site: migne

author: Hugh of Saint Victor

languages: en la

source_edition: Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 176, coll. 17C–42B

source_text:
## De sacramentis legis naturalis et scriptae

[0017C]D. Quid fuit priusquam mundus fieret? M. Solus Deus. D. Quandiu prius fuit? M. Ab aeterno. D. Ubi fuit cum nihil esset praeter ipsum? M. Ubi modo est, ibi fuit et tunc. D. Ubi est modo? M. In semetipso est, et omnia in ipso sunt, et ipse est in omnibus. D. Quando fecit Deus mundum? M. *In principio [n: (Gen. I)]*. D. Ubi factus est mundus? M. In Deo. D. Unde factus est mundus? M. De nihilo. D. Quomodo factus est mundus. M. Prius in materia simul facta sunt omnia: postea vero in hac qua nunc mundus cernitur forma, per sex dies composita sunt et ordinata universa. D. Quomodo poterat materia prius esse quam forma? M. Materia illa non [0017D] omnino sine forma fuit; sed tamen informis prius fuisse dicitur, quia in prima sui conditione tam decentem et tam aptam (sicut nunc habet) adhuc formam non habuit. D. Quare voluit Deus prius [0018C] creare rudem materiam: quasi non potuerit simul cum forma creasse eam? M. Voluit prius ostendere quid esset creatura ex se, et quid ex beneficio Creatoris deinde accepisset; ideoque prius creavit essentiam, postmodum formam indidit. D. Cui ostendebat hoc, quando adhuc nemo erat qui hoc videre poterat? M. Erant jam tunc angeli quibus hoc ostenderetur, ut foris in rebus conditis viderent, quod in seipsis intus agnoscerent; ne et ipsi gloriam quam acceperant sibi, sed conditori suo tribuendam putarent. Nobis quoque hoc ostenditur; qui etsi illud quando factum est non vidimus, quod tamen factum sit (sacro eloquio referente) audivimus. D. Ubi vel qualis fuit prima illa materia priusquam [0018D] formaretur? M. Ibidem confusa jacuit, ubi nunc ordinata subsistit. Nam terra in eodem in quo modo est, hoc est: medio loco constituta, tribus reliquis [0019A] elementis, id est aqua, et aere, et igne, in una adhuc caligine confusis undique involvebatur, quae videlicet confusio circumquaque terram ambiens tantumdem spatii sursum occupabat, quantum nunc universitas creaturarum complectitur. Formam jam tunc terra qualemcunque caeteris potiorem habuit, sed involuta atque obducta necdum apparere potuit quod fuit. Reliqua tria, ut dictum est, omnimodo confusa erant et indigesta, in modum cujusdam nebulae in hoc quod nunc aer et coelum tenet spatio suspensa. Quam caliginem tenebrosam tenebras Scriptura nominavit: quae in principio super faciem abyssi (quae adhuc nondum impleta erat) collectione aquarum desuper oppansae pendebant.

D. Quae formatio facta est prima die? M. Lux facta [0019B] est prima die [n: (Gen. I)]: quae quidem jam prius inter caetera materialiter creata fuerat; sed nunc primum ut lucere posset et illuminare, ab aliis segregata est atque distincta. D. Qualis existimanda est fuisse lux illa? M. Sunt qui asserunt nubem lucidam fuisse, quae (sicut sol modo) circumferebatur ambiens terram; quae dum superiores mundi partes oriens lustrabat diem, occasu autem suo ad infera descendens absentata luce fecit noctem. Inde distinctos et appellatos volunt tres illos primos dies in exordio creaturarum priusquam sol et caetera luminaria conderentur. D. Ubi dicendum est modo esse lucem illam? M. Dicunt modo in superioribus aetheris partibus circumquaque dispersam esse, et adhuc videri posse si non major illam solis claritas [0019C] absconderet; nocte vero ex illa adhuc luce diligenter considerantibus demonstrari quasi quasdam tenuissimae nebulae lucidas contra firmamentum reliquias dispersas, quas omnino major diei claritas ab oculis intuentium celat.

D. Quae formatio facta est secunda die? M. Firmamentum factum est secunda die [n: (ibid.)], quod quidem et prius ipsum materialiter creatum fuerat; sed huc usque indiscretum et in illa universali confusione permistum manebat. Nunc autem, id est secunda die, erutum a permistione et in formam redactum positum est, ut inter aquas superiores et aquas inferiores divideret; sic scilicet ut illi confusioni in modum nebulae circa terram pendenti medium veniens [0019D] quodammodo illam intersecaret, et ambitu suo circumquaque complectens partem infra se clauderet, partem extrinsecus separaret, id est ut ab ipsis aquis quae in divisione extrinsecus sive superius remanserunt, firmamentum medium inter aquas et aquas totum circumquaque ambiretur, aquae autem, quae intrinsecus sive inferius relictae sunt, totae ab ipso firmamento ex omni parte clauderentur. Pars ergo aquarum in divisione super firmamentum remansit; pars alia infra ambitum firmamenti conclusa, totum circumquaque aeris spatium implens occupavit. D. Estne credendum adhuc esse aquas super firmamentum? M. Sic putatur; quia et Scriptura sacra diversis in locis hoc manifeste confirmat, sicut est illud Psalmistae testimonium: [0020A] *Aquae quae super coelos sunt laudent nomen Domini [n: (Psal. CXLVIII)]*.

D. Quomodo possunt aquae super coelum consistere? M. Glacialiter vel (quod magis credibile est) ad similitudinem illius primi chaos firmiter ibi suspenduntur pendulae ad modum nebulae levis, qualis in principio natura omnium aquarum fuisse putatur.

D. Quae fuit formatio diei tertiae? M. Aquae illae quae sub firmamento pendentes remanserant compactae sunt ad invicem; et pondere tandem deorsum pressae congregatae sunt *in locum unum [n: (Gen. I)]*, id est in magnam illam abyssum quam prius desuper obtexerant: unde et nunc ad omnes terrarum partes per thracones et alveos suos derivantur. Congregatis [0020B] autem aquis, coepit apparere *arida [n: (ibid.)]*, hoc est terra, quae prius caligine illa et confusione involuta latuit; quam apparentem Deus germinibus suis vestivit: et sic completum est opus diei tertiae.

D. Quae formatio facta est die quarta? M. Luminaria condita sunt in coelo, id est sol et luna et stellae; ut lucerent super terram, et illuminarent illam, et tempora cursu suo distinguerent [n: (ibid.)].

D. Quae formatio facta est die quinta? M. Aves et pisces facti sunt de aquis. Aves deinde in aere collocatae sunt; pisces in originali sede permanserunt [n: (ibid.)].

D. Quae formatio facta est die sexta? M. Bestiae et caetera animantia quae vivunt super terram de [0020C] terra creata sunt. Consummatis autem et praeparatis omnibus, postremo (eadem tamen sexta die) factus est homo, qui universae dominaretur creaturae. D. Quare aves, quae in aere collocatae sunt, non sunt factae de ipso aere, sicut pisces de aqua, et bestiae pariter et homo de terra? M. Quia aer talem non habet corpulentiam ut de eo animal fieri possit sicut et de terra. D. Quare novissime factus est homo? M. Quia homo universae creaturae praeficiendus fuit, congruum erat ut prius mansio ejus praepararetur, postmodum ipse ordinatis omnibus quasi possessor et rector introduceretur in orbem terrarum. Haec igitur sunt opera conditionis quae sex diebus fecit Deus atque complevit, ante omnem diem creans, [0020D] tribus primis diebus disponens et ordinans, tribus sequentibus exordinans: prima discernens, secunda distinguens, tertia disponens, quarta exornans coelos, quinta aerem et aquam, sexta terram. D. Quare sex diebus fecit Deus opera sua, et septima requievit? M. Senarius quia ex partibus suis constat, signum perfectionis est; et idcirco voluit Deus sex diebus complere opera sua, ut ostenderet se in iis quae fecerat, nec superfluum aliquid posuisse nec reliquisse imperfectum. Completis autem sex diebus septima demum die requievit [n: (Gen. II)], id est ab opere cessavit; non quod ipse quasi fatigatus requie indigeret, sed ut nobis si secundum modum et mensuram nostram opera bona et perfecta facere studuerimus, requiem futuram promitteret. D. Quomodo [0021A] septima die Deus requievisse dicitur, cum ipse in Evangelio dicat: *Pater meus usque modo operatur et ego operor? [n: (Joan. V.)]* M. Deus multis modis operari dicitur. Est namque opus creationis, est et opus dispositionis, est opus propagationis, et est opus gubernationis; Opus creationis ante omnem diem fecit; opus dispositionis sex diebus complevit; opus propagationis usque in finem saeculi non deserit; ab opere gubernationis usque in aeternum non cessabit. D. Si septima die primum requievit Deus, quid ergo egit ab initio primae diei postquam lucem fecerat usque ad exortum sequentis quando firmamentum faciebat? M. Si propius rem intueri velis, invenies nequaquam Deum prima die post exordium lucis ab omni penitus opere quievisse; [0021B] quia non solum hoc quod lux facta est ad opus ejus pertinuit; sed etiam quod directa est, donec peracto circuitionis suae ambitu cursum consummavit. Primum igitur ut opus suum a perfecto inciperet, lucem orientem fecit; et inde eam dirigens, primum vespere, deinde mane, id est primam diem complevit. D. Nunquid ita de operibus reliquorum dierum intelligendum? M. In his ego nihil temere affirmare velim; quia, etsi similiter de opere diei secundae dici possit, quod primum firmamentum inter aquas et aquas fecerit; deinde cursum ejus usque ad exortum diei tertiae direxerit tamen quia de motu firmamenti necdum certum experimentum invenimus: hujus quaestionis nodum alio si placet modo dissolvamus. Potest namque non inconvenienter dici [0021C] non ita in illis sex diebus Dominum sui operis seriem continuasse, quasi nullo interim intervallo temporis opus intermiserit; sed quia nullum in operando diem intermisit, septima autem die sic demum ab omni opere quievisse, ut nec alia praeter ea quae jam facta fuerant deinceps crearet, nec aliter quam disposita jam erant (quantum ad ordinem pertinet universitatis) disponeret. Neque enim aliquid postmodum numero universitatis addidit, neque ordinem unversitatis in aliquo commutavit. D. Et quid quod adhuc quotidie novae creantur animae. M. Nihil tamen novum addici dicitur; quia ipsae animae, licet de nihilo creatae nunc primum esse incipiant, tamen quodammodo etiam tunc in similitudine sua creatae [0021D] fuerunt. Et ut breviter id quod mihi dicendum inde videtur tibi absolvam, universa tunc facta sunt ut nihil postmodum fieret quod prius vel in materia vel in similitudine creatum non fuisset.

## De sacramentis legis naturalis et scriptae (cont.)

D. Ultra adhuc in his operibus digna inquisitione video, quae quidem nolens praeterire compellor; ne forte in hujusmodi si te plus justo detineam, ad alia quae restant magis necessaria non pertingam. Nunc ergo si placet ad hominem revertamur, ut causam creationis ejus mihi admodum desideranti aperias. Quia profecto dignum est ut qui omnia propter ipsum facta jam credimus, etiam cur ipse factus sit non ignoremus. M. Deus qui summum et verum perfectumque bonum est ita ab aeterno in se et per se beatus fuit, ut ejus gloria et beatitudo, quia [0022A] aeterna et incommutabilis erat, non posset minui, et quia plena et perfecta fuerat, non posset augeri. Nullo igitur indigens, sed bonum quod ipse erat et quo beatus erat, cum aliis participare et alios in illo et per illud beatificare volens, nulla necessitate, sed sola charitate creavit rationalem creaturam, id est spiritus rationales, jussitque ut ipsi partim in sua puritate persisterent, partim ut carne vestiti corpus humanum ad vitam et ad sensum animarent. Illis ergo spiritibus qui corporibus sociandi erant, locum et habitationem in terra constituit; illis vero qui in sua puritate permansuri fuerant, mansionem in coelo collocavit. Illos quidem per dignationem in summo constituens; istos per dispensationem in imo disponens, ut et istos quandoque per obedientiam [0022B] ab imo ad summa proveheret, et illos per obedientiam in summo confirmaret. D. Quare voluit Deus spiritus sociare corporibus, cum majoris excellentiae fuissent in sua puritate persistentes? M. Voluit in illis ex creatione ostendere quod postmodum facturus ipse in illis fuerat ex dignatione. Quia enim in rebus creatis nihil excellentius est spiritu, nihil terra infimius atque corruptibilius, dum corpori de terra facto et corruptibilem materiam habenti, rationalem spiritum, id est, animam rationalem tribuit, in unum quodammodo consortium et societatem summis ima conjunxit; ostendens quia, quod erat corpus spiritui, hoc quodammodo spiritus erat sibi. Et sicut excellentiam spiritus infirmitati corporalis naturae conjunxerat una creationis conditio, [0022C] ita humilitatem creaturae spiritualis, excellentiae Creatoris sociare debuerat una pietatis dignatio. Fecit ergo, ut dictum est, corpus hominis de limo terrae et inspiravit ei animam rationalem quam creavit de nihilo [n: (Gen. II)], ut in corpore obedienter viventem ad consortium illorum spirituum qui sine corpore vivebant, id est angelorum, quandoque simul cum corpore elevaret; et pariter utrosque ad participationem gloriae suae attolleret, quatenus et in se spiritum et in spiritu corpus glorificaret; et quantum prius summa per dispensationem inclinavit dum conderet, tantum nunc ima per dignationem exaltaret. D. Quare non creavit Deus homines simul, sicut angelos creaverat? M. Quia voluit ut unum esset humani generis principium. D. Qnare hoc voluit? M. Ad [0022D] retundendam superbiam diaboli. Quia enim diabolus superbe aliud a Deo principium esse appetiit, ut magis confunderetur ejus elatio, hoc homo accepit, quatenus etiam in eo dignitatem similitudinis Dei haberet, quod sicut ille rebus omnibus creationis principium exstitit, ita iste esset omnibus hominibus principium generationis; et omnes homines dum se ab uno et unum esse cognoscerent, omnes se quasi unum amarent. D. Quare facta est mulier? M. In adjutorium generationis. D. Quare de viro facta est? M. Quia si aliunde fieret, unum principium non esset. D. Quare de latere facta est? M. Ut ostenderetur quia in consortium creabatur dilectionis; ne si de capite facta fuisset, praeferenda videretur viro ad dominationem, [0023A] aut si de pedibus, subjicienda ad servitutem. Quia igitur viro nec domina nec ancilla parabatur, sed socia; nec de capite, nec de pedibus, sed de latere fuerat producenda, ut juxta se ponendam agnosceret, quam de juxta se sumptam didicisset: *Misit igitur Deus soporem in Adam, et tulit unam de costis ejus [n: (Gen. II)]*, et exinde mulierem fabricavit. D. Quare dormienti potius quam vigilanti voluit costam subtrahere? M. Ne putaretur illi eam poenaliter abstraxisse. D. Quomodo de sola costa fieri potuit mulier? Nunquid aliquid aliud Deus illi costae ad augmentum extrinsecus addidit, aut novum aliquid concreavit, aut ipsa in semetipsa costa multiplicari coepit? M. Si ad mulieris corpus perficiendum illi costae Deus extrinsecus augmentum addidit (cum [0023B] illud quod addebatur multo majus fuit quam ipsa costa cui addebatur), inde potius mulierem factam Scriptura dixisse debuit unde plures substantiae suae partes accepit. Similiter si id quod costae in augmentum venit, de nihilo factum creditur; cur eam de viro factam dicimus et non potius de nihilo, cum illud ejus quod de nihilo factum esse multo majus sit quam id quod de viri substantia in corpus illius transivit? Restat ergo ut credamus costam illam in semetipsam multiplicatam nullum extrinsecus augmentum suscepisse. D. Quomodo potest fieri ut aliqua res crescat cui nihil aliunde apponitur? M. Plus est de nihilo aliquid facere, quam parvam substantiam in seipsum multiplicare.

