introducing ruined natures incapable of salvation, and others saved
which it is impossible can be lost; and Pharaoh, they say, as being of
a ruined nature, is therefore hardened by God, who has mercy upon the
spiritual, but hardens the earthly. Let us see now what they mean. For
we shall ask them if Pharaoh was of an earthy nature; and when they
answer, we shall say that he who is of an earthy nature is altogether
disobedient to God: but if disobedient, what need is there of his heart
being hardened, and that not once, but frequently? Unless perhaps,
since it was possible for him to obey (in which case he would certainly
have obeyed, as not being earthy, when hard pressed by the signs and
wonders), God needs him to be disobedient to a greater degree,[6] in
order that He may manifest His mighty deeds for the salvation of the
multitude, and therefore hardens his heart. This will be our answer to
them in the first place, in order to overturn their supposition that
Pharaoh was of a ruined nature. And the same reply must be given to
them with respect to the statement of the apostle. For whom does God
harden? Those who FROM THE LATIN.
suppose, would have done something else had they not been hardened. If,
indeed, they come to destruction in consequence of being hardened, they
no longer perish naturally, but in virtue of what befalls them. Then,
in the next place, upon whom does God show mercy? On those, namely, who
are to be saved. And in what respect do those persons stand in need of
a second compassion, who are to be saved once by their nature, and so
come naturally to blessedness, except that it is shown even from their
case, that, because it was possible for them to perish, they therefore
obtain mercy, that so they may not perish, but come to salvation, and
possess the kingdom of the good. And let this be our answer to those
who devise and invent the fable[1] of good or bad natures, i.e., of
earthly or spiritual souls, in consequence of which, as they say, each
one is either saved or lost.
9. And now we must return an answer also to those who would have
the God of the law to be just only, and not also good; and let us ask
such in what manner they consider the heart of Pharaoh to have been
hardened by God—by what acts or by what prospective arrangements.[2]
For we must observe the conception of a God[3] who in our opinion is
both just and good, but according to them only just. And let them show
us how a God whom they also acknowledge to be just, can with justice
cause the heart of a man to be hardened, that, in consequence of that
very hardening, he may sin and be ruined. And how shall the justice of
God be defended, if He Himself is the cause of the destruction of those
whom, owing to their unbelief (through their being hardened), He has
afterwards condemned by the authority of a judge? For why does He blame
him, saying, "But since thou wilt not let My people go, lo, I will
smite all the first-born in Egypt, even thy first-born,"[5] and
whatever else was spoken through Moses by God to Pharaoh? For it
behoves every one who maintains the truth of what is recorded in
Scripture, and who desires to show that the God of the law and the
prophets is just, to render a reason for all these things, and to show
how there is in them nothing at all derogatory to the justice of God,
since, although they deny His goodness, they admit that He is a just
judge, and creator of the world. Different, however, is the method of
our reply to those who assert that the creator of this world is a
malignant being, i.e., a devil.
FROM THE GREEK.
perish, as if they would obey unless they were hardened, or manifestly
those who would be saved because they are not of a ruined nature. And
on whom has He mercy? Is it on those who are to be saved? And how is
there need of a second mercy for those who have been prepared once for
salvation, and who will by all means become blessed on account of their
nature? Unless perhaps, since they are capable of incurring
destruction, if they did not receive mercy, they will obtain mercy, in
order that they may not incur that destruction of which they are
capable, but may be in the condition of those who are saved. And this
is our answer to such persons.
9. But to those who think they understand the term "hardened," we
must address the inquiry, What do they mean by saying that God, by His
working, hardens the heart, and with what purpose does He do this? For
let them observe the conception[4] of a God who is in reality just and
good; but if they will not allow this, let it be conceded to them for
the present that He is just; and let them show how the good and just
God, or the just. God only, appears to be just, in hardening the heart
of him who perishes because of his being hardened: and how the just God
becomes the cause of destruction and disobedience, when men are
chastened by Him on account of their hardness and disobedience. And why
does He find fault with him, saying, "Thou wilt not let My people
go;"[6] "Lo, I will smite all the first-born in Egypt, even thy
first-born;"[7] and whatever else is recorded as spoken from God to
Pharaoh through the intervention of Moses? For he who believes that the
Scriptures are true, and that God is just, must necessarily endeavour,
if he be honest,[8] to show how God, in using such expressions, may be
distinctly[9] understood to be just. But if any one should stand,
declaring with uncovered head that the Creator of the world was
inclined to wickedness,[10] we should need other words to answer them.
FROM THE LATIN.
10. But since we acknowledge the God who spoke by Moses to be not
only just, but also good, let us carefully inquire how it is in keeping
with the character of a just and good Deity to have hardened the heart
of Pharaoh. And let us see whether, following the example of the
Apostle Paul, we are able to solve the difficulty by help of some
parallel instances: if we can show, e.g., that by one and the same act
God has pity upon one individual, but hardens another; not purposing or
desiring that he who is hardened should be so, but because, in the
manifestation of His goodness and patience, the heart of those who
treat His kindness and forbearance with contempt and insolence is
hardened by the punishment of their crimes being delayed; while those,
on the other hand, who make His goodness and patience the occasion of
their repentance and reformation, obtain compassion. To show more
clearly, however, what we mean, let us take the illustration employed
by the Apostle Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews, where he says, "For
the earth, which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and
bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, will receive
blessing from God; but that which beareth thorns and briers is
rejected, and is nigh unto cursing, whose end is to be burned."[3] Now
from those words of Paul which we have quoted, it is clearly shown that
by one and the same act on the part of God—that, viz., by which He
sends rain upon the earth—one portion of the ground, when carefully
cultivated, brings forth good fruits; while another, neglected and
uncared for, produces thorns and thistles. And if one, speaking as it
were in the person of the rain,[4] were to say, "It is I, the rain,
that have made the good fruits, and it is I that have caused the thorns
and thistles to grow," however hard[6] the statement might appear, it
would nevertheless be true; for unless the rain had fallen, neither
fruits, nor thorns, nor thistles would have sprung up, whereas by the
coming of the rain the earth gave birth to both. Now, although it is
due to the beneficial action of the rain that the earth has produced
herbs of both kinds, it is not to the rain that the diversity of the
herbs is properly to be ascribed; but on those will justly rest the
blame for the bad seed, who, although they might have turned up the
ground by frequent ploughing, and have broken the clods by repeated
harrowing, and have extirpated all useless and noxious weeds, and have
cleared and prepared the fields for the coming showers by all the
labour and toil which cultivation demands, have nevertheless neglected
to do this, and who will accordingly reap briers and thorns, the most
appropriate fruit of their sloth. And the consequence therefore is,
that while the rain falls in kindness and impartiality[7] equally upon
the whole earth, yet, by one and the same operation of the rain, that
soil which is cultivated yields with a blessing useful fruits to the
diligent and careful cultivators, while that which has become hardened
through the neglect of the husbandman brings forth only thorns and
thistles. Let us there-
FROM THE GREEK.
10. But since they say that they regard Him as a just God, and we
as one who is at the same time good and just, let us consider how the
good and just God could harden the heart of Pharaoh. See, then,
whether, by an illustration used by the apostle in the Epistle to the
Hebrews, we are able to prove that by one operation[1] God has mercy
upon one man while He hardens another, although not intending to
harden; but, (although) having a good purpose, hardening follows as a
result of the inherent principle of wickedness in such persons,[2] and
so He is said to harden him who is hardened. "The earth," he says,
"which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth
herbs meet for them for whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from
God; but that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh
to cursing, whose end is to be burned."[3] As respects the rain, then,
there is one operation; and there being one operation as regards the
rain, the ground which is cultivated produces fruit, while that which
is neglected and is barren produces thorns. Now, it might seem
profane[5] for Him who rains to say, "I produced the fruits, and the
thorns that are in the earth;" and yet, although profane, it is true.
For, had rain not fallen, there would have been neither fruits nor
thorns; but, having fallen at the proper time and in moderation, both
were produced. The ground, now, which drank in the rain which often
fell upon it, and yet produced thorns and briers, is rejected and nigh
to cursing. The blessing, then, of the rain descended even upon the
inferior land; but it, being neglected and uncultivated, yielded thorns
and thistles. In the same way, therefore, the wonderful works also done
by God are, as it were, the rain; while the differing purposes are, as
it were, the cultivated and neglected land, being (yet), like earth, of
one nature. FROM THE LATIN.
fore view those signs and miracles which were done by God, as the
showers furnished by Him from above; and the purpose and desires of
men, as the cultivated and uncultivated soil, which is of one and the
same nature indeed, as is every soil compared with another, but not in
one and the same state of cultivation. From which it follows that every
one's will,[1] if untrained, and fierce, and barbarous, is either
hardened by the miracles and wonders of God, growing more savage and
thorny than ever, or it becomes more pliant, and yields itself up with
the whole mind to obedience, if it be cleared from vice and subjected
to training.