[0023C]D. Certum est: quapropter ea quae restant prosequere. M. Factos igitur extra paradisum in paradiso posuit, informans praeceptis vitae et disciplinae. D. Quare homo, qui in paradiso mansionem habiturus fuerat, extra paradisum factus est? M. Ne beneficium Dei imputaret naturae, sed gratiae. D. Quibus praeceptis informavit Deus hominem, cum eum collocaret in paradisum? M. Duobus, id est praecepto naturae, et praecepto disciplinae. Duo namque bona praeparat Deus homini: aliud temporale et aliud aeternum, utrumque plenum et perfectum. Alterum, id est temporale bonum, plenum in eo posuit; et alterum, id est aeternum, plenum ei proposuit. Illi quod dederat, custodiam apposuit praeceptum naturae; ad illud quod proposuerat, viam aperuit praeceptum [0023D] disciplinae. Praeceptum naturae continet praeceptionem, prohibitionem, concessionem; praeceptio naturalis fuit discretio per quam ei inspiratum est quae essent naturae suae necessaria; prohibitio naturalis fuit discretio per quam naturaliter ei insinuatum est quae essent noxia; concessio discretio fuit eorum quae erant media, id est quibus uti et non uti sine incommodo potuisset. Si igitur homo per naturale praeceptum imbutus negligentiam cavisset, divina providentia nulla eum violentia opprimi permitteret. Poterat namque homo per praeceptum naturae conservare bonum quod habuit; sed per illud non potuit bonum quod necdum habuit adipisci. Neque enim meritum esse poterat homini si vel vitaret [0024A] noxia vel salubria appeteret, sive ad utrumlibet mediis uteretur; quoniam in his omnibus non tam praecipientis affectum quam commodum obedientis attenderet. Itaque ut homo aliquid promereri posset, necessarium fuit ut praeceptum disciplinae adderetur, sed hoc neque de praeceptione neque de prohibitione sumi poterat, ne si vel eadem Deus praeciperet aut prohiberet, meritum, ut dictum est, obedienti non esset; aut si mutaret mandatum, ipse sibi contrarius fieret. Oportuit ergo ut de concessione sumeretur, sic tamen ut per ipsum praeceptum concessio non mutaretur, id est ut non praeceptum naturam corrumperet, sed inobedientia praevaricatori non natura noceret. Cum autem de concessione naturali praeceptum disciplinae formandum fuisset, congruum [0024B] fuit magis ut secundum prohibitionem hoc fieret, ne diabolus posset obedientiam calumniari; et in uno tantum non in pluribus, ne inobedientia valeret ab homine excusari. Si igitur homo in hac obedientia perstitisset, post tempus definitum a Deo ad illud summum bonum quod in coelis ei praeparatum fuerat, sine mortis dolore transferri debuerat cum omni prole sua in consortio beatorum angelorum aeternaliter victurus. D. Quare Deus indigentiam in homine esse voluit? M. Ut inde occasionem exercitationis sumeret; et ipsa exterior indigentia interiorem ei indigentiam demonstraret. D. Ante peccatum fuit mortalis an immortalis homo? M. Utrumque potestate, neutrum necessitate; utrumque postea [0024C] futurus necessitate, neutrum potestate; alterum prius per culpam, alterum deinde per gratiam.

## De sacramentis legis naturalis et scriptae (cont.)

D. Ubi est paradisus? M. Cur quaeris quod vides? Ad orientem ingressus tuus, hoc est lignum vitae quod conspicis. D. Quare vocatum est lignum vitae? M. Quia talis in eo virtus est ut ejus fructus possit vitam hominis a mortis et omnis infirmitatis molestia defendere. D. Quod est lignum scientiae boni et mali? M. In quo praevaricatus est Adam. D. Quare sic vocatum est? M. Adam antequam peccaret bonum et malum scivit: bonum quidem et per scientiam et per experientiam, malum vero per solam scientiam. Postquam vero lignum vetitum tetigit, malum tum etiam per experientiam cognoscere coepit; non tamen natura ligni, sed inobedientia hominis scientiam [0024D] contulit, dum per experientiam mali etiam bonum quam stricte fuerat tenendum agnovit. Itaque nomen hoc non ex natura quam habuit, sed ex occasione quam praestitit, ligno inditum esse credendum est. D. Quomodo praevaricatus est homo? M. Videns diabolus quod homo per obedientiam illuc ascenderet unde ipse per superbiam ceciderat, invidit ei, et quia per violentiam ei nocere non poterat, ad fraudem se convertit. Ne autem fraus illius si nimis occultaretur caveri omnino non posset, non permissus est per aliud animal tentare nisi per serpentem, ut naturalis astutia serpentis malitiam proderet tentatoris; ut per indumentum quod foris erat homo cognosceret quantum ejus qui intus regebatur [0025A] versutiam cavere debuisset. D. Quomodo tentatus est homo? M. Exteriori tentatione tantum. D. Quae est exterior tentatio? M. Suasio alicujus facta vel signo vel verbo ut ille cui fit ad consensum peccati inclinetur. D. Quae est interior tentatio? M. Motus primae delectationis per quem animus ad peccandum impellitur. Haec autem difficilius vincitur, quia interius oppugnans de nostro contra nos roboratur. Propterea diabolus veniam non meruit, quia nulla tentatione peccavit; homo vero qui exteriori tentatione pulsatus cecidit, tanto gravius plectendus crat, quanto leviori impulsu fuerat prostratus. Et tamen quia aliquam in cadendo, ut ita dicam, violentiam sensit, idcirco hunc tandem Dei gratia ad veniam erexit. Nos vero quanto graviorem in peccando [0025B] tentationis violentiam patimur, tanto leviori piaculo ad gratiam amissam renovamur. D. Quo ordine tentatus est homo? M. Diabolus, quia vidit mulierem utpote infirmiorem et minus ratione vigentem, facilius fraude circumveniri posse, primum eam aggressus est interrogatione, volens animum ejus elicere ut ex responsione ejus colligeret qualiter eam de caetero alloqui debuisset. D. Quare non horruit mulier serpentem loquentem sibi? M. Quia eum noviter creatum officium loquendi a Deo accepisse credebat. D. Quomodo allocutus est eam? M. *Comedite: et eritis sicut dii scientes bonum et malum [n: (Gen. III)]*. Per tria tentavit, per gulam, per vanam gloriam, per avaritiam. Est autem gula immoderatus appetitus edendi; vana gloria, amor propriae laudis; avaritia [0025C] immoderatus appetitus habendi. Per gulam tentavit, cum dixit: *Comedite.* Per vanam gloriam, cum dixit: *Eritis sicut dii.* Per avaritiam, cum dixit: *scientes bonum et malum.* D. Vellem ut ipsam radicem istius peccati explicares: et sicut demonstrasti mihi quo ordine patratum sit, ita etiam quid sit ostenderes. M. In primo homine Deus duo posuerat, videlicet appetitum justi et appetitum commodi; unum, id est appetitum justi, secundum voluntatem; alterum, id est appetitum commodi, secundum necessitatem. Illum autem ideo voluntarium esse constituit, ut in eo homo promereretur, sive bene eum retinendo cum posset deserere, sive male deserendo cum posset retinere. Hunc autem necessarium propterea esse voluit; quatenus in eo remuneraretur [0025D] homo, sive ad poenam si illum desereret, sive ad gloriam si illum retineret. Et idcirco illi effectum suum, id est justitiam inseparabiliter adjunxit, isti vero effectum suum, id est commodum separabilem proposuit, quatenus homo vel illo solo amisso hujus et illius affectus perderet; vel illo solo retento hujus et illius effectum retineret. Sed homo hoc solum quod potuit fecit; et quia appetitum justi sponte dereliquit, idcirco juste et justitiam et commodum perdidit; solum appetitum commodi ad augmentum infelicitatis retinendo; quia sicut augmentum gloriae fuisset in justitia perseveranti non posse ab amore habito boni tepescere, ita modo cumulus miseriae est ab appetitu boni non posse se (quamvis illud adipisci [0026A] nequeat) cohibere. D. Utrum volens an nolens deseruit homo appetitum justitiae? M. Si nolens deseruit, violentia potius appellanda est quam culpa; si autem voluntas praecessisse in eo dicitur, jam ipsa desertio justitiae primum peccatum fuisse negatur; nec poterit inveniri unde talis voluntas ei advenerit ut vellet bonum deserere; quia nec a semetipso velle aliquid potuit, nec a Deo quidquam praeter commodum et justum velle potestatem accepit. D. Tamen cum deseruit voluisse credendus est quod fecit. M. Recte hoc diceres si desinere aliquid esset facere. Quia autem ille non velle coepit quod prius noluit, sed tantummodo quod prius voluit, velle desiit, non necesse est ut hoc aut volens aut nolens fecisse dicatur. Voluit tamen aliquid quod volendo quia cum isto [0026B] velle non potuit, desiit istud velle quod voluit; nec ideo illud voluit quia velle desiit; sed potius ideo istud velle desiit quia illud voluit. D. Quare ergo magis dicitur peccasse in eo quod istud velle desiit quam in eo quod illud velle incoepit? M. Quia si hoc velle non desineret, sive illud sive aliud volendo, nunquam peccare potuisset. D. Quid est ergo justitia? M. Mensura in appetitu commodi. D. Quid est appetitus justitiae? M. Amor mensurae. D. Quid ergo voluit ut hoc velle desineret? M. Voluit aliquid extra mensuram. D. Nunquid et hoc velle peccatum non fuit? M. Non quod hoc voluit peccatum fuit, sed quod hoc volendo mensurae volendi, id justitiae appetitum amisit. D. Quid voluit extra mensuram? M. Similitudinem Dei appetiit. Peccavit itaque homo in [0026C] hoc quod deseruit appetitum justi, et punitus est in retento appetitu commodi. D. Quomodo? M. Dupliciter punitus est in appetitu commodi; sive cum ab his quae ordinare appetit restringitur, sive quia ad inordinata commoda appetenda relaxatur. In altero est poena, in altero est poena et culpa. D. Unde venit homini ut appetat inordinata? M. A poena peccati. D. Modum requiro. M. Deus fecerat primum corpus hominis sanum et integrum. Integrum quidem, quia nihil ei deerat ad perfectionem; sanum, quia nihil inerat ad corruptionem. Sed in utroque talem conditionem posuerat ut nec integritas nec sanitas sine adminiculo posset conservari. Itaque in rebus creatis forinsecus quaedam ordinavit quae ad conservandam atque tuendam incolumitatem sive integritatem [0026D] ejus valere potuissent; horum autem providendorum curam, et officium spiritui qui corpori praesidebat injunxit. Ne vero in illo exsequendo, si ex sola hoc praeceptione non etiam ex amore impleret, servili conditione premeretur, dedit ei Deus affectum quo corpus suum amaret, ut sicut ejus integritatem et sanitatem diligeret, sic etiam omnia quae ad illam conservandam valerent libenter provideret. Rursum ne vel in illis quaerendis labor esset, vel in sumendis periculum, indigentiam simul et appetitum carnalem certa mensura temperavit; quatenus ei ad fomentum et pauca sufficere possent, et ad satietatem modica. Itaque prudentia carnis tam labor quam oblectamentum et exercitatio futura foret si homo [0027A] justitiam tenuisset. Sed quia spiritus supra elatus appetitum suum intra mensuram cohibere noluit, idcirco meruit ut jam subtus per infinitos labores dissipatus in appetitu carnis suae mensuram tenere non possit. Fregit enim Deus mortalitate integritatem corporis humani, et ob hoc pluribus jam fomentis indiget quam prius, tam ad reparandam incolumitatem quantum periit quam ad conservandam quantum remansit. Hinc illa dura necessitas gignitur ut extra ordinem natura appetitum extendat; ut non solum naturam custodiat, sed etiam vitium naturae expellat. Spiritus enim sicut ei naturaliter datum est commodum carnis suae diligere; sic naturaliter etiam habet ut ejus incommodum non possit amare. Sciendum tamen est quod haec necessitas concupiscendi [0027B] non ideo culpa non est quia necessitas est; quia ut esset haec necessitas, non necessitas causa fuit, sed voluntas. Hoc tamen de omnibus veraciter dici potest, quod nihil anima appetit quantumlibet inordinatum videatur nisi propter aliquod commodum vel conservandi boni vel mali removendi; sicut verbi gratia dum coitum appetit, exstinguere cupit carnis pruriginem, dum cibum appetit vel potum, gulae ardorem. D. Si omnis appetitus commodum appetat, commodum autem suum appetere tam in bono conservando quam in removendo malo naturae datum sit, utquid haec concupiscentia homini in culpam reputatur? M. Non ideo peccat quod commodum suum appetit; sed quod inordinate appetit. D. Non potest inordinare non appetere? M. Non potest. D. [0027C] Quare non potest? M. Propter infirmitatem suam. D. Quare infirmatus est? M. Quia Deus integritatem naturae passibilitate mortalitatis confregit. D. Quare hoc fecit? M. Video quo tendas. D. Quae tamen causa fuit? M. Culpa hominis. D. Ergo per culpam suam ad hanc necessitatem venit. M. Ita est.

## De sacramentis legis naturalis et scriptae (cont.)

D. Non igitur eum excusat ista necessitas. M. Non potest excusare. D. Sed quid faciet? M. Quaerat adjutorium gratiae et dicat: *De necessitatibus meis erue me, Domine [n: (Psal. XXIV)]*; sicut dicit Apostolus: *Infelix ego homo, quis me liberabit de corpore mortis hujus? Gratia Dei per Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum [n: (Rom. VII)]*. D. Ergo homo nisi per gratiam Dei liberari non potest? M. Non potest. Dicimus enim quod homo in appetitu justi derelicto sponte [0027D] peccaverit; in appetitu commodi retento dupliciter punitus sit; sive quia ab ordinatis commodis restringitur, sive quia ad inordinata commoda relaxatur. In altero poena, in altero poena et culpa. Quia igitur homo tali poena multatus est per quam culpa non purgaretur sed cresceret, nisi fuisset liberatus per gratiam, per hanc poenam ad poenas damnationis aeternae merito descendisset. Itaque dilatum est judicium ejus ne damnandus inveniretur. Et quia eum Deus ad salutem praeordinaverat, locum et spatium correctionis et poenitentiae concessit, quatenus eum interim per gratiam suam talem efficeret, quem tandem non solum misericorditer sed etiam juste ad salutem judicare potuisset. D. Quis est locus poenitentiae [0028A] quem Deus concessit homini? M. Mundus iste. D. Et quod est spatium poenitentiae? M. Vita praesens, id est ab initio mundi usque in finem saeculi. D. Satis magnae sunt induciae istae: sed velim ut dicas adhuc quare mundum istum voces locum poenitentiae? M. Quatuor sunt loquar: unus in quo est solum bonum et summum bonum, et unus in quo est solum malum et summum malum; unus in quo est solum bonum non tamen summum bonum; et unus in quo est bonum et malum, nec summum bonum nec summum malum. D. Vellem ut exempla singulorum proponeres. M. In coelo est solum bonum et summum bonum; in inferno est solum malum et summum malum; in paradiso est solum bonum non tamen summum bonum; in mundo est bonum [0028B] et malum, nec summum bonum nec summum malum. D. Quare distinxisti loca ista? M. Paradisus est locus inchoantium et in melius proficientium, et ideo ibi solum bonum esse debuit; quia creatura a malo initianda non fuit; non tamen summum, ut esset in quo illi qui initiabantur proficere potuissent. Coelum est locus confirmatorum bonorum et per disciplinam ad summum profectum pertingentium. Unde solum summumque bonum in eo collocatum est. Infernus est locus confirmatorum malorum et disciplinam irrecuperabiliter deserentium; et ideo ibi solum et summum malum positum est. Mundus est locus errantium et reparandorum; et ideo simul bonum et malum in eo ordinatum est, ut per bonum quidem consolationem accipiant, per malum vero [0028C] correctionem. Non tamen summum bonum aut summum malum ibi est, ut sit quo et persistentes in malo deficere, et recedentes a malo proficere possent. Coelum igitur est in summo; infernus est in imo; in medio paradisus; inter imum et medium mundus. Homo igitur qui a medio ceciderat (quia ad reparationem exspectabatur) inter imum et medium collocandus erat. D. Ecce diu exspectatur homo: et quid faciet? M. Non poterit invenire consilium evadendi. D. Quid ergo prodest judicium differri si homo non potest liberari? M. Per se non potest. D. Per quem igitur? M. Ille qui per gratiam suam differt judicium, oportet interim ut per eamdem gratiam ostendat evadendi consilium.

## De sacramentis legis naturalis et scriptae (cont.)

D. Ergo judex reo consilium dabit? M. Deponet [0028D] interim personam judicis, et assumet personam consiliatoris. D. Quando veniet? M. In temporibus novissimis. D. Quare tandiu differt adventum suum? M. Ut permittat prius homini experiri defectum suum. Venient prius patriarchae et prophetae et legislatores, venient justi et sapientes, quaerent et non invenient; laborabunt et deficient, promittent multi et nulli ostendent. Cum autem omnes defecerint et multis promissionibus, multis etiam verbis prolatis siluerint, tunc ipse proferet unum verbum et dabit consilium. D. Quod consilium dabit? M. Nunquid ego conscius sum secretorum Dei? Secretum est et absconditum hoc consilium a saeculis. D. Tamen temporibus novissimis manifestum. [0029A] Praeterea si nos ad redemptionis sortem pertinere volumus, justum est ac decens ut ejus redemptionis nostrae modum non ignoremus. M. Consilium hoc in eo fuit qualiter homo juste vel a potestate diaboli eripi, vel Deo posset reconciliari. D. Desidero admodum scire qualiter hoc fieri potuerit. M. Causam hominis prius considera; et tunc facile poteris videre qua justitia sit liberatus. D. Et ipsam mihi demonstrari cupio. M. Causa hominis adversus duos consistit, id est adversus Deum et adversus diabolum; quapropter non te pigeat si hanc ipsam causam quasi sub trium personarum conformatione explanem. D. Totum me in exspectatione posuisti. M. Tres in causam veniunt, homo, Deus, et diabolus. Diabolus Deo injuriam fecisse convincitur; quia [0029B] servum ejus, id est hominem, et fraudulenter abduxit, et violenter tenuit. Homo injuriam fecisse convincitur Deo; quia et praeceptum ejus contempsit, et se sub manum alienam ponens suae servitutis damnum illi intulit. Item diabolus homini injuriam fecisse convincitur; quia illum et prius bona promittendo decepit, et post mala inferendo laesit. Injuste ergo diabolus tenet hominem, sed homo juste tenetur; quia diabolus nunquam meruit ut hominem sibi subjectum premeret; sed homo meruit per culpam suam ut ab eo premi permitteretur. Licet enim ignoraret falsum esse quod diabolus promisit, non tamen ignoravit quod illud (etiam si verum esset) contra Creatoris voluntatem concupiscere non debuit. Juste ergo homo subjectus est diabolo [0029C] quantum pertinet ad culpam suam; injuste autem quantum pertinet ab diaboli fraudulentiam. Si ergo homo talem patronum haberet cujus diabolus in causam adduci posset, juste dominio ejus homo contradiceret; quia nullam diabolus causam justam habuit quare sibi jus in homine vendicare debuerit. Patronus autem nullus talis inveniri poterat nisi Deus. Sed Deus causam hominis suscipere noluit; quia homini adhuc pro culpa sua iratus fuit. Oportuit ergo ut prius homo Deum placaret, et sic deinde fiducialiter Deo patrocinante cum diabolo causam iniret. Sed Deum rationabiliter placare non poterat, nisi damnum quod intulerat restitueret, et de contemptu satisfaceret. Homo vero nihil habuit quod digne Deo pro ablato damno recompensaret, [0029D] quia si quid de irrationabili creatura redderet, pro rationabili sublata minus esset. Sed nec hominem pro homine reddere potuit; quia justum et innocentem abstulerat, et neminem nisi peccatorem invenit. Nihil ergo homo invenit unde Deum sibi placare posset; quia sive sua sive seipsum daret, digna recompensatio non esset. Videns ergo Deus hominem sua virtute jugum damnationis justae evadere non posse, misertus est ejus; et primo gratuito praevenit eum per solam misericordiam, ut deinde liberaret per justitiam: hoc est, quia homo ex se justitiam evadendi non habuit, Deus homini per misericordiam justitiam dedit. Neque enim ereptio hominis perfecte rationabilis esset, nisi ex utraque [0030A] parte justa fieret, hoc est, sicut Deus justitiam habuit hominem requirendi, ita et homo justitiam haberet evadendi. Sed homo hanc justitiam nunquam habere potuisset, nisi Deus ei per misericordiam eam tribuisset. Ut ergo Deus ab homine placari posset, dedit Deus gratis homini quod homo ex debito Deo redderet. Dedit ergo homini hominem, quem homo pro homine Deo redderet; qui (ut digna recompensatio fieret) priori non solum aequalis sed et major esset. Ut ergo pro homine redderetur homo major homine, factus est Deus homo pro homine, et dedit se homo homini ut se acciperet ab homine. Incarnatus est Deus Dei Filius, et datus est hominibus Deus homo Christus, sicut Isaias ait: *Puer natus est nobis [n: (Isa. II)]*, etc. Quod ergo homini datus [0030B] est Christus, Dei fuit misericordia; quod ab homine redditus est Christus, hominis fuit justitia. In nativitate enim Christi juste placatus est Deus homini; quia talis homo inventus est pro homine, qui non solum, ut dictum est, par, sed et major esset homine. Ideo in nativitate Christi angeli pacem munde nuntiant, dicentes: *Gloria in altissimis Deo, et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis [n: (Luc. II)]*. Sed adhuc supererat homini ut sicut restaurando damnum placaverat iram; ita quoque pro contemptu satisfaciendo dignus fieret evadere poenam. Sed hoc convenientius fieri non poterat, nisi ut poenam quam non debebat sponte et obedienter susciperet, ut de poena quam per inobedientiam meruerat eripi dignus fieret. Hanc autem poenam homo peccator solvere [0030C] non poterat; qui quamcunque poenam susciperet, non nisi digne et juste (propter primi contemptus reatum) sustineret. Ut ergo homo juste poenam debitam evaderet, necesse fuit ut talis homo pro homine poenam susciperet, qui nihil poenae debuisset. Sed talis nullus inveniri poterat nisi Christus. Christus igitur et nascendo debitum hominis Patri solvit, et moriendo reatum hominis expiavit; ut cum ipse mortem pro homine (quam non debebat) sustineret, juste homo pro ipso mortem quam debebat evaderet, et jam locum calumniandi diabolus non inveniret; quia et ipse homini dominari non debuit, et homo liberari dignus fuit. Idem itaque et judicium nostrum et causam nostram fecit. Unde Psalmista: *Quoniam fecisti judicium meum et causam meam* [0030D] [n: (Psal. IX)]. Causam nostram fecit; quia debitum Patri pro nobis solvit, et moriendo reatum expiavit. Judicium vero; quia descendens ad inferos et portas mortis frangens captivitatem quae ibidem tenebatur liberavit. Judicium ergo diaboli adversus Deum factum est statim in principio saeculi; judicium hominis adversus diabolum, in passione Christi. Judicium hominis adversus Deum differtur usque in finem saeculi. Et ideo homo, si prius per Christum Deo reconciliari voluerit, potest judicium suum sine timore damnationis praestolari. D. Hic congrue debueras modos judicandi distinguere, quatenus ea quae hic de judicio dicta sunt ex aliorum collatione valeam et manifestius discernere et verius approbare. [0031A] M. Quatuor sunt judicia, videlicet secundum praescientiam, secundum causam, secundum operationem, secundum retributionem. Secundum praescientiam judicati fuimus antequam essemus; secundum causam judicamur ex quo esse incipimus, quando boni et mali sumus; secundum operationem judicamur, quando operibus foris ostendimus quales intus apud nos sumus; secundum retributionem judicamur, quando in percipienda mercede operum cognoscemus, quales ab aeterno apud Deum praevisi fuimus. Ex his quatuor judiciis duo sunt occulta, judicium secundum praescientiam et judicium secundum causam, et ideo in eis humanum judicium non recipitur: duo manifesta, id est judicium secundum operationem, et judicium secundum retributionem, [0031B] in quorum altero, hoc est judicio secundum operationem, hominibus a Deo in praesenti judicandi potestas datur; alterum vero hoc est judicium secundum retributionem, non ab hominibus, sed a Deo coram hominibus judicabitur. Sed judicium secundum praescientiam occultum est et immutabile; judicium secundum causam occultum et mutabile; judicium secundum operationem manifestum et mutabile. Judicium secundum retributionem manifestum et immutabile. Judicium secundum operationem imago quodammodo est sacramentum judicii secundum retributionem; quia illud manifestat causam et praescientiam innuit: hoc vero manifestabit causam et confirmabit praescientiam.

## De sacramentis legis naturalis et scriptae (cont.)

[0031C]D. Quid ad nos pertinuit quod Christus diabolum vicit? M. Christus propterea Filius hominis dicitur, quia humana natura quae in primo parente per peccatum senuerat, in Christo renovata quasi ad juventutis robur refleruit; et justum fuit etiam secundum legem, ut pro patre decrepito et quasi per defectum aetatis debili, Filius validior robore contra tyrannum congressum faceret, et ut ejus victoria non ipsi sed illi praecipue pro quo pugnaverat ad libertatem valeret. Nam et idcirco Filius Dei Filius hominis fieri voluit, ut illud de homine sumeret in quo homo pro homine diabolum superaret. D. Nunquid non etiam ante passionem Christi fuerat diabolus a quibusdam hominibus ejectus? M. Fuerat, non tamen nisi per [0031D] passionem. D. Quomodo potest hoc fieri? M. Sicut passio Christi nunc praeterita credentes sanctificat, ita nunc futura credentes sanctificabat. D. Qua ratione poteris hoc confirmare? M. Quid Verbum incarnatum dixerim, nisi regem qui hunc mundum intravit per assumptam humanitatem cum diabolo bellaturus, et eum exinde, quasi tyrannum et violenter in alieno dominantem, expulsurus. Et quid omnes priores sanctos qui ante incarnationem ab initio fuerunt electi appellaverim, nisi milites quosdam optimos regem venturum in acie praecedentes, ipsis quibus tunc sanctificabantur sacramentis quasi quibus armis muniti atque praecincti. Quid item eos qui post incarnationem usque ad finem electi subsequuntur, nisi milites alios non tamen alium, sed [0032A] ipsum regem suum praecedentem unanimiter atque alacriter sequentes, habentes et ipsi novi arma nova, tamen ab eodem armati, et contra diabolum pugnaturi. Sunt igitur sive praecedentes sive subsequentes, unius regis sacramenta portantes, uni regi militantes, et unum tyrannum superantes; illi venturum praecedentes, isti praecedentem subsequentes. Vides ergo quomodo omnes ab initio usque ad finem boni sunt Christi? Neque ulli diabolum vincunt, nisi hi soli qui sunt Christi. D. Ergo ab initio Christiani fuerunt? M. Nihil verius. D. Sed multi aliter existimant. M. Vis idem tibi evidentius ostendi? D. Volo. M. Tria sunt tempora per quae praesentis saeculi spatium decurrit. Primum est tempus naturalis legis; secundum tempus scriptae legis; tertium est tempus [0032B] gratiae. Primum est ab Adam usque ad Moysen; secundum a Moyse usque ad Christum; tertium a Christo usque ad finem saeculi. Similiter tria sunt genera hominum; id est homines naturalis legis, homines legis scriptae, homines gratiae. Homines naturalis legis dici possunt qui sola naturali ratione vitam suam dirigunt; vel potius homines naturalis legis dicuntur qui secundum concupiscentiam in qua nati sunt ambulant, Homines scriptae legis sunt ii qui exterioribus praeceptis ad bene vivendum informantur. Homines gratiae sunt ii qui per aspirationem Spiritus sancti afflati et illuminantur ut bonum quod faciendum est agnoscant, et inflammantur ut diligant, et corroborantur ut perficiant. Et ut idem manifestiori distinctione significemus, homines naturalis [0032C] legis sunt aperte mali; homines scriptae legis, ficte boni: homines gratiae, vere boni. In primo genere continentur pagani; in secundo Judaei; in tertio Christiani. Ista tria genera hominum ab initio nunquam ullo tempore defuerunt, tamen tempus naturalis legis ad aperte malos pertinet; qui illi tunc et numero plures et statu excellentiores fuerunt. Tempus legis scriptae ad ficte bonos; quia tunc homines in timore servientes opus mundabant, non animum. Tempus gratiae ad vere bonos pertinet; qui modo etiamsi numero plures non sint, tamen statu sunt excellentiores, et Dei gratia publice anteferuntur etiam ab iis qui ei moribus contradicunt. Scias ergo quocunque tempore ab initio mundi usque [0032D] ad finem nullum fuisse vel esse vere bonum nisi justificatum per gratiam; gratiam autem nunquam adipisci potuisse nisi per Christum, ita ut omnes sive praecedentes sive sequentes uno justificationis remedio salvatos agnoscas. Aspice ergo castra regis nostri et acies exercitus ejus in armis spiritualibus fulgentes, et quanta praecedentium sequentiumque populorum multitudine stipatus incedat.