11. But, to establish the point more clearly, it will not be
superfluous to employ another illustration, as if, e.g., one were to
say that it is the sun which hardens and liquefies, although liquefying
and hardening are things of an opposite nature. Now it is not incorrect
to say that the sun, by one and the same power of its heat, melts wax
indeed, but dries up and hardens mud:[3] not that its power operates
One way upon mud, and in another way upon wax; but that the qualities
of mud and wax are different, although according to nature they are one
thing,[4] both being from the earth. In this way, then, one and the
same working upon the part of God, which was administered by Moses in
signs and wonders, made manifest the hardness of Pharaoh, which he had
conceived in the intensity of his wickedness? but exhibited the
obedience of those other Egyptians who were intermingled with the
Israelites, and who are recorded to have quitted Egypt at the same time
with the Hebrews. With respect to the statement that the heart of
Pharaoh was subdued by degrees, so that on one occasion he said, "Go
not far away; ye shall go a three days' journey, but leave your wives,
and your children, and your cattle,"[8] and as regards any other
statements, according to which he appears to yield gradually to the
signs and wonders, what else is shown, save that the power of the signs
and miracles was making some impression on him, but not so much as it
ought to have done? For if the hardening were of such a nature as many
take it to be, he would not indeed have given way even in a few
instances. But I think there is no absurdity in explaining the tropical
or figurative[9] nature of that language employed in speaking of
"hardening," according to common usage. For those masters who are
remarkable for kindness to their slaves, are frequently accustomed to
say to the latter, when, through much patience and indulgence on their
part, they have become insolent and worthless: "It is I that have made
you what you are; I have spoiled you; it is my endurance that has made
you good for nothing: I am to blame for your perverse and wicked
habits, because I do not have you immediately punished for every
delinquency according to your deserts." For we must first attend to the
tropical or figurative meaning of the language, and so come to see the
force of the expression, and not find fault with the word, whose inner
meaning we do not ascertain.
FROM THE GREEK.
11. And as if the sun, uttering a voice, were to say, "I liquefy
and dry up," liquefaction and drying up being opposite things, he would
not speak falsely as regards the point in question;[2] wax being melted
and mud being dried by the same heat; so the same operation, which was
performed through the instrumentality of Moses, proved the hardness of
Pharaoh on the one hand, the result of his wickedness, and the yielding
of the mixed Egyptian multitude who took their departure with the
Hebrews. And the brief statement[6] that the heart of Pharaoh was
softened, as it were, when he said, "But ye shall not go far: ye will
go a three days' journey, and leave your wives,"[7] and anything else
which he said, yielding little by little before the signs, proves that
the wonders made some impression even upon him, but did not accomplish
all (that they might). Yet even this would not have happened, if that
which is supposed by the many—the hardening of Pharaoh's heart—had been
produced by God Himself. And it is not absurd to soften down such
expressions agreeably to common usage:[10] for good masters often say
to their slaves, when spoiled by their kindness and forbearance, "I
have made you bad, and I am to blame for offences of such enormity."
For we must attend to the character and force of the phrase, and not
argue sophistically," disregarding the meaning of the expression. Paul
accordingly, having examined these points clearly, says to the sinner:
"Or despisest thou the riches of His goodness, and forbearance, and
long-suffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to
repentance? FROM THE LATIN.
Finally, the Apostle Paul, evidently treating of such, says to him who
remained in his sins: "Despisest thou the riches of His goodness, and
forbearance, and long-suffering; not knowing that the goodness of God
leadeth thee to repentance? but, after thy hardness and impenitent
heart, treasurest up unto thyself wrath on the day of wrath and
revelation of the righteous judgment of God."[1] Such are the words of
the apostle to him who is in his sins. Let us apply these very
expressions to Pharaoh, and see if they also are not spoken of him with
propriety, since, according to his hardness and impenitent heart, he
treasured and stored up for himself wrath on the day of wrath, inasmuch
as his hardness could never have been declared and manifested, unless
signs and wonders of such number and magnificence had been performed.
12. But if the proofs which we have adduced do not appear full
enough, and the similitude of the apostle seem wanting in
applicability,[3] let us add the voice of prophetic authority, and see
what the prophets declare regarding those who at first, indeed, leading
a righteous life, have deserved to receive numerous proofs of the
goodness of God, but afterwards, as being human beings, have fallen
astray, with whom the prophet, making himself also one, says: "Why, O
LORD, hast Thou made us to err from Thy way? and hardened our heart,
that we should not fear Thy name? Return, for Thy servants' sake, for
the tribes of Thine inheritance, that we also for a little may obtain
some inheritance from Thy holy hill."[5] Jeremiah also employs similar
language: "O Lord, Thou hast deceived us, and we were deceived; Thou
hast held (us), and Thou hast prevailed."[7] The expression, then,
"Why, O Lord, hast Thou hardened our heart, that we should not fear Thy
name?" used by those who prayed for mercy, is to be taken in a
figurative, moral acceptation,[8] as if one were to say, "Why hast Thou
spared us so long, and didst not requite us when we sinned, but didst
abandon us, that so our wickedness might increase, and our liberty of
sinning be extended when punishment ceased?" In like manner, unless a
horse continually feel the spur[9] of his rider, and have his mouth
abraded by a bit,[10] he becomes hardened. And a boy also, unless
constantly disciplined by chastisement, will grow up to be an insolent
youth, and one ready to fall headlong into vice. God accordingly
abandons and neglects those whom He has judged undeserving of
chastisement: "For whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth
every son whom He receiveth."[11] From which we are to suppose that
those are to be received into the rank and affection of sons, who have
deserved to be scourged and chastened by the Lord, in order that they
also, through endurance of trials and tribulations, may be able to say,
"Who shall separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus?
shall tribulation, or anguish, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or
sword?"[12] For by all these is each one's resolu-
FROM THE GREEK.
but, after thy hardness and impenitent heart, treasurest up unto
thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous
judgment of God."[1] Now, let what the apostle says to the sinner be
addressed to Pharaoh, and then the announcements made to him will be
understood to have been made with peculiar fitness, as to one who,
according to his hardness and unrepentant heart, was treasuring up to
himself wrath; seeing that his hardness would not have been proved nor
made manifest unless miracles had been performed, and miracles, too, of
such magnitude and importance.
12. But since such narratives are slow to secure assent,[2] and
are considered to be forced,[4] let us see from the prophetical
declarations also, what those persons say, who, although they have
experienced the great kindness of God, have not lived virtuously, but
have afterwards sinned. "Why, O Lord, hast Thou made us to err from Thy
ways? Why hast Thou hardened our heart, so as not to fear Thy name?
Return for Thy servants' sake, for the tribes of Thine inheritance,
that we may inherit a shall portion of Thy holy mountain."[6] And in
Jeremiah: "Thou hast deceived me, O Lord, and I was deceived; Thou wert
strong, and Thou didst prevail."[7] For the expression, "Why hast Thou
hardened our hear, so as not to fear Thy name?" uttered by those who
are begging to receive mercy, is in its nature as follows: "Why hast
Thou spared us so long, not visiting us because of our sins, but
deserting us, until our transgressions come to a height?" Now He leaves
the greater part of men unpunished, both in order that the habits of
each one may be examined, so far as it depends upon ourselves, and that
the virtuous may be made manifest in consequence of the test applied;
while the others, not escaping notice from God—for He knows all things
before they exist—but from the rational creation and themselves, may
afterwards obtain the means of cure, seeing they would not have known
the benefit had they not FROM THE LATIN.
tion manifested and displayed, and the firmness of his perseverance
made known, not so much to God, who knows all things before they
happen, as to the rational and heavenly virtues,[2] who have obtained a
part in the work of procuring human salvation, as being a sort of
assistants and ministers to God. Those, on the other hand, who do not
yet offer themselves to God with such constancy and affection, and are
not ready to come into His service, and to prepare their souls for
trial, are said to be abandoned by God, i.e., not to be instructed,
inasmuch as they are not prepared for instruction, their training or
care being undoubtedly postponed to a later time. These certainly do
not know what they will obtain from God, unless they first entertain
the desire of being bene-fired; and this finally will be the case, if a
man come first to a knowledge of himself, and feel what are his
defects, and understand from whom he either ought or can seek the
supply of his deficiencies. For he who does not know beforehand of his
weakness or his sickness, cannot seek a physician; or at least, after
recovering his health, that man will not be grateful to his physician
who did not first recognise the dangerous nature of his ailment. And
so, unless a man has first ascertained the defects of his life, and the
evil nature of his sins, and made this known by confession from his own
lips, he cannot be cleansed or acquitted, lest he should be ignorant
that what he possesses has been bestowed on him by favour, but should
consider as his own property what flows from the divine liberality,
which idea undoubtedly generates arrogance of mind and pride, and
finally becomes the cause of the individual's ruin. And this, we must
believe, was the case with the devil, who viewed as his own, and not as
given him by God, the primacy[7] which he held at the time when he was
unstained;[8] and thus was fulfilled in him the declaration, that
"every one who exalteth himself shall be abased."[9] From which it
appears to me that the divine mysteries were concealed from the wise
and prudent, according to the statement of Scripture, that "no flesh
should glory before God,"[10] and revealed to children—to those,
namely, who, after they have become infants and little children, i.e.,
have returned to the humility and simplicity of children, then make
progress; and on arriving at perfection, remember that they have
obtained their state of happiness, not by their own merits, but by the
grace and compassion of God.