## De sacramentis legis naturalis et scriptae (cont.)

D. Vellem ut nunc tanti regis exercitum mihi sigillatim describeres; qui et quales milites ejus ab initio fuerint; quae arma, quos hostes habuerint, ubi et quando, et qualia bella gesserint: quomodo vicerint, quae postremo praemia (victoria consummata) perceperint. M. Postquam primus parens generis [0033A] humani propter inobedientiae culpam a paradiso exsulans in hunc mundum venit, diabolus jus tyrannicum in illo exercens, sicut prius fraudulenter seduxerat, ita postmodum violenter possidebat. Sed Dei providentia quae hunc ad salutem disponebat, sic justitiae rigorem per misericordiam temperavit, ut eum ad tempus quidem ab illo premi permitteret, et tamen ne ab illo in aeternum premeretur, ex ipsa ei poena remedium praepararet. Itaque jam tunc ex ipso mundi exordio sacramenta salutis suae homini proposuit quibus eum sub exspectatione futurae sanctificationis consignaret: quatenus ea quisquis fide recta et spe firma propter obedientiam institutionis divinae perciperet, etiam sub jugo positus ad consortium libertatis pertineret. Proposuit itaque [0033B] edictum informans et hominem erudiens, ut quicunque eum salvatorem atque liberatorem exspectare eligeret, ejusdem suae electionis votum in perceptione sacramentorum ejus approbare debuisset: « Proposuit et diabolus sacramenta sua quibus suos sibi alligaret, quatenus ab illis qui ejus imperium detrectabant quanto eos manifestius discerneret tanto securius detineret. Coepit ergo genus humanum mox in partes contrarias dividi aliis diaboli sacramenta suscipientibus, aliis vero suscipientibus sacramenta Christi: et factae sunt duae familiae: una Christi, altera diaboli. » Diabolus ergo videns quod generis humani propago quam in radice sua vitiaverat, quamvis tota cum corruptione nascendo prodiret, non tamen tota in eadem renascendo innovata [0033C] persisteret, statuit per eos quos possidebat, illos quos amittebat persequendo premere; tanto tunc amplius ad inferendam violentiam praesumens, quanto se prius meminerat fraudulentia praevaluisse. Verum haec maligni versutia machinatio, divinae misericordiae dispensatio fuit, ut videlicet homo confirmatus per gratiam contra eum justitiam suam defenderet, quam per eum prius seductus deseruit. In quo nimirum convenienter etiam superbia tyranni confunditur, quod modo hominem mortalem et infirmum per tormenta superare non praevalet quem antea nulla infirmitate circumdatum sola persuasione seduxit. Tam diversa igitur intentione opus unum perficitur, cum diabolus suos milites ad persecutionem [0033D] et violentiam, Christus vero suos ad patientiam exhortatur. Quia autem diabolus ab initio sive per se sive per suos non ob aliud bonos impugnat nisi ut eis justitiam tollat, et boni non aliud per hanc pugnam exigunt, nisi ut suam justitiam non amittant, patet profecto quod ipse cum non valet quod vult ad effectum perducere, semper a bonis vincitur, etiam si foris praevaluisse videatur. Ergo cum milites diaboli exterius violentiam inferunt, milites Christi interius per patientiam vincunt. D. Ergo sacramenta Christi arma sunt? M. Non solum arma, sed et medicamenta. D. Quomodo? M. Medicamenta sunt, quia sanant infirmos; arma, quia protegunt sanos. D. Quid est sacramentum? M. Sacrae rei signum. D. Quot modis fiunt sacramenta? M. [0034A] Tribus; id est rebus, verbis, factis. Rebus, ut in aqua, in pane, in vino, in sale, in cinere, in oleo, in igne et in caeteris hujusmodi; verbis, ut est Trinitatis invocatio et alia quae in benedictionibus sive consecrationibus vel conjurationibus virtutem divinam habentia verba proferuntur; factis, ut est crucis signaculum, incurvatio genuum, expansio manuum, et caetera quaecunque talia sunt. D. Quare dicitur sacramentum sacrae rei signum? M. Quia per id quod foris visibile cernitur, aliud interius invisibile significatur. Verbi gratia: Ut per aquam, remissio peccatorum; per ignem, ardor charitatis; per oleum, misericordia; per salem, sapientia, etc. D. In talibus ergo salutem quaeret homo cum ipse rationalis sit, et dignior in conditione sua rebus insensatis? Quomodo [0034B] ista salutem dare possunt et languoribus animarum mederi; cum ipsa sint corporalia, nihil praeter speciem visibilem habentia? M. Est prorsus aliud ibi praeter id quod oculis corporeis cernitur; et ipsum est quod invisibiliter peccatorum maculas mundat, et languoribus animarum medetur. D. Illa ergo virtus unde venit? M. Non ex illius natura quod ibi visibile cernitur; sed ex operatione Spiritus sancti qui in illo visibili invisibiliter operatur. D. Nonne hanc eamdem virtutem ad reparationem hominis sine exhibitione vel adminiculo rerum corporalium Spiritus sanctus praestare potuisset? M. Posset utique si vellet. D. Quae ergo causa fuit ut ista instituerentur, ut homo quasi in istis quae inferiora sunt et indigniora juberetur salutem quaerere, cum [0034C] solus Deus sit a quo homo salutem et debeat quaerere et possit sperare? M. In istis, non ab istis jubetur homo salutem quaerere; sic ut eam cum adeptus fuerit, sciat se ab illo qui eam in istis quaerere jussit accepisse. D. Dic ergo cur praecepit Deus homini in ejusmodi rebus salutem quaerere? M. Ut humiliaretur homo et erudiretur. Humiliaretur quidem dum cogitur nunc jacens in inferiori bonum suum quaerere; quod prius cum staret, a suo superiori contempsit accipere. Congruum ergo praecedentis superbiae morbo, subsequentis humilitatis medicamentum apponitur, ut videlicet homo qui prius Deum (perniciose elatus in semetipso) despexerat postmodum salubriter humiliatus sponte se etiam in sensibilibus [0034D] rebus praeter Deum substernat. Ad doctrinam etiam sacramenta proposita sunt homini, ut per ea quae exterius aguntur, quid sibi interius exhibeatur possit agnoscere. D. Ergo in ommni sacramento plus esse credendum est, quam id quod solum videri et corporali sensu percipi potest? M. Duo ibi sunt: unum quod exterius sensu corporali percipimus, quod proprie sacramentum, id est sacrae rei signum dicitur; alterum quod non videmus sed credimus, quod recte res sive virtus sacramenti nominatur. D. Quid interest inter signum et sacramentum? M. Signum solum ex institutione significat; sacramentum etiam ex similitudine repraesentat. Item signum rem significare potest, non conferre. In sacramento autem non sola significatio est, sed etiam efficacia; ut [0035A] videlicet simul et ex institutione significat, et ex similitudine repraesentet, et conferat ex sanctificatione. D. Utrum potest aliquando sacramentum pro signo accipi? M. Improprie pro sola significatione sacramentum vocatur. D. Quid si dixerimus illas Veteris Legis figuras signa tantum fuisse futurorum, non sacramenta, et spiritualem gratiam (quae in illis dabatur) mediantibus iis quae futura erant sacramentis fuisse collatam? M. Si quis sacramenta priore effectum sanctificationis habuisse negaverit, non mihi recte sentire videtur, in hoc tamen dignitatem sequentium indubitanter praeferimus, quod illa et visibilia et signa visibilium fuerunt; ista vero cum sint visibilia, ipsa quidem tantummodo invisibilis gratiae sacramenta sunt. Idcirco sacramenta gratiae [0035B] primum per invocationem Trinitatis sanctificationem in se suscipiunt, ac deinde sanctificationem conferunt, ut sint ex sanctificatione sanctificantia, atque hoc ex sua sibique coelitus indita sanctificatione conferant quod illa per haec conferre consueverant ex sola horum significatione.

D. Quae sunt illa sine quibus salus ab initio haberi non potuit? M. Tria sunt, id est, fides, et sacramenta fidei, et opera bona: quae a principio ad obtinendam salutem homini proposita videntur. His milites Christi semper usi sunt: in fide robur in sacramentis fidei arma, in operibus bonis tela accipientes, quibus contra diabolum pugnaverunt. Sane quemadmodum neque robur inermi, neque arma sine viribus, aut tela, contra fortem armatum prodesse [0035C] possunt dimicanti; ita quidem fides sine operibus et sacramentorum sanctificatione, et rursus sine fide sacramenta, aut opera salutis effectum non habent.

D. Quid est fides? M. Paulus dicit *fidem esse substantiam rerum sperandarum, argumentum non apparentium [n: (Hebr. XI)]*. D. Qualiter hoc accipiendum putas? Quaecunque vel futura, nec dum sunt; vel praeterita jam esse desierunt; vel praesentia veritatem sui a sensibus nostris sive cognitione abscondunt: haec omnia quantum attinet ad nos quodammodo non sunt; sed quia per fidem de his omnibus quasi existentibus praesentibus quaedam in nobis certitudo nascitur, non immerito ipsa fides et non existentium substantia, et non apparentium argumentum [0035D] appellatur. Porro illud considerandum est quod sola fide nemo potest placere Deo nisi charitas illi sociata fuerit, ut sit videlicet fides operans ex dilectione. Attamen fides fundamentum quodammodo est et principium boni in homine, de qua charitas nascitur, de charitate autem spes generatur; quia fides ad cogitationem pertinet, charitas vero amor, spes fiducia est.

D. Breviter velim ut horum diffinitione proposita, ipsa mihi manifestius distinguantur. M. Fides est voluntaria absentium certitudo supra opinionem et infra scientiam constituta. Charitas est amor Dei propter ipsum, et amor proximi propter Deum. Spes est fiducia futurorum bonorum ex gratia Dei et bona conscientia. In hoc etiam fides et spes differre videntur: [0036A] quod fides de praesentibus praeteritis simul et futuris esse potest: spes de solis futuris; fides de nostris et alienis; spes solummodo de nostris. Fides de bonis et malis; spes de solis bonis.

## De sacramentis legis naturalis et scriptae (cont.)

D. Quid est sacramentum fidei? M. Duobus modis intelligi potest sacramentum fidei: sive ipsum sacramentum quod est fides; sive sacramentum fidei, id est fidelium, quo fideles utuntur et sanctificantur. D. Qua ratione fides sacramentum dicitur? M. Sicut sacramentum baptismi cum dicitur, non aliud sacramentum quam ipsum quod est baptismus significatur, ita et sacramentum fidei ipsam fidem quae sacramentum est, nonnunquam accipere solemus. Porro caetera omnia ideo sacramenta fidei dicuntur, quod ad eos tantum qui fidem habent sanctificandos [0036B] instituta sint. Ipsa vero fides, ut dictum est, sacramentum est, propterea quod sicut in baptismo et in aliis sacramentis aliud est quod foris ostenditur, atque aliud spiritualis virtus quae intus exhibetur; sic aliud est fides qua *nunc,* sicut dicit Apostolus, Deum quasi *per speculum in aenigmate cernimus [n: (I Cor. XIII)]*; atque aliud visio manifesta qua eum postea *facie ad faciem [n: (ibid.)]* contemplantes visuri sumus. Fides igitur sacramentum est visionis futurae; et ipsa visio virtus est ejus sacramenti quod est fides. D. Doceri nunc velim quae res ad fidem pertineant? M. Duo sunt: Creator et creatura. Haec sana fides ita discernere debet, ut nec creaturae divinitatem Creatoris attribuat, nec Creatori infirmitatem creaturae ascribat; id est, nec Deum concludat tempore, [0036C] nec creaturam tendat aeternitate. Nam quodlibet horum fiat: fides necesse est detrimentum patiatur. Sequitur autem ut fides cum recte inter Creatorem et creaturam diviserit, recte etiam offerre studeat Creatoris honorem suum tribuendo, ut videlicet confiteatur omnia ab ipso et per ipsum facta esse, ipsum vero non aliunde sed a semetipso sine principio et fine subsistere. Deinde sequitur tertium, ut videlicet eum quem Creatorem confitetur omnium, credat etiam et exspectet hominum salvatorem. Et ut breviter perstringamus, haec sunt quibus nihil unquam minus recta fides habere potuit, ut unus Deus credatur, factor omnium et hominum salvator. Nam illi qui creaturam pro Deo colentes [0036D] gemino errore decepti, vel creaturam aeternam, vel Deum temporalem esse credebant: quid isti aliud fecisse dicendi sunt quam excellentiam factoris operi et infirmitatem facturae tribuisse Creatoris? Rursus philosophi gentilium; quia fidem de Salvatore non habebant, quamvis inter Creatorem et opus suum discernendum minime fallerentur, nequaquam tamen fideles appellandi sunt, quia fidem Salvatoris non habuerunt. D. Qualem fidem habuerunt antiqui de Salvatore venturo, maxime ii qui circa primordia saeculi existentes nondum adhuc Scripturas in quibus adventus ejus promittebatur acceperant? M. Non necesse est ut dicamus omnibus qui tunc fideles erant adventum ejus in carnem, crucem et resurrectionem manifeste revelatum fuisse; cum etiam [0037A] apostoli qui eum praesentem in carne viderunt (quorum fides et justitia ab ipso Salvatore praedicatur) hoc ignorasse legantur. Credebant tamen se salvari per eum quomodo et quando ei placuisset; sed quod morte illius redimendi essent (exceptis paucis quibus hoc a Deo revelatum fuerat) eos ignorasse ex hoc patenter ostenditur, quod et Petrus Domino mortem suam praedicenti contraire nititur [n: (Matth. XVI)]; et caeteri apostoli omnes in morte ipsius desperasse potius leguntur, adeo ut ipsi propter crucem jam desperantes dicerent: *Nos autem sperabamus quod ipse esset redempturus Israel [n: (Luc. XXIV)]*. Qui enim ipso vivente redemptionem speraverant, postea autem ipso moriente desperant; patenter ostendunt, quia quod per mortem ejus redimendi [0037B] fuerant nescierunt.

D. An hoc illis prioribus sufficere poterat ad salutem, ut crederent eum creatorem omnium, et salvatorem exspectarent venturum? M. Poterat hoc eis tunc sufficere cum caeteris sine quibus, ut dictum est, fides placere non poterat, in iis duntaxat qui tempus bene operandi habebant, id est, cum susceptione sacramentorum et exercitatione bonorum operum per charitatem et spem fide roboratam. D. Ergo postea crevit fides? M. Duobus modis crescit fides: per constantiam et cognitionem. Alii fidem habent cognitione magnam, et parvam constantia; alii cognitione parvam et constantia magnam. Apud Deum autem pretiosior est magna fidei constantia quam cognitio magna. Antiqui igitur [0037C] sancti fidem habebant plures cognitione parvam et magnam constantia; sicut econtrario nunc multi fidem habent cognitione magnam et constantia parvam.

D. Quae sacramenta erant sub lege naturali? M. Oblationes et sacrificia et decimae. D. Qua ratione haec sacramenta vocantur? M. Quia sacrae rei signa sunt. D. Cujus? M. Remissionis peccatorum. D. Quomodo? M. Substantia hominis duplex est: alia interior quae ipse est; alia exterior in rebus quas possidet. Voluit ergo Deus ut homo de exteriori substantia sua sibi oblationem faceret, ut justa recompensatione dum id quod exterius a Deo acceperat devote redderet, id quod interius de semetipso perdiderat Deo tribuente recuperaret. Per fidem ergo et oblationes sive sacrificia tunc remissionem [0037D] peccatorum acceperunt quicunque veterem hominem deponentes, hoc est Adam, membra novi, id est Christi facti sunt. Idem namque in illis oblationes et sacrificia fide mediante operabantur, quod postea sub lege scripta circumcisio aut sub gratia baptismus; videlicet ut et ipsi ab omni peccato sive originali sive actuali justificati, inter membra illius computarentur, cujus fide et sacramentis sanctificabantur. Eamdem quippe passio Salvatoris, praecedentibus sacramentis, id est sive oblationi sub naturali, sive circumcisioni sub lege scripta, virtutem et efficaciam sanctificationis contulit, quam subsequentibus et succedentibus confert: hoc solo excepto quod sacrificia et oblationes non ita sub naturali [0038A] lege quemadmodum circumcisio sub scripta et baptismus sub gratia ad necessitatem salutis, sed ad cultum devotionis fiebant, sola tunc fide justificante et purificante credentes. Et rursum hoc etiam in circumcisione excepto quod illi priores patres quamlibet justi et Deo placentes ante datam hostiam regni coelestis januam intrare non poterant; sed tantum in sinu Abrahae, id est in requie tranquilla servabantur, quousque ille veniret qui pro nobis moriens et resurgens per assumptam carnem coelos ascenderet, et omnibus in se credentibus ac se sequentibus viam aperiret.

D. Si eadem virtus in illis sacramentis fuit quae in istis est, quid causae erat ut illa cessarent et ista succederent? M. Manifestior veritas in istis declaratur; [0038B] et justum erat ut sicut paulatim procedente tempore crevit agnitio fidei, ita etiam alia sacramenta instituerentur, quae etsi aliam sanctificationem gratiae spiritualis non conferrent, eamdem tamen manifestius panderent. Erat quippe idem Salvator, eadem fides, eadem gratia: illic venturi, hic exhibiti. Sed, quia ipse per quem salus dabatur adhuc longe erat, ejusdem salutis signa obscura esse debuerunt, ut paulatim ejus adventu appropinquante et fides amplius cresceret, et gratia evidentius se manifestaret. Ideo primum per oblationem et postea per circumcisionem, ad ultimum per baptismum, expiationis et justificationis sacramentum formari institutum est; quia ejusdem mundationis forma et similitudo in oblatione quidem occulte innuitur, [0038C] circumcisione vero evidentius exprimitur, per baptismum autem manifesta declaratur. Primam namque justificationem accepit homo, ut pro remediis salutis, exterioris substantiae partem offerret Deo, partem ad usum proprium retineret, quatenus in hoc facto disceret ea quae intrinsecus bona erant Deo tribuere, quae vero mala, sibi imputare. Sed hoc signum de longe sumptum magis docuit hominem quid esset quam quid fieret. Igitur cum tempus advenisset quo veritas declarari debuerat, datum est ei remedium circumcisionis sacramentum, ubi dum ab interiori substantia hominis pars non quidem naturaliter superflua, sed ejus quod superfluum est figura, praeciditur; jam manifestius illa peccati circumcisio quam in interiori homine gratia perficit [0038D] demonstratur. Quia autem circumcisio exteriores sordes et enormitates quae foris sunt resecat, ablutio autem maculas etiam interiores emundat; jam manifesta veritate adveniente Christo circumcisio cessare debuit, ut illud sacramentum succederet, quod perfectam hominis emundationem et interiorem animae candorem (quem in ipso ot per ipsum sacramentum adipiscitur) posset declarare. Videntur ergo illa prima sacramenta quasi quaedam umbra gratiae spiritualis; illa vero quae postea secuta sunt quasi quaedam imago, et (si ita dicendum est) lineamenta veritatis habentia. Ista vero non jam umbra vel imago, sed corpus veritatis; in quibus (quia plenarie salutis effectus datur, et evidenter [0039A] ostenditur) quasi spiritus in corpore viventi exteriori motione se prodit; sic in eis vita gratiae invisibilis clarissime demonstratur.

D. De operibus restat nunc ut quae dicenda sunt aperias. M. Tria genera factorum sunt: quaedam sunt omnino bona quae nunquam licite praeteriri possunt; quaedam omnino mala sunt quae nunquam licite committi possunt; quaedam sunt media quae sive fiant sive non fiant nec culpa est nec meritum. Quae sic ergo se habent ut nunquam licite fieri possint, illa tantummodo lex naturalis prohibuit; illa vero quae nunquam licite possunt praeteriri sola praecepit, media omnia ad utrumlibet relinquens. De illis autem quae vel praecipienda vel relinquenda erant, unum tantum praeceptum in corde hominis [0039B] posuit: *Quod tibi vis, id aliis feceris; quod tibi non vis, aliis ne feceris [n: (Matth. VII; Tobiae IV)]*, ut ex sui videlicet consideratione homo disceret qualem se erga proximum exhibere deberet. Sed postea, cum lex subintrasset, et disciplinam vivendi arctiorem proponeret coepit ex iis quae media erant quaedam excipere, et ex eis alia per praeceptionem, alia per prohibitionem in alteram partem tantum locare, ut quemadmodum primo homini in paradiso Deus de concessione naturali unam pro praecepto disciplinae exhibitionem exceperat, ita modo filiis ejus non ex una veritate stantibus, sed per varios errores dissipatis, non unum de concessione naturali praeceptum disciplinae quasi probandis, sed quasi corrigendis et reparandis multa formaret, ut quanto magis se [0039C] in mediis temperare discerent, tanto levius inconcessa cavere valerent.

## De sacramentis legis naturalis et scriptae (cont.)

D. Quae fuerunt illa quae lex naturalis facienda aut vitanda proposuerat? M. Illa septem quae postea lex scripta in secunda tabula de dilectione proximi mandabat. Primum erat: *Honora patrem tuum et matrem tuam, ut bene sit tibi, et sis longaevus super terram;* secundum: *Non occides;* tertium: *Non maechaberis;* quartum: *Non furtum facies;* quintum: *Non falsum testimonium dices;* sextum: *Non concupisces uxorem proximi tui;* septimum: *Non concupisces rem proximi tui [n: (Deut. V)]*. Primum secundum praeceptionem factum est; sex alia secundum prohibitionem. D. Quare de non faciendis unum tantum praeceptum datum est, et de faciendis plura? [0039D] M. Primum peccatum hominis fuit inobedientia; et idcirco vita ista quae homini ad poenitentiam conceditur, tota obedientiae deputatur. Quia igitur homo in malis agendis ex propria concupiscentia in diversa distrahitur, in bonis vero agendis sola obedientiae regula gubernatur; ideo in malis cavendis, quae habet ex semetipso et per semetipsum facere potest, singulatim instruendus erat, ad bona vero agenda ad obedientiam solummodo revocandus, ut ibi per sententiam alterius salubrius disceret quid ipse agere debuisset. Cum enim jubetur homo patri et matri honorem deferre, non hoc ad carnales parentes solum referendum est; sed hoc potius ei praecipitur, ut quod in mandatis suis aliquando contempsit, [0040A] nunc propter Deum homini superiori obedientiam atque honorem exhibere non dedignetur.

D. Ecce demonstrasti tria, id est fidem, et sacramenta fidei et opera. Nunc superest ut in his qui haec habebant, qualis aut quanta effecta sit reparatio ostendas. M. Si summum bonum hominis contemplatio praesentis Dei esset, maxime quia ad perfruendum hoc homo primus conditus creditur, merito fides, per quam absentem quodammodo videre incipit, initium boni et principium restaurationis ejus memoratur. Nam quoniam homo, qui peccando cognitionem Dei perdidit, per fidem iterum illuminatur, ut eum videre atque cognoscere possit; patet quia id per quod ei primum bonum quod perdiderat redditur, jure exordium restaurationis ejus vocatur. [0040B] Quae restauratio scilicet secundum incrementa fidei crescit, dum homo per agnitionem amplius illuminatur et inflammatur perdilectionem. Fides igitur ipsa est per quam reparatur homo et in qua ei bonum amissum redditur, ut per eam paulatim cognitione pariter et amore crescens ad plenam illam visionis felicitatem pervenire mereatur. Sic enim justus quandiu in hoc corpore existens peregrinatur a Domino vivere habet ex fide, quemadmodum beatus cum eductus de hoc ergastulo fuerit et introductus in gaudium Domini sui, vivere habebit ex contemplatione. Sed mira Dei dispensatione agitur quod nunc interim malitia hostis antiqui ad impugnandos et persequendos fideles relaxatur, quatenus videlicet hoc homini reputetur pro merito, si [0040C] nunc per fidem ambulans viam veritatis etiam vel impugnatus non deserat, qui prius visione praesentis Dei roboratus sola persuasione prostratus erat. Ut autem in hoc praelio invictus stare possit et bonum suum illaesum custodire, dantur ei, ut dictum est jam, in sacramentis arma quibus se muniat, et in operibus bonis tela quibus hostem prosternat, ut scilicet fidei charitate et spe adjuncta interius pariter roboretur et vincat. Jam (ut existimo) satis demonstratum est tibi qualis fides et quae sacramenta aut quae opera illis sanctis primis ad obtinendam salutem fuerunt necessaria.

D. Quandiu duravit status iste priorum? M. Usque ad Abraham. Tunc etenim volens Deus populum suum in unum congregare et ab infidelium collegio [0040D] sequestrare, ut non solum in una fide, sed etiam in una essent societate, vocavit Abraham, ut eum de terra sua educeret, ut per illum unum et in illo uno omnes qui ab illo nascituri aut illum secuturi erant a pristina conversatione educens in unam societatem novae vitae congregaret. Cui etiam praecepit ut circumcideret pellem praeputii sui in signum sibi, posteris in exemplum; tantum ad priorem statum superaddens quatenus per hoc signaculum populus Dei ab infidelibus discerneretur, quousque ille viveret qui non solum de filiis Abrahae, sed de universis etiam gentibus fideles colligeret, ac per hoc non jam per signaculum carnis in genere, sed per signaculum baptismatis secerneret in emundatione. [0041A] D. Nunquid non etiam olim ante diluvium fideles ab infidelibus discreti erant? M. Erant; sed post diluvium rursus humanum genus ad unum populum redactum in Abraham secundo discerni coepit. D. Qualiter fiebat circumcisio? M. Praeceptum fuit ut puer masculus octavo die nativitatis suae circumcideretur in carne praeputii sui cultello de petra facto. D. Quae fuit ratio ut sic fieri praeciperetur? M. Tres sunt circumcisiones: una in carne tantum exterius, quae sacramentum est; duae aliae quae sunt res et virtus sacramenti. Altera quae fit in praesenti, quando per depositionem iniquitatis mens circumciditur. Altera quae in futuro fiet, quando per depositionem corruptionis corpus circumcidetur. Prima igitur est in carne; secunda in mente; tertia [0041B] in corpore. Octonarius vero in sacra Scriptura aliquando tempus resurrectionis significat quod post praesentem (quae septem diebus currit) vitam sequitur: aliquando tempus gratiae in quo aeterna bona servientibus Deo promittuntur. Merito igitur illa prima circumcisio quae sacramentum erat aliarum duarum, jussa est fieri die octavo, ut ostenderet quod in tempore gratiae corda circumcidenda erant [0042A] per emundationem iniquitatis, et in tempore resurrectionis corpora per depositionem corruptionis. Propterea autem solis masculis data est circumcisio carnis, quia sacra Scriptura per masculinum sexum animam, per muliebrem vero carnem significare solet; ut videlicet ostenderetur quod illa exterior circumcisio animabus justificationem contulit, sed carni non abstulit corruptionem. Cultellus de petra factus Christum significat, de quo dicit Apostolus: *Petra autem erat Christus [n: (I Cor. X)]*, *qui tollit peccata mundi [n: (Joan. I)]*. In carne praeputii idcirco jussa est fieri quoniam ad remedium data est contra originale peccatum, quod a parentibus contrahimus per illud membrum propagati. D. Quod ergo mulieres remedium habebant quae non circumcidebantur? [0042B] M. Fidem et oblationes sive sacrificia: ipsam quoque circumcisionem; non tamen suscipiendo sed credendo. D. Quid dicendum est de pueris ante octavam diem morientibus, quoniam ad illud remedium pervenire non poterant, salvine fuerant an damnati? M. Hoc Dei judicio relinquendum mihi videtur.