13. It is therefore by the sentence of God that he is abandoned
who deserves to be so, while over some sinners God exercises
forbearance; not, however, without a definite principle of action.[11]
Nay, the very fact that He is long-suffering conduces to the advantage
of those very persons, since the soul over which He exercises this
providential care is immortal; and, as being immortal and everlasting,
it is not, although not immediately cared for, excluded from salvation,
which is postponed to a more convenient time. For perhaps it is
expedient for those who have been more deeply imbued with the poison of
FROM THE GREEK.
condemned themselves. It is of advantage to each one, that he perceive
his own peculiar nature[1] and the grace of God. For he who does not
perceive his own weakness and the divine favour, although he receive a
benefit, yet, not having made trial of himself, nor having condemned
himself, will imagine that the benefit conferred upon him by the grace
of Heaven is his own doing. And this imagination, producing also
vanity,[3] will be the cause of a downfall: which, we conceive, was the
case with the devil, who attributed to himself the priority which he
possessed when in a state of sinlessness.[4] "For every one that
exalteth himself shall be abased," and "every one that humbleth himself
shall be exalted."[5] And observe, that for this reason divine things
have been concealed from the wise and prudent, in order, as says the
apostle, that "no flesh should glory in the presence of God; "[6] and
they have been revealed to babes, to those who after childhood have
come to better things, and who remember that it is not so much from
their own effort, as by the unspeakable goodness (of God), that they
have reached the greatest possible extent of blessedness.
13. It is not without reason, then, that he who is abandoned, is
abandoned to the divine judgment, and that God is long-suffering with
certain sinners; but because it will be for their advantage, with
respect to the immortality of the soul and the unending world,[12] that
they be not quickly brought[13] into a state of salvation, but be
conducted to it more slowly, after having experienced many FROM THE
LATIN.
wickedness to obtain this salvation at a later period. For as medical
men sometimes, although they could quickly cover over the scars of
wounds, keep back and delay the cure for the present, in the
expectation of a better and more perfect recovery, knowing that it is
more salutary to retard the treatment in the cases of swellings caused
by wounds, and to allow the malignant humours to flow off for a while,
rather than to hasten a superficial cure, by shutting up in the veins
the poison of a morbid humour, which, excluded from its customary
outlets, will undoubtedly creep into the inner parts of the limbs, and
penetrate to the very vitals of the viscera, producing no longer mere
disease in the body, but causing destruction to life; so, in like
manner, God also, who knows the secret things of the heart, and
foreknows the future, in much forbearance allows certain events to
happen, which, coming from without upon men, cause to come forth into
the light the passions and vices which are concealed within, that by
their means those may be cleansed and cured who, through great
negligence and carelessness, have admitted within themselves the roots
and seeds of sins, so that, when driven outwards and brought to the
surface, they may in a certain degree be cast forth and dispersed.[1]
And thus, although a man may appear to be afflicted with evils of a
serious kind, suffering convulsions in all his limbs, he may
nevertheless, at some future time, obtain relief and a cessation from
his trouble; and, after enduring his afflictions to satiety, may, after
many sufferings, be restored again to his (proper) condition. For God
deals with souls not merely with a view to the short space of our
present life, included within sixty years[4] or more, but with
reference to a perpetual and never-ending period, exercising His
providential care over souls that are immortal, even as He Himself is
eternal and immortal. For He made the rational nature, which He formed
in His own image and likeness, incorruptible; and therefore the soul,
which is immortal, is not excluded by the shortness of the present life
from the divine remedies and cures.
14. But let us take from the Gospels also the similitudes of
those things which we have mentioned, in which is described a certain
rock, having on it a little superficial earth, on which, when a seed
falls, it is said quickly to spring up; but when sprung up, it withers
as the sun ascends in the heavens, and dies away, because it did not
cast its root deeply into the ground? Now this rock undoubtedly
represents the human soul, hardened on account of its own negligence,
and converted into stone because of its wickedness. For God gave no one
a stony heart by a creative act; but each individual's heart is said to
become stony through his own wickedness and disobedience. As,
therefore, if one were to blame a husbandman for not casting his seed
more quickly upon rocky ground, because seed cast upon other rocky soil
was seen to spring up speedily, the husbandman would certainly say in
reply: "I sow this soil more slowly, for this reason,
FROM THE GREEK.
evils. For as physicians, who are able to cure a man quickly, when they
suspect that a hidden poison exists in the body, do the reverse of
healing, making this more certain through their very desire to heal,
deeming it better for a considerable time to retain the patient under
inflammation and sickness, in order that he may recover his health more
surely, than to appear to produce a rapid recovery, and afterwards to
cause a relapse, and (thus) that hasty cure last only for a time; in
the same way, God also, who knows the secret things of the heart, and
foresees future events, in His long-suffering, permits (certain events
to occur), and by means of those things which happen from without
extracts the secret evil, in order to cleanse him who through
carelessness has received the seeds of sin, that having vomited them
forth when they came to the surface, although he may have been deeply
involved in evils, he may afterwards obtain healing after his
wickedness, and be renewed? For God governs souls not with reference,
let me say, to the fifty[3] years of the present life, but with
reference to an illimitable s age: for He made the thinking principle
immortal in its nature, and kindred to Himself; and the rational soul
is not, as in this life, excluded from cure.
14. Come now, and let us use the following image[6] from the
Gospel. There is a certain rock, with a little surface-soil, on which,
if seeds fall, they quickly spring up; but when sprung up, as not
having root, they are burned and withered when the sun has arisen. Now
this rock is a human soul, hardened on account of its negligence, and
converted to stone because of its wickedness; for no one receives from
God a heart created of stone, but it becomes such in consequence of
wickedness. If one, then, were to find fault with the husbandman for
not sowing his seed sooner upon the rocky soil, when he FROM THE LATIN.
that it may retain the seed which it has received; for it suits this
ground to be sown somewhat slowly, lest perhaps the crop, having
sprouted too rapidly, and coming forth from the mere surface of a
shallow soil, should be unable to withstand the rays of the sun." Would
not he who formerly found fault acquiesce in the reasons and superior
knowledge of the husbandman, and approve as done on rational grounds
what formerly appeared to him as rounded on no reason? And in the same
way, God, the thoroughly skilled husbandman of all His creation,
undoubtedly conceals and delays to another time those[1] things which
we think ought to have obtained health sooner, in order that not the
outside of things, rather than the inside, my be cured. But if any one
now were to object to us that certain seeds do even fall upon rocky
ground, i.e., on a hard and stony heart, we should answer that even
this does not happen without the arrangement of Divine Providence;
inasmuch as, but for this, it would not be known what condemnation was
incurred by rashness in hearing and indifference in investigation,[3]
nor, certainly, what benefit was derived from being trained in an
orderly manner. And hence it happens that the soul comes to know its
defects, and to cast the blame upon itself, and, consistently with
this, to reserve and submit itself to training, i.e., in order that it
may see that its faults must first be removed, and that then it must
come to receive the instruction of wisdom. As, therefore, souls are
innumerable, so also are their manners, and purposes, and movements,
and appetencies, and incitements different, the variety of which can by
no means be grasped by the human mind; and therefore to God alone must
be left the art, and the knowledge, and the power of an arrangement of
this kind, as He alone can know both the remedies for each individual
soul, and measure out the time of its cure. It is He alone then who, as
we said, recognises the ways of individual men, and determines by what
way He ought to lead Pharaoh, that through him His name might be named
in all the earth, having previously chastised him by many blows, and
finally drowning him in the sea. By this drowning, however, it is not
to be supposed that God's providence as regards Pharaoh was terminated;
for we must not imagine, because he was drowned, that therefore he had
forthwith completely[5] perished: "for in the hand of God are both we
and our words; all wisdom, also, and knowledge of workmanship,"[6] as
Scripture declares. But these points we have discussed according to our
ability, treating of that chapter[7] of Scripture in which it is said
that God hardened the heart of Pharaoh, and agreeably to the statement,
"He hath mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He
hardeneth."[9]
15. Let us now look at those passages of Ezekiel where he says,
"I will take away from them their stony heart, and I will put in them a
heart of flesh, that they may walk in My statutes, and keep Mine
ordinances.[10]
FROM THE GREEK.
saw other rocky ground which had received seed flourishing, the
husbandman would reply, "I shall sow this ground more slowly, casting
in seeds that will be able to retain their hold, this slower method
being better for the ground, and more secure than that which receives
the seed in a more rapid manner, and more upon the surface." (The
person finding fault) would yield his assent to the husbandman, as one
who spoke with sound reason, and who acted with skill: so also the
great Husbandman of all nature postpones that benefit which might be
deemed premature,[2] that it may not prove superficial. But it is
probable that here some one may object to us with reference to this:
"Why do some of the seeds fall upon the earth that has superficial
soil, the soul being, as it were, a rock?" Now we must say, in answer
to this, that it was better for this soul, which desired better things
precipitately,[4] and not by a way which led to them, to obtain its
desire, in order that, condemning itself on this account, it may, after
a long time, endure to receive the husbandry which is according to
nature. For souls are, as one may say, innumerable; and their habits
are innumerable, and their movements, and their purposes, and their
assaults, and their efforts, of which there is only one admirable
administrator, who knows both the seasons, and the fitting helps, and
the avenues, and the ways, viz., the God and Father of all things, who
knows how He conducts even Pharaoh by so great events, and by drowning
in the sea, with which latter occurrence His superintendence of Pharaoh
does not cease. For he was not annihilated when drowned: "For in the
hand of God are both we and our words; all wisdom also, and knowledge
of workmanship."[8] And such is a moderate defence with regard to the
statements that "Pharaoh's heart was hardened," and that "God hath
mercy upon whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth."