english:
## On the Sacraments of the Natural Law and of the Written Law

[0017C]D. What was there before the world was made? M. God alone. D. How long was he before? M. From eternity. D. Where was he, when there was nothing besides himself? M. Where he now is, there he was then also. D. Where is he now? M. He is in himself, and all things are in him, and he himself is in all things. D. When did God make the world? M. *In the beginning [n: (Gen. I)]*. D. Where was the world made? M. In God. D. Out of what was the world made? M. Out of nothing. D. How was the world made. M. First, in matter, all things were made together; but afterwards, in this form in which the world is now beheld, all things were composed and set in order through six days. D. How could matter be before form? M. That matter was not [0017D] altogether without form; yet it is said to have been unformed at first, because in the first condition of itself it did not yet have so seemly and so fitting a form as it now has. D. Why did God will first [0018C] to create unshaped matter — as though he could not have created it together with its form? M. He willed first to show what a creature was of itself, and what it had afterwards received from the Creator's kindness; and therefore he first created the essence, and afterwards put the form into it. D. To whom was he showing this, when as yet there was no one who could see it? M. There were already then angels to whom this might be shown, that they might see outwardly in the things founded what they should inwardly recognize in themselves; lest they too should think that the glory they had received was to be ascribed to themselves, and not to their founder. To us also this is shown; for we, although we did not see it when it was done, have nevertheless heard that it was done, on the report of sacred utterance. D. Where, or of what sort, was that first matter before [0018D] it was formed? M. It lay confused in the very place where it now subsists in order. For the earth, set in the same place in which it now is, that is, in the middle place, was enwrapped on every side by the three remaining [0019A] elements, that is, by water and air and fire, still confused together in one murk; which confusion, of course, encircling the earth round about, occupied upward as much space as the whole body of creatures now embraces. Even then the earth had a form of some kind, more excellent than the rest, but, wrapped and overlaid, what it was could not yet appear. The remaining three, as has been said, were in every way confused and undigested, hanging in the manner of a kind of cloud in that space which now air and heaven hold. This shadowy murk Scripture named darkness: which in the beginning, spread out above by the gathering of the waters, hung over the face of the deep (which was not yet filled).

D. What formation was made on the first day? M. Light was made [0019B] on the first day [n: (Gen. I)]: which indeed had already before been created materially among the rest; but now for the first time, that it might be able to shine and to give light, it was separated and marked off from the others. D. Of what sort is that light to be reckoned to have been? M. There are those who assert that it was a luminous cloud, which (as the sun does now) was carried round encircling the earth; and while, rising, it lit up the upper parts of the world, it made day, but descending at its setting to the lower regions, by the absence of its light it made night. From this they will have those first three days at the outset of creatures — before the sun and the other luminaries were founded — to have been marked off and named. D. Where must that light be said now to be? M. They say that it is now dispersed round about in the upper parts of the aether, and could still be seen if the greater brightness of the sun did not [0019C] hide it; but that at night, out of that light, there are still shown to those who consider carefully, as it were, certain luminous remnants of a most thin cloud scattered against the firmament, which the greater brightness of the day wholly conceals from the eyes of beholders.

D. What formation was made on the second day? M. The firmament was made on the second day [n: (ibid.)], which indeed had itself also been created materially before; but until now it remained undistinguished and mingled in that universal confusion. But now, that is, on the second day, drawn out of the mingling and reduced to form, it was set to divide between the upper waters and the lower waters; namely in such wise that, coming into the middle of that confusion which hung in the manner of a cloud about the earth, it should in a certain way [0019D] cut through it, and, embracing it round about with its own circuit, should shut one part beneath itself and separate the other part outside — that is, that by those very waters which in the division remained outside or above, the firmament, set in the middle between the waters and the waters, should be wholly encompassed round about, while the waters which were left within or below should all be shut in on every side by that same firmament. Part of the waters, therefore, remained in the division above the firmament; the other part, enclosed beneath the circuit of the firmament, took possession of the whole space of the air, filling it round about. D. Is it to be believed that there are still waters above the firmament? M. So it is thought; because Holy Scripture also in divers places plainly confirms this, as is that testimony of the Psalmist: [0020A] *Let the waters that are above the heavens praise the name of the Lord [n: (Psal. CXLVIII)]*.

D. How can waters stand above heaven? M. In icy fashion, or (what is the more credible) after the likeness of that first chaos they are firmly suspended there, hanging in the manner of a light cloud, such as the nature of all waters is thought to have been in the beginning.

D. What was the formation of the third day? M. Those waters which had remained hanging beneath the firmament were compacted together; and pressed down at length by their weight they were gathered *into one place [n: (Gen. I)]*, that is, into that great deep which before they had covered over: whence even now they are drawn off to all parts of the earth through their [sic: *thracones*] and their channels. But when the waters had been gathered, [0020B] the *dry land [n: (ibid.)]* began to appear, that is, the earth, which before lay hidden, wrapped in that murk and confusion; and God clothed it, as it appeared, with its own shoots: and so the work of the third day was completed.

D. What formation was made on the fourth day? M. The luminaries were founded in heaven, that is, the sun and the moon and the stars; that they might shine over the earth, and give it light, and by their course mark off the times [n: (ibid.)].

D. What formation was made on the fifth day? M. The birds and the fishes were made out of the waters. The birds were then placed in the air; the fishes remained in their original seat [n: (ibid.)].

D. What formation was made on the sixth day? M. The beasts and the other living things which live upon the earth were created out of [0020C] the earth. But when all things had been consummated and prepared, last of all (yet on that same sixth day) man was made, who should have dominion over every creature. D. Why were the birds, which were placed in the air, not made out of the air itself, as the fishes out of the water, and the beasts likewise and man out of the earth? M. Because the air has not such bodily substance that a living thing could be made of it as it can of the earth. D. Why was man made last of all? M. Because man was to be set over every creature, it was fitting that his dwelling should first be prepared, and that afterwards he himself, when all things had been ordered, should be brought into the round world as its possessor and ruler. These, therefore, are the works of the founding which God made and completed in six days: creating before every day, [0020D] disposing and ordering in the first three days, setting out in order in the three following: on the first discerning, on the second distinguishing, on the third disposing, on the fourth adorning the heavens, on the fifth the air and the water, on the sixth the earth. D. Why did God make his works in six days, and rest on the seventh? M. The number six, because it consists of its own parts, is a sign of perfection; and therefore God willed to complete his works in six days, that he might show that in the things he had made he had neither set down anything superfluous nor left anything imperfect. But when the six days had been completed, on the seventh day at last he rested [n: (Gen. II)], that is, he ceased from work; not that he himself, as though wearied, had need of rest, but that he might promise us a rest to come, if we should study to do good and perfect works according to our own manner and measure. D. How [0021A] is God said to have rested on the seventh day, when he himself says in the Gospel: *My Father worketh until now, and I work? [n: (Joan. V.)]* M. God is said to work in many ways. For there is the work of creation, and there is also the work of disposition, there is the work of propagation, and there is the work of governance. The work of creation he made before every day; the work of disposition he completed in six days; the work of propagation he does not forsake until the end of the age; from the work of governance he will not cease unto eternity. D. If God first rested on the seventh day, what then did he do from the beginning of the first day, after he had made the light, until the rising of the day following, when he was making the firmament? M. If you will look at the matter more closely, you will find that God by no means rested on the first day, after the beginning of light, from every work whatsoever; [0021B] because not only did this belong to his work, that the light was made, but also that it was directed, until, the compass of its circuit being run through, it consummated its course. First therefore, that he might begin his work from what was perfect, he made the light rising; and thence directing it, he completed first the evening, then the morning, that is, the first day. D. Is it to be understood so of the works of the remaining days? M. In these matters I would rashly affirm nothing; because, although the like might be said of the work of the second day — that he first made the firmament between the waters and the waters, and then directed its course until the rising of the third day — yet, since we have not yet found any certain experience concerning the motion of the firmament, let us, if you please, loose the knot of this question in another way. For it can not unfittingly be said [0021C] that the Lord did not so continue the succession of his work in those six days as though he had left off the work for no interval of time in the meanwhile; but that, since he passed over no day in working, on the seventh day he then at last rested from all work in such wise that he neither thereafter created other things beside those which had already been made, nor disposed them otherwise than they had already been disposed (so far as pertains to the order of the universe). For neither did he afterwards add anything to the number of the universe, nor did he change the order of the [sic: *unversitatis*] in anything. D. And what of this, that new souls are still created daily. M. Yet nothing new is said to be adjudged; because those souls themselves, although created out of nothing and only now first beginning to be, were nevertheless in a certain way created even then in their likeness. [0021D] And that I may briefly discharge for you what seems to me to be said thereon: all things were then made, so that nothing should afterwards come to be which had not before been created either in matter or in likeness.

## On the Sacraments of the Natural Law and of the Written Law (cont.)

D. I see still further in these works matters worthy of inquiry, which indeed, though unwilling, I am compelled to pass over; lest perchance, if I detain you longer than is right upon such things, I fail to reach the other matters that remain, which are more necessary. Now therefore, if you please, let us return to man, that you may open to me — for I greatly desire it — the cause of his creation. For it is assuredly fitting that we, who already believe that all things were made for his sake, should also not be ignorant why he himself was made. M. God, who is the highest and true and perfect good, was from eternity so blessed in himself and through himself that his glory and beatitude, because it was [0022A] eternal and unchangeable, could not be diminished, and, because it had been full and perfect, could not be increased. Needing nothing, therefore, but willing to share with others the good which he himself was and by which he was blessed, and to make others blessed in it and through it, by no necessity but by charity alone he created the rational creature, that is, rational spirits; and he commanded that they should in part persist in their own purity, and in part, clothed with flesh, should quicken the human body to life and to sense. To those spirits, therefore, which were to be joined to bodies, he appointed a place and a habitation on earth; but for those which were to remain in their own purity he set a dwelling in heaven. The one sort indeed he set on high by favor; the other he disposed below by dispensation, that both he might one day, through obedience, [0022B] carry these up from the lowest to the highest, and might, through obedience, confirm those in the highest. D. Why did God will to join spirits to bodies, since they would have been of greater excellence persisting in their own purity? M. He willed to show in them by creation what he was afterwards to do in them by favor. For since among created things nothing is more excellent than spirit, nothing lower and more corruptible than earth, when to a body made of earth and having corruptible matter he granted a rational spirit, that is, a rational soul, he joined in a certain way the highest things to the lowest in one fellowship and society; showing that what the body was to the spirit, this in a certain way the spirit was to itself. And just as one condition of creation had joined the excellence of the spirit to the weakness of bodily nature, [0022C] so one favor of loving-kindness was to join the lowliness of the spiritual creature to the excellence of the Creator. He made, therefore, as has been said, the body of man out of the slime of the earth, and breathed into it a rational soul which he created out of nothing [n: (Gen. II)], that living obediently in the body it might one day be raised, together with the body, to the fellowship of those spirits which lived without a body, that is, of the angels; and that he might lift both alike to a share in his own glory, so as to glorify both the spirit in himself and the body in the spirit; and that, as far as he had before inclined the highest things by dispensation when he founded them, so far he might now exalt the lowest by favor. D. Why did God not create men all at once, as he had created the angels? M. Because he willed that there should be one beginning of the human race. D. Why [sic: *Qnare*] did he will this? M. For [0022D] the beating back of the pride of the devil. For since the devil proudly desired to be another beginning apart from God, in order that his haughtiness might be the more confounded, man received this, so that he should have therein also the dignity of the likeness of God: that as God stood forth as the beginning of creation to all things, so man should be the beginning of generation to all men; and that all men, while they knew themselves to be from one and to be one, might all love one another as though they were one. D. Why was woman made? M. For a help unto generation. D. Why was she made out of the man? M. Because if she were made from elsewhere, there would not be one beginning. D. Why was she made out of his side? M. That it might be shown that she was created into a fellowship of love; lest, if she had been made out of the head, she should seem to be preferred to the man for dominion, [0023A] or, if out of the feet, to be subjected to him for servitude. Since, therefore, she was being prepared for the man neither as mistress nor as handmaid, but as companion, she had to be brought forth neither out of the head nor out of the feet, but out of the side, that he might acknowledge that she was to be set beside him, whom he had learned to have been taken from beside him: *God therefore sent a deep sleep upon Adam, and took one of his ribs [n: (Gen. II)]*, and from it fashioned the woman. D. Why did he will to take away the rib from him sleeping rather than waking? M. Lest he should be thought to have drawn it from him by way of penalty. D. How could the woman be made out of a rib alone? Did God add anything else to that rib from without for its increase, or create together with it something new, or did the rib itself begin to be multiplied in itself? M. If, for the completing of the woman's body, God added to that rib an increase from without (since [0023B] that which was added was much greater than the rib itself to which it was added), then Scripture ought rather to have said that the woman was made out of that from which she received the greater number of the parts of her substance. Likewise, if that which came to the rib for its increase is believed to have been made out of nothing, why do we say that she was made out of the man, and not rather out of nothing, since that part of her which was made out of nothing is much greater than that which passed over from the substance of the man into her body? It remains, therefore, that we believe that that rib was multiplied into itself and received no increase from without. D. How can it come about that any thing grows to which nothing is added from elsewhere? M. It is more to make something out of nothing than to multiply a small substance into itself.