15. Let us look also at the declaration in Ezekiel, which says,
"I shall take away their stony hearts, and will put in them hearts of
flesh, that they FROM THE LATIN.
For if God, when He pleases, takes away a heart of stone and bestows a
heart of flesh, that His ordinances may be observed and His
commandments may be obeyed, it will then appear that it is not in our
power to put away wickedness. For the taking away of a stony heart
seems to be nothing else than the removal of the wickedness by which
one is hardened, from whomsoever God pleases to remove it. Nor is the
bestowal of a heart of flesh, that the precepts of God may be observed
and His commandments obeyed, any other thing than a man becoming
obedient, and no longer resisting the truth, but performing works of
virtue. If, then, God promises to do this, and if, before He takes away
the stony heart, we are unable to remove it from ourselves, it follows
that it is not in our power, but in God's only, to cast away
wickedness. And again, if it is not our doing to form within us a heart
of flesh, but the work of God alone, it will not be in our power to
live virtuously, but it will in everything appear to be a work of
divine grace. Such are the assertions of those who wish to prove from
the authority of Holy Scripture that nothing lies in our own power. Now
to these we answer, that these passages are not to be so understood,
but in the following manner. Take the case of one who was ignorant and
untaught, and who, feeling the disgrace of his ignorance, should,
driven either by an exhortation from some person, or incited by a
desire to emulate other wise men, hand himself over to one by whom he
is assured that he will be carefully trained and competently
instructed. If he, then, who had formerly hardened himself in
ignorance, yield himself, as we have said, with full purpose of mind to
a master, and promise to obey him in all things, the master, on seeing
clearly the resolute nature of his determination; will appropriately
promise to take away all ignorance, and to implant knowledge within his
mind; not that he undertakes to do this if the disciple refuse or
resist his efforts, but only on his offering and binding himself to
obedience in all things. So also the Word of God promises to those who
draw near to Him, that He will take away their stony heart, not indeed
from those who do not listen to His word, but from those who receive
the precepts of His teaching; as in the Gospels we find the sick
approaching the Saviour, asking to receive health, and thus at last be
cured. And in order that the blind might be healed and regain their
sight, their part consisted in making supplication to the Saviour, and
in believing that their cure could be effected by Him; while His part,
on the other hand, lay in restoring to them the power of vision. And in
this way also does the Word of God promise to bestow instruction by
taking away the stony heart, i.e., by the removal of wickedness, that
so men may be able to walk in the divine precepts, and observe the
commandments of the law.
FROM THE GREEK.
may walk in My statutes and keep My precepts."[1] For if God, when He
wills, takes away the stony hearts, and implants hearts of flesh, so
that His precepts are obeyed and His commandments are observed, it is
not in our power to put away wickedness. For the taking away of the
stony hearts is nothing else than the taking away of the wickedness,
according to which one is hardened, from him from whom God wills to
take it; and the implanting of a heart of flesh, so that a man may walk
in the precepts of God and keep His commandments, what else is it than
to become somewhat yielding and unresistent to the truth, and to be
capable of practising virtues? And if God promises to do this, and if,
before He takes away the stony hearts, we do not lay them aside, it is
manifest that it does not depend upon ourselves to put away wickedness;
and if it is not we who do anything towards the production within us of
the heart of flesh, but if it is God's doing, it will not be our own
act to live agreeably to virtue, but altogether (the result of) divine
grace. Such will be the statements of him who, from the mere words (of
Scripture), annihilates free-will.[2] But we shall answer, saying, that
we ought to understand these passages thus: That as a man, e.g., who
happened to be ignorant and uneducated, on perceiving his own defects,
either in consequence of an exhortation from his teacher, or in some
other way, should spontaneously give himself up to him whom he
considers able to introduce[3] him to education and virtue; and, on his
yielding himself up, his instructor promises that he will take away his
ignorance, and implant instruction, not as if it contributed nothing to
his training, and to the avoiding of ignorance, that he brought himself
to be healed, but because the instructor promised to improve him who
desired improvement; so, in the same way, the Word of God promises to
take away wickedness, which it calls a stony heart, from those who come
to it, not if they are unwilling, but (only) if they submit themselves
to the Physician of the sick, as in the Gospels FROM THE LATIN.
16. There is next brought before us that declaration uttered by
the Saviour in the Gospel: "That seeing they may see, and not perceive;
and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest they should happen
to be converted, and their sins be forgiven them."[1] On which our
opponent will remark: "If those who shall hear more distinctly are by
all means to be corrected and converted, and converted in such a manner
as to be worthy of receiving the remission of sins, and if it be not in
their own power to hear the word distinctly, but if it depend on the
Instructor to teach more openly and distinctly, while he declares that
he does not proclaim to them the word with clearness, lest they should
perhaps hear and understand, and be converted, and be saved, it will
follow, certainly, that their salvation is not dependent upon
themselves. And if this be so, then we have no free-will either as
regards salvation or destruction." Now were it not for the words that
are added, "Lest perhaps they should be converted, and their sins be
forgiven them," we might be more inclined to return the answer, that
the Saviour was unwilling that those individuals whom He foresaw would
not become good, should understand the mysteries of the kingdom of
heaven, and that therefore He spoke to them in parables; but as that
addition follows, "Lest perhaps they should be converted, and their
sins be forgiven them," the explanation is rendered more difficult.
And, in the first place, we have to notice what defence this passage
furnishes against those heretics who are accustomed to hunt out of the
Old Testament any expressions which seem, according to their view, to
predicate severity and cruelty of God the Creator, as when He is
described as being affected with the feeling of vengeance or
punishment, or by any of those emotions, however named, from which they
deny the existence of goodness in the Creator; for they do not judge of
the Gospels with the same mind and feelings, and do not observe whether
any such statements are found in them as they condemn and censure in
the Old Testament. For manifestly, in the passage referred to, the
Saviour is shown, as they themselves admit, not to speak distinctly,
for this very reason, that men may not be converted, and
FROM THE GREEK.
the sick are found coming to the Saviour, and asking to obtain healing,
and so are cured. And, let me say, the recovery of sight by the blind
is, so far as their request goes, the act of those who believe that
they are capable of being healed; but as respects the restoration of
sight, it is the work of our Saviour. Thus, then, does the Word of God
promise to implant knowledge in those who come to it, by taking away
the stony and hard heart, which is wickedness, in order that one may
walk in the divine commandments, and keep the divine injunctions.
16. There was after this the passage from the Gospel, where the
Saviour said, that for this reason did He speak to those without in
parables, that "seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not
understand; lest they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven
them."[1] Now, our opponent will say, "If some persons are assuredly
converted on hearing words of greater clearness, so that they become
worthy of the remission of sins, and if it does not depend upon
themselves to hear these words of greater clearness, but upon him who
teaches, and he for this reason does not announce them to them more
distinctly, lest they should see and understand, it is not within the
power of such to be saved; and if so, we are not possessed of free-will
as regards salvation and destruction." Effectual, indeed, would be the
reply to such arguments, were it not for the addition, "Lest they
should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them,"—namely, that the
Saviour did not wish those who were not to become good and virtuous to
understand the more mystical (parts of His teaching), and for this
reason spake to them in parables; but now, on account of the words,
"Lest they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them," the
defence is more difficult. In the first place, then, we must notice the
passage in its bearing on the heretics, who hunt out those portions
from the Old Testament where is exhibited, as they themselves daringly
assert, the cruelty[2] of the Creator of the world[3] FROM THE LATIN.
when converted, receive the remission of sins. Now, if the words be
understood according to the letter merely, nothing less, certainly,
will be contained in them than in those passages which they find fault
with in the Old Testament. And if they are of opinion that any
expressions occurring in such a connection in the New Testament stand
in need of explanation, it will necessarily follow that those also
occurring in the Old Testament, which are the subject of censure, may
be freed from aspersion by an explanation of a similar kind, so that by
such means the passages found in both Testaments may be shown to
proceed from one and the same God. But let us return, as we best may,
to the question proposed.