[0023C]D. It is certain: wherefore go on with what remains. M. Having made them, then, outside paradise, he placed them in paradise, forming them by the precepts of life and of discipline. D. Why was man, who was to have his dwelling in paradise, made outside paradise? M. That he might not impute the benefit of God to nature, but to grace. D. By what precepts did God form man, when he set him in paradise? M. By two, that is, by the precept of nature and the precept of discipline. For God prepares two goods for man: one temporal and the other eternal, each of them full and perfect. The one, that is, the temporal good, he set full within him; and the other, that is, the eternal, he set full before him. To that which he had given he applied as a guard the precept of nature; to that which he had set before him the precept of discipline opened [0023D] the way. The precept of nature contains precept, prohibition, and concession. The natural precept was the discernment by which it was breathed into him what things were necessary for his nature; the natural prohibition was the discernment by which it was naturally implanted in him what things were harmful; the concession was the discernment of those things which were indifferent, that is, which he might use or not use without disadvantage. If therefore man, instructed by the natural precept, had guarded against negligence, the divine providence would have permitted him to be oppressed by no violence. For man was able, through the precept of nature, to keep the good which he had; but through it he could not obtain the good which he did not yet have. For it could be no merit to a man if he either avoided [0024A] harmful things or sought wholesome ones, or used indifferent things toward either alternative; since in all these he would be regarding not so much the affection of the one commanding as the advantage of the one obeying. And so, that man might be able to merit something, it was necessary that the precept of discipline should be added; but this could be taken neither from the precept nor from the prohibition, lest, if God commanded or forbade the same things, there should be, as has been said, no merit for the one obeying; or, if he changed the commandment, he should become contrary to himself. It behooved, therefore, that it should be taken from the concession, yet in such wise that by that very precept the concession should not be changed — that is, that the precept should not corrupt nature, but that disobedience, not nature, should injure the transgressor. But since the precept of discipline had to be formed out of the natural concession, it was the more fitting [0024B] that this should be done according to prohibition, lest the devil should be able to bring a charge against the obedience; and in one thing only, not in many, lest the disobedience should be able to be excused by man. If therefore man had stood fast in this obedience, after the time appointed by God he ought to have been carried over, without the pain of death, to that highest good which had been prepared for him in the heavens, there to live eternally with all his offspring in the fellowship of the blessed angels. D. Why did God will that there should be need in man? M. That from it he might take occasion of exercise; and that that outward need might show him his inward need. D. Before sin, was man mortal or immortal? M. Both by power, neither by necessity; and afterwards to be both [0024C] by necessity, neither by power: the one first through fault, the other thereafter through grace.

## On the Sacraments of the Natural Law and of the Written Law (cont.)

D. Where is paradise? M. Why do you ask what you see? Toward the east is your entrance; this is the tree of life which you behold. D. Why was it called the tree of life? M. Because such is the power in it that its fruit can defend the life of man from death and from the trouble of every infirmity. D. What is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? M. That in which Adam transgressed. D. Why was it so called? M. Adam, before he sinned, knew good and evil: good indeed both by knowledge and by experience, but evil by knowledge alone. But after he touched the forbidden tree, he began to know evil then by experience also; yet it was not the nature of the tree but the disobedience of the man that conferred the knowledge, [0024D] since through the experience of evil he came to know also how strictly the good had had to be held fast. And so this name is to be believed to have been given to the tree not from the nature which it had, but from the occasion which it afforded. D. How did man transgress? M. The devil, seeing that man was ascending by obedience to the place whence he himself had fallen by pride, envied him; and because he could not harm him by violence, he turned himself to deceit. But lest his deceit, if it were too much hidden, could not be guarded against at all, he was not permitted to tempt through any other animal save through the serpent, that the natural cunning of the serpent might betray the malice of the tempter; that through the covering which was outside, man might know how greatly he ought to have guarded against the [0025A] craft of him who was ruling within. D. How was man tempted? M. By outward temptation only. D. What is outward temptation? M. The persuasion of someone, made either by sign or by word, that he to whom it is made may be inclined to consent unto sin. D. What is inward temptation? M. The motion of the first delight, by which the mind is driven to sin. And this is the more difficultly overcome, because, assailing us from within, it is strengthened against us out of what is our own. Therefore the devil did not merit pardon, because he sinned by no temptation; but man, who fell when struck by an outward temptation, was [sic: *crat*] so much the more grievously to be punished, by how much the lighter the impulse by which he had been laid low. And yet, because in falling he felt some violence, so to speak, therefore at length the grace of God raised him up unto pardon. But we, the more grievous the violence of temptation we suffer [0025B] in sinning, by the lighter expiation are we renewed unto the grace we had lost. D. In what order was man tempted? M. The devil, because he saw that the woman, as being weaker and less strong in reason, could the more easily be circumvented by fraud, first approached her with a question, wishing to draw out her mind, that from her answer he might gather how he ought thereafter to address her. D. Why did the woman not shudder at the serpent speaking to her? M. Because she believed that, being newly created, it had received the office of speaking from God. D. How did he address her? M. *Eat: and you shall be as gods, knowing good and evil [n: (Gen. III)]*. He tempted by three things: by gluttony, by vainglory, by avarice. Now gluttony is the immoderate appetite of eating; vainglory, the love of one's own praise; avarice, [0025C] the immoderate appetite of having. By gluttony he tempted when he said: *Eat.* By vainglory, when he said: *You shall be as gods.* By avarice, when he said: *knowing good and evil.* D. I would that you should unfold the very root of this sin: and as you have shown me in what order it was committed, so you should also show what it is. M. In the first man God had set two things, namely the appetite for the just and the appetite for the advantageous; the one, that is, the appetite for the just, according to will; the other, that is, the appetite for the advantageous, according to necessity. And he appointed that the former should be voluntary for this reason, that in it man might earn merit, either by keeping it well when he could forsake it, or by forsaking it ill when he could keep it. But the latter he willed to be necessary for this reason, that in it man might be recompensed, [0025D] either unto punishment if he forsook the former, or unto glory if he kept the former. And therefore to the one he inseparably joined its own effect, that is, justice; but to the other he set forth its own effect, that is, advantage, as separable; so that man, by losing the one alone, should lose the affection of both the one and the other; or, by keeping the one alone, should keep the effect of both the one and the other. But man did only that which he could; and because he forsook the appetite for the just of his own accord, therefore he justly lost both justice and advantage; keeping only the appetite for the advantageous, unto the increase of his unhappiness; because, just as it would have been an increase of glory for one persevering in justice not to be able to grow lukewarm from the love of the good he possessed, so now it is a heap of misery not to be able to restrain himself from the appetite for the good (although he cannot [0026A] obtain it). D. Did man forsake the appetite for justice willing or unwilling? M. If he forsook it unwilling, it is rather to be called violence than fault; but if the will is said to have gone before in him, then that very forsaking of justice is denied to have been the first sin; nor will it be possible to find whence such a will came to him, that he should will to forsake the good; because he could neither will anything of himself, nor did he receive from God the power to will anything beside the advantageous and the just. D. Yet, since he forsook it, he must be believed to have willed what he did. M. You would say this rightly if to cease from something were to do something. But since he did not begin to will what he formerly did not will, but only ceased to will what he formerly willed, it is not necessary that he be said to have done this either willing or unwilling. Yet he willed something, by willing which, because with that [0026B] he could not will, he ceased to will this which he had willed; nor did he will the one because he ceased to will; but rather he ceased to will this because he willed that. D. Why then is he rather said to have sinned in that he ceased to will this, than in that he began to will that? M. Because if he did not cease to will this, then, willing either that or anything else, he could never have sinned. D. What then is justice? M. Measure in the appetite for the advantageous. D. What is the appetite for justice? M. The love of measure. D. What then did he will, that he should cease to will this? M. He willed something beyond measure. D. Was not this willing too a sin? M. It was not a sin that he willed this, but that in willing this he lost the measure of willing, that is, the appetite for justice. D. What did he will beyond measure? M. He desired the likeness of God. And so man sinned in [0026C] this, that he forsook the appetite for the just, and he was punished in the appetite for the advantageous which he kept. D. How? M. He was punished doubly in the appetite for the advantageous: both when he is restrained from those things which he desires in an ordered way, and because he is let loose to desire disordered advantages. In the one is punishment; in the other is punishment and fault. D. Whence does it come to man that he desires disordered things? M. From the punishment of sin. D. I ask the manner. M. God had made the first body of man sound and whole. Whole indeed, because nothing was lacking to it for perfection; sound, because nothing was in it for corruption. But in both he had set such a condition that neither wholeness nor soundness could be preserved without support. And so among created things he ordered certain things outwardly which could avail to preserve and safeguard its soundness or wholeness; [0026D] and the care and office of providing these he laid upon the spirit which presided over the body. But lest, in carrying that out, he should be pressed by a servile condition if he fulfilled it from mere command and not also from love, God gave him an affection whereby he should love his own body, that as he loved its wholeness and soundness, so also he should willingly provide all things which availed to preserve it. Again, lest either there should be labor in seeking those things, or peril in taking them, he tempered by a fixed measure both the need and the carnal appetite; so that few things could suffice him for sustenance, and moderate things for satiety. And so the prudence of the flesh would have been labor as well as delight and exercise, if man [0027A] had kept justice. But because the spirit, lifted up above, would not restrain its appetite within measure, therefore it deserved that now, scattered below through endless labors, it should not be able to keep measure in the appetite of its own flesh. For God broke by mortality the wholeness of the human body, and on this account it now needs more sustenance than before, both to repair its soundness so far as it has perished, and to preserve it so far as it has remained. Hence is begotten that hard necessity whereby nature extends its appetite beyond order; so that it may not only guard nature, but also drive out the vice of nature. For as it is naturally given to the spirit to love the advantage of its own flesh, so also it naturally has this, that it cannot love its disadvantage. Yet it must be known that this necessity of concupiscence [0027B] is not therefore no fault because it is a necessity; because, that this necessity should be, not necessity but will was the cause. This, however, can be truly said of all things: that the soul desires nothing, however disordered it may seem, save on account of some advantage, either of preserving a good or of removing an evil; as, for example, when it desires intercourse, it longs to quench the itching of the flesh; when it desires food or drink, the burning of gluttony. D. If every appetite desires what is advantageous, and if to desire one's own advantage, both in preserving a good and in removing an evil, is given by nature, why is this concupiscence reckoned to man for a fault? M. He does not sin because he desires his own advantage, but because he desires it in a disordered way. D. Is he not able to disorder, not to desire? M. He is not able. D. [0027C] Why is he not able? M. Because of his weakness. D. Why has he been weakened? M. Because God broke the wholeness of nature by the passibility of mortality. D. Why did he do this? M. I see where you are tending. D. What, nevertheless, was the cause? M. The fault of man. D. Therefore through his own fault he came to this necessity. M. It is so.

## On the Sacraments of the Natural Law and of the Written Law (cont.)

D. This necessity, then, does not excuse him. M. It cannot excuse him. D. But what shall he do? M. Let him seek the help of grace, and say: *Deliver me from my necessities, O Lord [n: (Psal. XXIV)]*; as the Apostle says: *Unhappy man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death? The grace of God, through Jesus Christ our Lord [n: (Rom. VII)]*. D. Therefore man cannot be set free save through the grace of God? M. He cannot. For we say that man sinned of his own accord in forsaking the appetite for the just; [0027D] and that in keeping the appetite for the advantageous he was doubly punished — either because he is restrained from ordered advantages, or because he is let loose to disordered advantages. In the one, punishment; in the other, punishment and fault. Since therefore man was mulcted with such a punishment as would not purge the fault but increase it, he would, unless he had been set free through grace, have deservedly gone down through this punishment to the punishments of eternal damnation. And so his judgment was deferred, lest he should be found deserving of damnation. And because God had foreordained him unto salvation, he granted him a place and a space of correction and of penitence, so that in the meanwhile he might by his grace make him such a one as he could at length judge unto salvation not only mercifully but also justly. D. What is the place of penitence [0028A] which God granted to man? M. This world. D. And what is the space of penitence? M. The present life, that is, from the beginning of the world unto the end of the age. D. Great enough is that respite: but I would that you should say further: why do you call this world the place of penitence? M. There are four — I shall speak: one in which there is only good and the highest good; and one in which there is only evil and the highest evil; one in which there is only good, yet not the highest good; and one in which there is good and evil, neither the highest good nor the highest evil. D. I would that you should set out examples of each. M. In heaven there is only good and the highest good; in hell there is only evil and the highest evil; in paradise there is only good, yet not the highest good; in the world there is good [0028B] and evil, neither the highest good nor the highest evil. D. Why have you distinguished these places? M. Paradise is the place of those beginning and of those advancing to what is better, and therefore there ought to be only good there; because the creature was not to be initiated from evil; yet not the highest good, that there might be that in which those who were being initiated could advance. Heaven is the place of the good who are confirmed and who through discipline attain to the highest advance. Whence only the highest good is placed in it. Hell is the place of the evil who are confirmed and who irrecoverably forsake discipline; and therefore only the highest evil is set there. The world is the place of those who err and who are to be restored; and therefore both good and evil are ordered together in it, that through the good they may receive consolation, and through the evil [0028C] correction. Yet neither the highest good nor the highest evil is there, that there may be that whereby those persisting in evil can fall away, and those withdrawing from evil can advance. Heaven, therefore, is in the highest; hell is in the lowest; in the middle, paradise; between the lowest and the middle, the world. Man, therefore, who had fallen from the middle (since he was awaited for restoration), had to be placed between the lowest and the middle. D. Behold, man is long awaited: and what shall he do? M. He will not be able to find counsel for escaping. D. What profit is it, then, that judgment be deferred, if man cannot be set free? M. Of himself he cannot. D. Through whom, then? M. He who through his grace defers the judgment must meanwhile through that same grace show the counsel for escaping.