17. We said formerly, when discussing the case of Pharaoh, that
sometimes it does not lead to good results for a man to be cured too
quickly, especially if the disease, being shut up within the inner
parts of the body, rage with greater fierceness. Whence God, who is
acquainted with secret things, and knows all things before they happen,
in His great goodness delays the cure of such, and postpones their
recovery to a remoter period, and, so to speak, cures them by not
curing them, lest a too favourable state of health[4] should render
them incurable. It is therefore possible that, in the case of those to
whom, as being "without," the words of our Lord and Saviour were
addressed, He, seeing from His scrutiny of the hearts and reins that
they were not yet able to receive teaching of a clearer type, veiled by
the covering of language the meaning of the profounder mysteries, lest
perhaps, being rapidly converted and healed, i.e., having quickly
obtained the remission of their sins, they should again easily slide
back into the same disease which they
FROM THE GREEK.
in His purpose of avenging and punishing the wicked,[1] or by whatever
other name they wish to designate such a quality, so speaking only that
they may say that goodness does not exist in the Creator; and who do
not deal with the New Testament in a similar manner, nor in a spirit of
candour,[2] but pass by places similar to those which they consider
censurable in the Old Testament. For manifestly, and according to the
Gospel, is the Saviour shown, as they assert, by His former words, not
to speak distinctly for this reason, that men might not be converted,
and, being converted, might become deserving of the remission of sins:
which statement of itself is nothing inferior[3] to those passages from
the Old Testament which are objected to. And if they seek to defend the
Gospel, we must ask them whether they are not acting in a blameworthy
manner in dealing differently with the same questions; and, while not
stumbling against the New Testament, but seeking to defend it, they
nevertheless bring a charge against the Old regarding similar points,
whereas they ought to offer a defence in the same way of the passages
from the New. And therefore we shall force them, on account of the
resemblances, to regard all as the writings of one God. Come, then, and
let us, to the best of our ability, furnish an answer to the question
submitted to us.
17. We asserted also, when investigating the subject of Pharaoh,
that sometimes a rapid cure is not for the advantage of those who are
healed, if, after being seized by troublesome diseases, they should
easily get rid of those by which they had been entangled. For,
despising the evil as one that is easy of cure, and not being on their
guard a second time against falling into it, they will be involved in
it (again). Wherefore, in the case of such persons, the everlasting
God, the Knower of secrets, who knows all things before they exist, in
conformity with His goodness, delays sending them more rapid
assistance, and, so to speak, in helping them does not help, the latter
course being to their advan- FROM THE LATIN.
had found could be healed without any difficulty. For if this be the
case, no one can doubt that the punishment is doubled, and the amount
of wickedness increased; since not only are the sins which had appeared
to be forgiven repeated, but the court[1] of virtue also is desecrated
when trodden by deceitful and polluted beings,[2] filled within with
hidden wickedness. And what remedy can there ever be for those who,
after eating the impure and filthy food of wickedness, have tasted the
pleasantness of virtue, and received its sweetness into their mouths,
and yet have again betaken themselves to the deadly and poisonous
provision of sin? And who doubts that it is better for delay and a
temporary abandonment to occur, in order that if, at some future time,
they should happen to be satiated with wickedness, and the filth with
which they are now delighted should become loathsome, the word of God
may at last be appropriately made clear to them, and that which is holy
be not given to the dogs, nor pearls be cast before swine, which will
trample them under foot, and turn, moreover, and rend and assault those
who have proclaimed to them the word of God? These, then, are they who
are said to be "without," undoubtedly by way of contrast with those who
are said to be "within," and to hear the word of God with greater
clearness. And yet those who are "without" do hear the word, although
it is covered by parables, and overshadowed by proverbs. There are
others, also, besides those who are without, who are called Tyrians,
and who do not hear at all, respecting whom the Saviour knew that they
would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes, if the
miracles performed among others had been done amongst them, and yet
these do not hear those things which are heard even by those who are
"without:" and I believe, for this reason, that the rank of such in
wickedness was far lower and worse than that of those who are said to
be "without," i.e., who are not far from those who are within, and who
have deserved to hear the word, although in parables; and because,
perhaps, their cure was delayed to that time when it will be more
tolerable for them on the day of judgment, than for those before whom
those miracles which are recorded were performed, that so at last,
being then relieved from the weight of their sins, they may enter with
more ease and power of endurance upon the way of safety. And this is a
point which I wish impressed upon those who peruse these pages, that
with respect to topics of such difficulty and obscurity we use our
utmost endeavour, not so much to ascertain clearly the solutions of the
questions (for every one will do this as the Spirit gives him
utterance), as to maintain the rule of faith in the most unmistakeable
manner,[7] by striving to show that the providence of God, which
equitably administers all things, governs also immortal souls on the
justest principles, (conferring rewards) according to the merits and
motives of each individual; the present economy of things s not being
confined within the life of this world, but the pre-existing state of
merit always furnishing the ground for
FROM THE GREEK.
tage. It is probable, then, that those "without," of whom we are
speaking, having been foreseen by the Saviour, according to our
supposition, as not (likely) to prove steady in their conversion,[3] if
they should hear more clearly the words that were spoken, were (so)
treated by the Saviour as not to hear distinctly the deeper (things of
His teaching),[4] lest, after a rapid conversion, and after being
healed by obtaining remission of sins, they should despise the wounds
of their wickedness, as being slight and easy of healing, and should
again speedily relapse into them. And perhaps also, suffering
punishment for their former transgressions against virtue, which they
had committed when they had forsaken her, they had not yet filled up
the (full) time; in order that, being abandoned by the divine
superintendence, and being filled to a greater degree by their own
evils which they had sown, they may afterwards be called to a more
stable repentance; so as not to be quickly entangled again in those
evils in which they had formerly been involved when they treated with
insolence the requirements of virtue, and devoted themselves to worse
things. Those, then, who are said to be "without" (manifestly by
comparison with those "within "), not being very far from those
"within," while those "within" hear clearly, do themselves hear
indistinctly, because they are addressed in parables; but nevertheless
they do hear. Others, again, of those "without," who are called
Tyrians, although it was foreknown that they would have repented long
ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes, had the Saviour come near their
borders, do not hear even those words which are heard by those
"without" (being, as is probable, very far inferior in merit to those
"without"[6]), in order that at another season, after it has been more
tolerable for them than for those who did not receive the word (among
whom he mentioned also the Tyrians), they may, on hearing the word at a
more appropriate time, obtain a more lasting repentance. But observe
whether, besides our desire to investigate (the truth), FROM THE LATIN.
the state that is to follow,[1] and thus by an eternal and immutable
law of equity, and by the controlling influence of Divine Providence,
the immortal soul is brought to the summit of perfection. If one,
however, were to object to our statement, that the word of preaching
was purposely put aside by certain men of wicked and worthless
character, and (were to inquire) why the word was preached to those
over whom the Tyrians, who were certainly despised, are preferred in
comparison (by which proceeding, certainly, their wickedness was
increased, and their condemnation rendered more severe, that they
should hear the word who were not to believe it), they must be answered
in the following manner: God, who is the Creator of the minds of all
men, foreseeing complaints against His providence, especially on the
part of those who say, "How could we believe when we neither beheld
those things which others saw, nor heard those words which were
preached to others? in so far is the blame removed from us, since they
to whom the word was announced, and the signs manifested, made no delay
whatever, but became believers, overpowered by the very force of the
miracles;" wishing to destroy the grounds for complaints of this kind,
and to show that it was no concealment of Divine Providence, but the
determination of the human mind which was the cause of their ruin,
bestowed the grace of His benefits even upon the unworthy and the
unbelieving, that every mouth might indeed be shut, and that the mind
of man might know that all the deficiency was on its own part, and none
on that of God; and that it may, at the same time, be understood and
recognised that he receives a heavier sentence of condemnation who has
despised the divine benefits conferred upon him than he who has not
deserved to obtain or hear them, and that it is a peculiarity of divine
compassion, and a mark of the extreme justice of its administration,
that it sometimes conceals from certain individuals the opportunity of
either seeing or hearing the mysteries of divine power, lest, after
beholding the power of the miracles, and recognising and hearing the
mysteries of its wisdom, they should, on treating them with contempt
and indifference, be punished with greater severity for their impiety.
18. Let us now look to the expression, "It is not of him that
willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy."[4]
For our opponents assert, that if it does not depend upon him that
willeth, nor on him that runneth, but on God that showeth mercy, that a
man be saved, our salvation is not in our own power. For our nature is
such as to admit of our either being saved or not, or else our
salvation rests solely on the will of Him who, if He wills it, shows
mercy, and confers salvation. Now let us inquire, in the first place,
of such persons, whether
FROM THE GREEK.
we do not rather strive to maintain an attitude of piety in everything
regarding God and His Christ,[2] seeing we endeavour by every means to
prove that, in matters so great and so peculiar regarding the varied
providence of God, He takes an oversight of the immortal soul. If,
indeed, one were to inquire regarding those things that are objected
to, why those who saw wonders and who heard divine words are not
benefited, while the Tyrians would have repented if such had been
performed and spoken amongst them; and should ask, and say, Why did the
Saviour proclaim such to these persons, to their own hurt, that their
sin might be reckoned to them as heavier? we must say, in answer to
such an one, that He who understands the dispositions[3] of all those
who find fault with His providence—(alleging) that it is owing to it
that they have not believed, because it did not permit them to see what
it enabled others to behold, and did not arrange for them to hear those
words by which others, on hearing them, were benefited—wishing to prove
that their defence is not founded on reason, He grants those advantages
which those who blame His administration asked; in order that, after
obtaining them, they may notwithstanding be convicted of the greatest
impiety in not having even then yielded themselves to be benefited, and
may cease from such audacity; and having been made free in respect to
this very point, may learn that God occasionally, in conferring
benefits upon certain persons, delays and procrastinates, not
conferring the favour of seeing and hearing those things which, when
seen and heard, would render the sin of those who did not believe,
after acts so great and peculiar, heavier and more serious.
18. Let us look next at the passage: "So, then, it is not of him
that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth
mercy."[4] For they who find fault say: If "it is not of him that
willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy,"
salvation does not depend upon ourselves, but upon the arrangement[5]
made by Him who has formed[6] us FROM THE LATIN.
to desire blessings be a good or evil act ; and whether to hasten after
good as a final aim[2] be worthy of praise. If they were to answer that
such a procedure was deserving of censure, they would evidently he mad
; for all holy men both desire blessings and run after them, and
certainly are not blameworthy. How, then, is it that he who is not
saved, if he be of an evil nature, desires blessing, and runs after
them, but does not find them? For they say that a bad tree does not
bring forth good fruits, whereas it is a good fruit to desire
blessings. And how is the fruit of a bad tree good? And if they assert
that to desire blessings, and to run after them, is an act of
indifference,[4] i.e., neither good nor bad, we shall reply, that if it
be an indifferent act to desire blessings, and to run after them, then
the opposite of that will also he an indifferent act, viz., to desire
evils, and to run after them ; whereas it is certain that it is not an
indifferent act to desire evils, and to run after them, but one that is
manifestly wicked. It is established, then, that to desire and follow
after blessings is not an indifferent, but a virtuous proceeding.
Having now repelled these objections by the answer which we have
given, let us hasten on to the discussion of the subject itself, in
which it is said, "It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that
runneth, but of God that showeth mercy."[8] In the book of Psalms—in
the Songs of Degrees, which are ascribed to Solomon—the following
statement occurs: "Except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain
that build it; except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but
in vain."[9] By which words he does not indeed indicate that we should
cease from building or watching over the safe keeping of that city
which is within us; but what he points out is this, that whatever is
built without God, and whatever is guarded without him, is built in
vain, and guarded to no purpose. For in all things that are well built
and well protected, the Lord is held to be the cause either of the
building or of its protection. As if, e.g., we were to behold some
magnificent structure and mass of splendid building reared with
beauteous architectural skill, would we not justly and deservedly say
that such was built not by human power, but by divine help and might?
And yet from such a statement it will not be meant that the labour and
industry of human effort were inactive, and effected nothing at all. Or
again, if we were to see some city surrounded by a severe blockade of
the enemy, in which threatening engines were brought against the walls,
and the place hard pressed by a vallum, and weapons, and fire, and all
the instruments of war, by which destruction is prepared, would we not
rightly and deservedly say, if the enemy were repelled and put to
flight, that the deliverance had been wrought for the liberated city by
God? And yet we would not mean, by so speaking, that either the
vigilance of the sentinels, or the alertness of the young men,[11] or
the protection of the guards, had been wanting. And the apostle also
must be understood in a similar manner, because the human will alone is
not sufficient to obtain salvation; nor is any mortal running able to
win
FROM THE GREEK.
such as we are, or on the purpose [1] of Him who showeth mercy when he
pleases. Now we must ask these persons the following questions: Whether
to desire what is good is virtuous or vicious; and whether the desire
to run in order to reach the goal in the pursuit of what is good be
worthy of praise or censure ? And if they shall say that it is worthy
of censure, they will return an absurd answer;[3] since the saints
desire and run, and manifestly in so acting do nothing that is
blameworthy. But if they shall say that it is virtuous to desire what
is good, and to run after what is good, we shall ask them how a
perishing nature desires better things;[5] for it is like an evil tree
producing good fruit, since it is a virtuous act to desire better
things. They will give (perhaps) a third answer, that to desire and run
after what is good is one of those things that are indifferent,[6] and
neither beautiful[7] nor wicked. Now to this we must say, that if to
desire and to run after what is good be a thing of indifference, then
the opposite also is a thing of indifference, viz., to desire what is
evil, and to run after it. But it is not a thing of indifference to
desire what is evil, and to run after it. And therefore also, to desire
what is good, and to run after it, is not a thing of indifference.
Such, then, is the defence which I think we can offer to the statement,
that "it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of
God that showeth mercy."[8] Solomon says in the book of Psalms (for the
Song of Degrees[10] is his, from which we shall quote the words):
"Unless the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it;
except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh in vain: "[9] not
dissuading us from building, nor teaching us not to keep watch in order
to guard the city in our soul, but showing that what is built without
God, and does not receive a guard from Him, is built in vain and
watched to no purpose, because God might reasonably be entitled the
Lord of the building; and the Governor of all things, the Ruler of the
guard of the city. As, then, if we were to say that such a building is
not the work of the builder, but of God, the heavenly (rewards), and to
obtain the prize of our high calling[1] of God in Christ Jesus, unless
this very good will of ours, and ready purpose, and whatever that
diligence within us may be, be aided or furnished with divine help. And
therefore most logically[2] did the apostle say, that "it is not of him
that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy;"
in the same manner as if we were to say of agriculture what is actually
written: "I planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So
then neither is he that planteth anything, neither he that watereth;
but God that giveth the increase."[4] As, therefore, when a field has
brought good and rich crops to perfect maturity, no one would piously
and logically assert that the husbandman had made those fruits, but
would acknowledge that they had been produced by God; so also is our
own perfection brought about, not indeed by our remaining inactive and
idle,[5] (but by some activity on our part): and yet the consummation
of it will not be ascribed to us, but to God, who is the first and
chief cause of the work. So, when a ship has overcome the dangers of
the sea, although the result be accomplished by great labour on the
part of the sailors, and by the aid of all the art of navigation, and
by the zeal and carefulness of the pilot, and by the favouring
influence of the breezes, and the careful observation of the signs of
the stars, no one in his sound senses would ascribe the safety of the
vessel, when, after being tossed by the waves, and wearied by the
billows, it has at last reached the harbour in safety, to anything else
than to the mercy of God. Not even the sailors or pilot venture to say,
"I have saved the ship," but they refer all to the mercy of God; not
that they feel that they have contributed no skill or labour to save
the ship, but because they know that while they contributed the labour,
the safety of the vessel was ensured by God. So also in the race of our
life we ourselves must expend labour, and bring diligence and zeal to
bear; but it is from God that salvation is to be hoped for as the fruit
of our labour. Otherwise, if God demand none of our labour, His
commandments will appear to be superfluous. In vain, also, does Paul
blame some for having fallen from the truth, and praise others for
abiding in the faith; and to no purpose does he deliver certain
precepts and institutions to the Churches: in vain, also, do we
ourselves either desire or run after what is good. But it is certain
that these things are not done in vain; and it is certain that neither
do the apostles give instructions in vain, nor the Lord enact laws
without a reason. It follows, therefore, that we declare it to be in
vain, rather, for the heretics to speak evil of these good declarations.
FROM THE GREEK.
and that it was not owing to the successful effort of the watcher, but
of the God who is over all, that such a city suffered no injury from
its enemies, we should not be wrong,[3] it being understood that
something also had been done by human means, but the benefit being
gratefully referred to God who brought it to pass; so, seeing that the
(mere) human desire is not sufficient to attain the end, and that the
running of those who are, as it were, athletes, does not enable them to
gain the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus—for these
things are accomplished with the assistance of God — it is well said
that "it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of
God that showeth mercy." As if also it were said with regard to
husbandry what also is actually recorded: "I planted, Apollos watered;
and God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth
anything, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the
increase."[4] Now we could not piously assert that the production of
full crops was the work of the husbandman, or of him that watered, but
the work of God. So also our own perfection is brought about, not as if
we ourselves did nothing;[6] for it is not completed[7] by us, but God
produces the greater part of it. And that this assertion may be more
clearly believed, we shall take an illustration from the art of
navigation. For in comparison with the effect of the winds,[8] and the
mildness of the air,[9] and the light of the stars, all co-operating in
the preservation of the crew, what proportion[10] could the art of
navigation be said to bear in the bringing of the ship into
harbour?—since even the sailors themselves, from piety, do not venture
to assert often that they had saved the ship, but refer all to God; not
as if they had done nothing, but because what had been done by
Providence was infinitely[11] greater than what had been effected by
their art. And in the matter of our salvation, what is done by God is
infinitely greater than what is done by ourselves; and therefore, I
think, is it FROM THE LATIN.
19. After this there followed this point, that "to will and to do
are of God."[3] Our opponents maintain that if to will be of God, and
if to do be of Him, or if, whether we act or desire well or ill, it be
of God, then in that case we are not possessed of free-will. Now to
this we have to answer, that the words of the apostle do not say that
to will evil is of God, or that to will good is of Him; nor that to do
good or evil is of God; but his statement is a general one, that to
will and to do are of God. For as we have from God this very quality,
that we are men[4] that we breathe, that we move; so also we have from
God (the faculty) by which we will, as if we were to say that our power
of motion is from God,[6] or that the performing of these duties by the
individual members, and their movements, are from God. From which,
certainly, I do not understand this, that because the hand moves, e.g.,
to punish unjustly, or to commit an act of theft, the act is of God,
but only that the power of motion[8] is from God; while it is our duty
to turn those movements, the power of executing which we have from God,
either to purposes of good or evil. And so what the apostle says is,
that we receive indeed the power of volition, but that we misuse the
will either to good or evil desires. In a similar way, also, we must
judge of results.
FROM THE GREEK.
said that "it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but
of God that showeth mercy." For if in the manner which they imagine we
must explain the statement,[1] that "it is not of him that willeth, nor
of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy," the commandments
are superfluous; and it is in vain that Paul himself blames some for
having fallen away, and approves of others as having remained upright,
and enacts laws for the Churches: it is in vain also that we give
ourselves up to desire better things, and in vain also (to attempt) to
run. But it is not in vain that Paul gives such advice, censuring some
and approving of others; nor in vain that we give ourselves up to the
desire of better things, and to the chase after things that are
pre-eminent. They have accordingly not well explained the meaning of
the passage.[2]
19. Besides these, there is the passage, "Both to will and to do
are of God."[3] And some assert that, if to will be of God, and to do
be of God, and if, whether we will evil or do evil, these (movements)
come to us from God, then, if so, we are not possessed of free-will.
But again, on the other hand, when we will better things, and do things
that are more excellent,[5] seeing that willing and doing are from God,
it is not we who have done the more excellent things, but we only
appeared (to perform them), while it was God that bestowed them;[7] so
that even in this respect we do not possess free-will. Now to this we
have to answer, that the language of the apostle does not assert that
to will evil is of God, or to will good is of Him (and similarly with
respect to doing better and worse); but that to will in a general [9]
way, and to run in a general way, (are from Him). For as we have from
God (the property) of being living things and human beings, so also
have we that of willing generally, and, so to speak, of motion in
general. And as, possessing (the property) of life and of motion, and
of moving, e.g., these members, the hands or the feet, we could not
rightly say[10] that we had from God this FROM THE LAT LATIN
20. But with respect to the declaration of the apostle,
"Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will
He hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth He yet find fault?
For who hath resisted His will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that
repliest against God ? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed
it, Why hast thou made me thus ? Hath not the potter power over the
clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto
dishonour ? "[4] Some one will perhaps say, that as the potter out of
the same lump makes some vessels to honour, and others to dishonour, so
God creates some men for perdition, and others for salvation; and that
it is not therefore in our own power either to be saved or to perish;
by which reasoning we appear not to be possessed of free-will. We must
answer those who are of this opinion with the question, Whether it is
possible for the apostle to contradict himself? And if this cannot be
imagined of an apostle, how shall he appear, according to them, to be
just in blaming those who committed fornication in Corinth, or those
who sinned, and did not repent of their unchastity, and fornication,
and uncleanness, which they had committed? How, also, does he greatly
praise those who acted rightly, like the house of Onesiphorus, saying,
"The Lord give mercy to the house of Onesiphorus; for he oft refreshed
me, and was not ashamed of my chain: but, when he had come to Rome, he
sought me out very diligently, and found me. The Lord grant unto him
that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day."[5] Now it is not
consistent with apostolic gravity to blame him who is worthy of blame,
i.e., who has sinned, and greatly to praise him who is deserving of
praise for his good works; and again, as if it were in no one's power
to do any good or evil, to say that it was the Creator's doing that
every one should act virtuously or wickedly, seeing He makes one vessel
to honour, and another to dishonour. And how can he add that statement,
"We must all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ, that every one
of us may receive in his body, according to what he hath done, whether
it be good or bad ? "[6] For what reward of good will be conferred on
him who could not commit evil, being formed by the Creator to that very
end? or what punishment will deservedly be inflicted on him who was
unable to do good in consequence of the creative act of
FROM THE GREEK.
species of motion,[1] whereby we moved to strike, or destroy, or take
away another's goods, but that we had received from Him simply the
generic[2] power of motion, which we employed to better or worse
purposes; so we have obtained from God (the power) of acting, in
respect of our being living things, and (the power) to will from the
Creator? while we employ the power of will, as well as that of action,
for the noblest objects, or the opposite.
20. Still the declaration of the apostle will appear to drag us
to the conclusion that we are not possessed of freedom of will, in
which, objecting against himself, he says, "Therefore hath He mercy on
whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth. Thou wilt say
then unto me, Why doth He yet find fault? For who hath resisted His
will ? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God ? Shall
the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one
vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour ?"[4] For it will be
said: If the potter of the same lump make some vessels to hon-our and
others to dishonour, and God thus form some men for salvation and
others for ruin, then salvation or ruin does not depend upon ourselves,
nor are we possessed of free-will. Now we must ask him who deals so
with these passages, whether it is possible to conceive of the apostle
as contradicting himself. I presume, however, that no one will venture
to say so. If, then, the apostle does not utter contradictions, how can
he, according to him who so understands him, reasonably find fault,
censuring the individual at Corinth who had committed fornication, or
those who had fallen away, and had not repented of the licentiousness
and impurity of which they had been guilty? And how can he bless those
whom he praises as having done well, as he does the house of
Onesiphorus in these words: "The Lord give mercy to the house of
Onesiphorus; for he oft refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chain:
FROM THE LATIN.
his Maker?[1] Then, again, how is not this opposed to that other
declaration elsewhere, that "in a great house there are not only
vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and of earth, and some to
honour, and some to dishonour. If a man therefore purge himself from
these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the
Master's use, prepared unto every good work."[4] He, accordingly, who
purges himself, is made a vessel unto honour, while he who has
disdained to cleanse himself from his impurity is made a vessel unto
dishonour. From such declarations, in my opinion, the cause of our
actions can in no degree be referred to the Creator. For God the
Creator makes a certain vessel unto honour, and other vessels to
dishonour; but that vessel which has cleansed itself from all impurity
He makes a vessel unto honour, while that which has stained itself with
the filth of vice He makes a vessel unto dishonour. The conclusion from
which, accordingly, is this, that the cause of each one's actions is a
pre-existing one; and then every one, according to his deserts, is made
by God either a vessel unto honour or dishonour. Therefore every
individual vessel has furnished to its Creator out of itself the causes
and occasions of its being formed by Him to be either a vessel unto
honour or one unto dishonour. And if the assertion appear correct, as
it certainly is, and in harmony with all piety, that it is due to
previous causes that every vessel be prepared by God either to honour
or to dishonour, it does not appear absurd that, in discussing remoter
causes in the same order, and in the same method, we should come to the
same conclusion respecting the nature of souls, and (believe) that this
was the reason why Jacob was beloved before he was born into this
world, and Esau hated, while he still was contained in the womb of his
mother.
FROM THE GREEK.
but, when he was in Rome, he sought me out very diligently, and found
me. The Lord grant to him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that
day."[2] It is not consistent for the same apostle[3] to blame the
sinner as worthy of censure, and to praise him who had done well as
deserving of approval; and again, on the other hand, to say, as if
nothing depended on ourselves, that the cause was in the Creator[5] why
the one vessel was formed to honour, and the other to dishonour. And
how is this statement correct:[6] "For we must all appear before the
judgment-seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in
his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or
bad,"[7] since they who have done evil have advanced to this pitch of
wickedness[8] because they were created vessels unto dishonour, while
they that have lived virtuously have done good because they were
created from the beginning for this purpose, and became vessels unto
honour? And again, how does not the statement made elsewhere conflict
with the view which these persons draw from the words which we have
quoted (that it is the fault of the Creator that one vessel is in
honour and another in dishonour), viz., "that in a great house there
are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and of earth;
and some to honour, and some to dishonour. If a man therefore purge
himself, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the
Master's use, and prepared unto every good work; "[4] for if he who
purges himself becomes a vessel unto honour, and he who allows himself
to remain unpurged[9] becomes a vessel unto dishonour, then, so far as
these words are concerned, the Creator is not at all to blame. For the
Creator makes vessels of honour and vessels of dishonour, not from the
beginning according to His foreknowledge,[10] since He does not condemn
or justify beforehand[11] according to it ; but (He makes) those into
vessels of honour who purged themselves, and those into vessels of
dishonour who allowed FROM THE LATIN.
21. Nay, that very declaration, that from the same lump a vessel
is formed both to honour and to dishonour, will not push us hard; for
we assert that the nature of all rational souls is the same, as one
lump of clay is described as being under the treatment of the potter.
Seeing, then, the nature of rational creatures is one, God, according
to the previous grounds of merit,[3] created and formed out of it, as
the potter out of the one lump, some persons to honour and others to
dishonour. Now, as regards the language of the apostle, which he utters
as if in a tone of censure, "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest
against God ?" he means, I think, to point out that such a censure does
not refer to any believer who lives tightly and justly, and who has
confidence in God, i.e., to such an one as Moses was, of whom Scripture
says that "Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice; "[5] and as
God answered Moses, so also does every saint answer God. But he who is
an unbeliever, and loses confidence in answering before God owing to
the unworthiness of his life and conversation, and who, in relation to
these matters, does not seek to learn and make progress, but to oppose
and resist, and who, to speak more plainly, is such an one as to be
able to say those words which the apostle indicates, when he says,
"Why, then, does He yet find fault? for who will resist His will ? "—to
such an one may the censure of the apostle rightly be directed, "Nay
but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?" This censure
accordingly applies not to believers and saints, but to unbelievers and
wicked men.
Now, to those who introduce souls of different natures,[7] and
who turn this declaration of the apostle to the support of their own
opinion, we have to reply as follows: If even they are agreed as to
what the apostle says, that out of the one lump are formed both those
who are made to honour and those who are made to dishonour, whom they
term of a nature that is to be saved and destroyed, there will then be
no longer souls of different natures, but one nature for all. And if
they admit that one and the same potter may undoubtedly denote one
Creator, there will not
FROM THE GREEK.
themselves to remain unpurged: so that it results from older causes[1]
(which operated) in the formation of the vessels unto honour and
dishonour, that one was created for the former condition, and another
for the latter. But if we once admit that there were certain older
causes (at work) in the forming of a vessel unto honour, and of one
unto dishonour, what absurdity is there in going back to the subject of
the soul, and (in supposing) that a more ancient cause for Jacob being
loved and for Esau being hated existed with respect to Jacob before his
assumption of a body, and with regard to Esau before he was conceived
in the womb of Rebecca ?
21. And at the same time, it is clearly shown that, as far as
regards the underlying nature,[2] as there is one (piece of) clay which
is under the hands of the potter, from which piece vessels are formed
unto honour and dishonour; so the one nature of every soul being in the
hands of God, and, so to speak, there being (only) one lump of
reasonable beings,[4] certain causes of more ancient date led to some
being created vessels unto hon-our, and others vessels unto dishonour.
But if the language of the apostle convey a censure when he says, "Nay
but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?" it teaches us that
he who has confidence before God, and is faithful, and has lived
virtuously, would not hear the words, "Who art thou that repliest
against God?" Such an one, e.g., as Moses was, "For Moses spake, and
God answered him with a voice;"[6] and as God answers Moses, so does a
saint also answer God. But he who does not possess this confidence,
manifestly, either because he has lost it, or because he investigates
these matters not from a love of knowledge, but from a desire to find
fault,[8] and who therefore says, "Why does He yet find fault? for who
hath resisted His will ?" would merit the language of censure, which
says, "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God ?"
Now to those who introduce different natures, and who make use
FROM THE LATIN.
be different creators either of those who are saved, or of those who
perish. Now, truly, let them choose whether the), will have a good
Creator to be intended who creates had and ruined men, or one who is
not good, who creates good men and those who are prepared to honour.
For the necessity of returning an answer will extort from them one of
these two alternatives. But according to our declaration, whereby we
say that it is owing to preceding causes that God makes vessels either
to honour or to dishonour, the approval of God's justice is in no
respect limited. For it is possible that this vessel, which owing to
previous causes was made in this world to honour, may, if it behave
negligently, be converted in another world, according to the deserts of
its conduct, into a vessel unto dishonour: as again, if any one, owing
to preceding causes, was formed by his Creator in this life a vessel
unto dishonour, and shall mend his ways and cleanse himself from all
filth and vice, he may, in the new world, be made a vessel to honour,
sanctified and useful, and prepared unto every good work. Finally,
those who were formed by God in this world to be Israelites, and who
have lived a life unworthy of the nobility of their race, and have
fallen away from the grandeur of their descent, will, in the world to
come, in a certain degree[3] be converted, on account of their
unbelief, from vessels of honour into vessels of dishonour; while, on
the other hand, many who in this life were reckoned among Egyptian or
Idumean vessels, having adopted the faith and practice of Israelites,
when they shall have done the works of Israelites, and shall have
entered the Church of the Lord, will exist as vessels of honour in the
revelation of the sons of God. From which it is more agreeable to the
rule of piety to believe that every rational being, according to his
purpose and manner of life, is converted, sometimes from had to good,
and falls away sometimes from good to bad: that some abide in good, and
others advance to a better condition, and always ascend to higher
things, until they reach the highest grade of all; while others, again,
remain in evil, or, if the wickedness within them begin to spread
itself further, they descend to a worse condition, and sink into the
lowest depth of wickedness. Whence also we must suppose that it is
possible there may be some who began at first indeed with small
offences, but who have poured out wickedness to such a degree, and
attained such proficiency in evil, that in the measure of their
wickedness they are equal even to the opposing powers: and again, if,
by means of many severe administrations of punishment, they are able at
some future time to recover their senses, and gradually attempt to find
healing for their wounds, they may, on ceasing from their wickedness,
be restored to a state of goodness. Whence we are of opinion that,
seeing the soul, as we have frequently said, is immortal and eternal,
it is possible that, in the many and endless periods of duration in the
immeasurable and different worlds, it may descend from the highest good
to the lowest evil, or be restored from the lowest evil to the highest
good.
FROM THE GREEK.
of the declaration of the apostle (to support their view), the
following must be our answer. If they maintain[1] that those who perish
and those who are saved are formed of one lump, and that the Creator of
those who are saved is the Creator also of them who are lost, and if He
is good who creates not only spiritual but also earthy (natures) (for
this follows from their view), it is nevertheless possible that be who,
in consequence of certain former acts of righteousness,[2] had now been
made a vessel of honour, but who had not (afterwards) acted in a
similar manner, nor done things befitting a vessel of honour, was
converted in another world into a vessel of dishonour; as, on the other
hand, it is possible that he who, owing to causes more ancient than the
present life, was here a vessel of dishonour, may after reformation
become in the new creation "a vessel of honour, sanctified and meet for
the Master's use, prepared unto every good work." And perhaps those who
are now Israelites, not having lived worthily of their descent, will be
deprived of their rank, being changed, as it were, from vessels of
honour into those of dishonour; and many of the present Egyptians and
Idumeans who came near to Israel, when they shall have borne fruit to a
larger extent, shall enter into the Church of the Lord, being no longer
accounted Egyptians and Idumeans, but becoming Israelites: so that,
according to this view, it is owing to their (varying) purposes that
some advance from a worse to a better condition, and others fall from
better to worse; while others, again, are preserved in a virtuous
course, or ascend from good to better; and others, on the contrary,
remain in a course of evil, or from bad become worse, as their
wickedness flows on. FROM THR LATIN.
21. But since the words of the apostle, in what he says regarding
vessels of honour or dishonour, that "if a man therefore purge himself,
he will be a vessel unto honour, sanctified and meet for the Master's
service, and prepared unto every good work," appear to place nothing in
the power of God, but all in ourselves; while in those in which he
declares that "the potter hath power over the clay, to make of the same
lump one vessel to honour, another to dishonour," he seems to refer the
whole to God,—it is not to be understood that those statements are
contradictory, but the two meanings are to be reduced to agreement, and
one signification must be drawn from both, viz., that we are not to
suppose either that those things which are in our own power can be done
without the help of God, or that those which are in God's hand can be
brought to completion without the intervention of our acts, and
desires, and intention; because we have it not in our own power so to
will or do anything, as not to know that this very faculty, by which we
are able to will or to do, was bestowed on us by God, according to the
distinction which we indicated above. Or again, when God forms vessels,
some to honour and others to dishonour, we are to suppose that He does
not regard either our wills, or our purposes, or our deserts, to be the
causes of the honour or dishonour, as if they were a sort of matter
from which He may form the vessel of each one of us either to honour or
to dishonour; whereas the very movement of the soul itself, or the
purpose of the understanding, may of itself suggest to him, who is not
unaware of his heart and the thoughts of his mind, whether his vessel
ought to be formed to honour or to dishonour. But let these points
suffice, which we have discussed as we best could, regarding the
questions connected with the freedom of the will.[6]
FROM THE GREEK.
22. But since the apostle in one place does not pretend that the
becoming of a vessel unto honour or dishonour depends upon God, but
refers back the whole to ourselves, saying, "If, then, a man purge
himself, he will be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, meet for the
Master's use, and prepared unto every good work;" and elsewhere does
not even pretend that it is dependent upon ourselves, but appears to
attribute the whole to God, saying, "The potter hath power over the
clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour and another to
dishonour ;" and as his statements are not contradictory, we must
reconcile them, and extract one complete statement from both. Neither
does our own power,[1] apart from the knowledge[2] of God, compel us to
make progress; nor does the knowledge of God (do so), unless we
ourselves also contribute something to the good result; nor does our
own power, apart from the knowledge of God, and the use of the power
that worthily belongs to us,[3] make a man become (a vessel) unto
honour or dishonour; nor does the will of God alone[4] form a man to
honour or to dishonour, unless He hold our will to be a kind of matter
that admits of variation,[5] and that inclines to a better or worse
course of conduct. And these observations are sufficient to have been
made by us on the subject of free-will.
CHAP. II.—ON' THE OPPOSING POWERS.
I. We have now to notice, agreeably to the statements of
Scripture, how the opposing powers, or the devil himself, contends with
the human; race, inciting and instigating men to sin. And in the first
place, in the book of Genesis,[1] the serpent is described as having
seduced Eve; regarding whom, in the work entitled The Ascension of
Moses[2] (a little treatise, of which the Apostle Jude makes mention in
his Epistle), the archangel Michael, when disputing with the devil
regarding the body of Moses, sa