## On the Sacraments of the Natural Law and of the Written Law (cont.)

D. Will the judge, then, give counsel to the accused? M. He will lay aside [0028D] for the time being the person of the judge, and will take up the person of the counsellor. D. When will he come? M. In the last times. D. Why does he defer his coming so long? M. That he may first permit man to make trial of his own failing. First will come the patriarchs and the prophets and the lawgivers; there will come the just and the wise; they will seek and will not find; they will labor and will fail; many will promise, and none will show. But when all have failed, and, after many promises and many words brought forth, have fallen silent, then he himself will bring forth one word and will give counsel. D. What counsel will he give? M. Am I privy to the secrets of God? This counsel is secret and hidden from the ages. D. Yet in the last times it is made manifest. [0029A] Besides, if we wish to belong to the lot of the redemption, it is just and seemly that we be not ignorant of the manner of that redemption of ours. M. This counsel lay in this: how man could justly be either snatched from the power of the devil or reconciled to God. D. I greatly desire to know how this could be done. M. Consider first the case of man; and then you will easily be able to see by what justice he has been set free. D. And I long to have that very thing shown me. M. The case of man stands against two, that is, against God and against the devil; wherefore let it not irk you if I set forth this same case as it were under the shaping of three persons. D. You have set me wholly in expectation. M. Three come into the case: man, God, and the devil. The devil is convicted of having done injury to God; because [0029B] he both fraudulently led away his servant, that is, man, and violently held him. Man is convicted of having done injury to God; because he both despised his precept, and, setting himself under another's hand, brought upon him the loss of his own servitude. Likewise the devil is convicted of having done injury to man; because he both first deceived him by promising good things, and afterwards harmed him by inflicting evils. Unjustly, therefore, the devil holds man, but justly is man held; because the devil never deserved to oppress man as subject to him; but man deserved through his own fault that he should be permitted to be oppressed by him. For although he did not know that what the devil promised was false, he was nevertheless not ignorant that he ought not to have desired it (even if it were true) against the will of the Creator. Justly, therefore, is man subjected to the devil [0029C] so far as pertains to his own fault; but unjustly so far as pertains from the deceitfulness of the devil. If therefore man had such an advocate that the devil could be brought into court against him, man would justly gainsay his lordship; because the devil had no just cause why he should claim a right over man for himself. But no such advocate could be found save God. But God was unwilling to take up the case of man; because he was still angry with man for his fault. It behooved, therefore, that man should first appease God, and so thereafter, with God as his patron, enter with confidence into the case with the devil. But he could not reasonably appease God unless he restored the loss which he had brought upon him, and made satisfaction for the contempt. But man had nothing wherewith to make worthy recompense to God for the loss inflicted, [0029D] because if he rendered anything of the irrational creation, it would be less than the rational creature taken away. But neither could he render a man for a man; because he had taken away one just and innocent, and found none but a sinner. Nothing, therefore, did man find whereby he could appease God toward himself; because whether he gave what was his own or himself, it would not be a worthy recompense. God therefore, seeing that man could not by his own power escape the yoke of just damnation, had mercy on him; and first went before him freely by mercy alone, that thereafter he might set him free by justice: that is, because man had not of himself the justice of escaping, God gave man justice through mercy. For neither would the rescue of man be perfectly reasonable, unless it were done justly on both [0030A] sides — that is, that as God had justice in requiring man, so man too should have justice in escaping. But man could never have had this justice, unless God had bestowed it upon him through mercy. In order, therefore, that God might be appeased by man, God gave freely to man what man should render to God out of debt. He gave, therefore, to man a man, whom man should render to God for man; who (that a worthy recompense might be made) should be not only equal to the former, but even greater. That, therefore, a man greater than man might be rendered for man, God was made man for man, and man gave himself to man that he might receive himself from man. God the Son of God was incarnate, and to men was given the God-man Christ, as Isaiah says: *A child is born to us [n: (Isa. II)]*, and so forth. That, therefore, Christ was given [0030B] to man, was the mercy of God; that Christ was rendered by man, was the justice of man. For in the nativity of Christ God was justly appeased toward man; because such a man was found for man as should be not only, as has been said, equal to man, but even greater. Therefore in the nativity of Christ the angels announce peace purely [cj: *munde*; read *mundo*, "to the world"], saying: *Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men of good will [n: (Luc. II)]*. But it still remained for man that, as by restoring the loss he had appeased the wrath, so also by making satisfaction for the contempt he should become worthy to escape the punishment. But this could not more fittingly be done than that he should willingly and obediently take up the punishment which he did not owe, that he might become worthy to be snatched from the punishment which he had deserved through disobedience. But this punishment sinful man could not [0030C] pay; for whatever punishment he took up, he would bear it only worthily and justly (on account of the guilt of the first contempt). That, therefore, man might justly escape the punishment he owed, it was necessary that such a man should take up the punishment for man as had owed no punishment. But no such man could be found save Christ. Christ, therefore, both by being born paid man's debt to the Father, and by dying expiated man's guilt; so that, when he himself bore for man the death which he did not owe, man might justly escape for his sake the death which he did owe, and the devil might now find no place for bringing a charge; because both the devil ought not to have had lordship over man, and man was worthy to be set free. And so he made both our judgment and our cause. Whence the Psalmist: *For thou hast made my judgment and my cause* [0030D] [n: (Psal. IX)]. He made our cause; because he paid the debt to the Father for us, and by dying expiated the guilt. But the judgment; because, descending to the lower regions and breaking the gates of death, he set free the captivity which was held there. The judgment of the devil against God, therefore, was made at once in the beginning of the age; the judgment of man against the devil, in the passion of Christ. The judgment of man against God is deferred unto the end of the age. And therefore man, if he shall first have willed to be reconciled to God through Christ, can await his judgment without fear of damnation. D. Here you ought fittingly to have distinguished the modes of judging, so that by comparison with the others I might be able both more plainly to discern and more truly to approve the things which have here been said concerning judgment. [0031A] M. There are four judgments, namely according to foreknowledge, according to cause, according to operation, according to retribution. According to foreknowledge we were judged before we were; according to cause we are judged from the time we begin to be, when we are good and evil; according to operation we are judged when by our works we show outwardly what sort we are inwardly with ourselves; according to retribution we are judged when, in receiving the wage of our works, we shall know what sort we were foreseen from eternity with God. Of these four judgments two are hidden, the judgment according to foreknowledge and the judgment according to cause, and therefore in them human judgment is not admitted; two are manifest, that is, the judgment according to operation and the judgment according to retribution, [0031B] and in one of these, that is, in the judgment according to operation, the power of judging in the present is given by God to men; but the other, that is, the judgment according to retribution, will be judged not by men, but by God in the presence of men. But the judgment according to foreknowledge is hidden and unchangeable; the judgment according to cause, hidden and changeable; the judgment according to operation, manifest and changeable. The judgment according to retribution, manifest and unchangeable. The judgment according to operation is in a certain way an image, a sacrament of the judgment according to retribution; because the one manifests the cause and hints at the foreknowledge, but the other will manifest the cause and will confirm the foreknowledge.

## On the Sacraments of the Natural Law and of the Written Law (cont.)

[0031C]D. What did it pertain to us that Christ conquered the devil? M. Christ is called the Son of man for this reason, that human nature, which in the first parent had grown old through sin, renewed in Christ flowered again [sic: *refleruit*] as it were unto the strength of youth; and it was just, even according to law, that on behalf of a decrepit father, weak as it were through the failing of age, a son of greater strength should make the encounter against the tyrant, and that his victory should avail unto liberty not for himself but chiefly for him for whom he had fought. For on this account also the Son of God willed to become the Son of man, that he might take from man that in which man might overcome the devil for man. D. Had not the devil also been cast out by certain men even before the passion of Christ? M. He had been, yet not save through [0031D] the passion. D. How can this be? M. As the passion of Christ, now past, sanctifies believers, so, being then to come, it sanctified believers. D. By what reasoning will you be able to confirm this? M. What should I have called the incarnate Word, save a king who entered this world through the humanity he assumed, to do battle with the devil, and thereafter to drive him out as a tyrant and one violently lording it over what was another's. And what should I have called all the earlier saints who from the beginning before the incarnation were elect, save certain most excellent soldiers going before the king who was to come in the battle-line, fortified and girded as with arms by those very sacraments by which they were then sanctified. What, likewise, should I call those who after the incarnation unto the end follow as elect, save other soldiers, following with one mind and eagerly not another but [0032A] their own king himself going before them, they too, being new, having new arms, yet armed by the same one, and about to fight against the devil. They are, therefore, whether going before or following after, bearing the sacraments of one king, serving as soldiers of one king, and overcoming one tyrant; those going before him who was to come, these following after him who went before. Do you see, then, how all from the beginning unto the end who are good are Christ's? Nor do any overcome the devil save those alone who are Christ's. D. Therefore from the beginning they were Christians? M. Nothing is truer. D. But many judge otherwise. M. Do you wish the same to be shown you more evidently? D. I do. M. There are three times through which the space of the present age runs. The first is the time of the natural law; the second, the time of the written law; the third is the time [0032B] of grace. The first is from Adam unto Moses; the second from Moses unto Christ; the third from Christ unto the end of the age. Likewise there are three kinds of men, that is, men of the natural law, men of the written law, men of grace. Men of the natural law can be called those who direct their life by natural reason alone; or rather, men of the natural law are called those who walk according to the concupiscence in which they were born, Men of the written law are those who are formed unto good living by outward precepts. Men of grace are those who, breathed upon by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, are both enlightened, that they may know the good which is to be done, and inflamed, that they may love it, and strengthened, that they may accomplish it. And, that we may signify the same by a plainer distinction, men of the natural [0032C] law are openly evil; men of the written law, feignedly good; men of grace, truly good. In the first kind are contained the pagans; in the second, the Jews; in the third, the Christians. These three kinds of men have from the beginning at no time been lacking, yet the time of the natural law pertains to the openly evil; who then were both more in number and more excellent in state. The time of the written law, to the feignedly good; because then men, serving in fear, cleansed the work, not the mind. The time of grace pertains to the truly good; who now, even if they be not more in number, are nevertheless more excellent in state, and by the grace of God are publicly set first even by those who contradict it in their manners. Know, therefore, that at whatever time from the beginning of the world unto [0032D] the end there has been and is none truly good save one justified through grace; and that grace could never be obtained save through Christ, so that you may acknowledge that all, whether going before or following after, were saved by one remedy of justification. Look, then, upon the camp of our king and the battle-lines of his army shining in spiritual arms, and with how great a multitude of preceding and following peoples he goes attended.

## On the Sacraments of the Natural Law and of the Written Law (cont.)

D. I would that you should now describe to me one by one the army of so great a king: who and of what sort his soldiers were from the beginning; what arms, what enemies they had; where and when, and what sort of wars they waged; how they conquered; what rewards at the last (the victory being consummated) they received. M. After the first parent of the human [0033A] race, exiled from paradise for the fault of disobedience, came into this world, the devil, exercising a tyrannical right over him, possessed him violently thereafter as he had first fraudulently seduced him. But the providence of God, which was disposing him unto salvation, so tempered the rigor of justice by mercy that it permitted him indeed to be oppressed by that one for a time, and yet, lest he should be oppressed by him forever, prepared for him a remedy out of the very punishment. And so already then, from the very outset of the world, God set before man the sacraments of his salvation, whereby he might seal him under the expectation of the sanctification to come: so that whoever should receive them with right faith and firm hope, for the sake of obedience to the divine institution, might, even though set under the yoke, belong to the fellowship of liberty. He set forth, therefore, [0033B] an edict, forming and instructing man, that whoever should choose to await him as savior and liberator ought to approve the vow of that same choice of his in the receiving of his sacraments: « The devil also set forth his own sacraments, whereby he might bind his own to himself, so that, by how much the more plainly he distinguished them from those who refused his rule, by so much the more securely he might hold them. The human race, therefore, soon began to be divided into contrary parts, some receiving the sacraments of the devil, others receiving the sacraments of Christ: and there were made two households, the one of Christ, the other of the devil. » The devil therefore, seeing that the offspring of the human race, which he had corrupted in its root, although it came forth wholly with corruption in being born, did not nevertheless persist wholly in that same corruption, being renewed in being born again, [0033C] determined to press by persecution, through those whom he possessed, those whom he was losing; presuming then so much the more to inflict violence, by how much he remembered himself to have prevailed before by fraud. But this contrivance, the craft of the malign one, was the dispensation of divine mercy: namely, that man, confirmed through grace, might defend against him the justice which, seduced before by him, he had forsaken. Wherein, without doubt, the pride of the tyrant is also fittingly confounded, in that now he does not prevail through torments to overcome a man mortal and weak, whom before, surrounded by no weakness, he seduced by persuasion alone. By an intention so diverse, therefore, one work is accomplished, when the devil exhorts his soldiers to persecution [0033D] and violence, but Christ exhorts his own to patience. And since the devil, from the beginning, whether through himself or through his own, attacks the good for no other end than to take away their justice, and the good demand nothing else through this fight than that they may not lose their justice, it is assuredly plain that he, when he cannot bring what he wills to effect, is always overcome by the good, even if he seem to have prevailed outwardly. Therefore, when the soldiers of the devil inflict violence outwardly, the soldiers of Christ conquer inwardly through patience. D. Are the sacraments of Christ, then, arms? M. Not only arms, but also medicines. D. How? M. They are medicines, because they heal the sick; arms, because they protect the sound. D. What is a sacrament? M. The sign of a sacred reality. D. In how many ways are sacraments made? M. [0034A] In three; that is, by things, by words, by deeds. By things, as in water, in bread, in wine, in salt, in ash, in oil, in fire, and in the rest of this kind; by words, as is the invocation of the Trinity, and the other words having divine power which are uttered in blessings or consecrations or adjurations; by deeds, as is the little sign of the cross, the bending of the knees, the spreading out of the hands, and all other such things as there are. D. Why is a sacrament called the sign of a sacred reality? M. Because through that which is discerned visibly without, another thing invisible within is signified. For example: as through water, the remission of sins; through fire, the ardor of charity; through oil, mercy; through salt, wisdom, and so forth. D. Shall man, then, seek salvation in such things, since he himself is rational, and more worthy in his own condition than things without sense? How [0034B] can these things give salvation and heal the languors of souls, since they are themselves bodily, having nothing beyond a visible appearance? M. There is altogether something else there beyond that which is discerned by bodily eyes; and it is that very thing which invisibly cleanses the stains of sins and heals the languors of souls. D. Whence, then, comes that power? M. Not from the nature of that which is there discerned visibly, but from the operation of the Holy Spirit, who works invisibly in that visible thing. D. Could not the Holy Spirit have furnished this same power for the restoration of man without the showing forth or the support of bodily things? M. He assuredly could, if he willed. D. What cause was there, then, that these things should be instituted, that man should be bidden to seek salvation as it were in these things which are lower and less worthy, since [0034C] God alone is he from whom man both ought to seek salvation and can hope for it? M. Man is bidden to seek salvation in these things, not from these things; in such wise that, when he has obtained it, he may know that he has received it from him who bade him seek it in these things. D. Tell me, then: why did God command man to seek salvation in things of this kind? M. That man might be humbled and instructed. Humbled indeed, while he is compelled now, lying below, to seek his good in what is lower, which before, when he stood, he despised to receive from him who was above him. Fittingly, therefore, is the medicine of subsequent humility applied to the disease of preceding pride: namely, that the man who before had despised God (ruinously puffed up in himself) should afterwards, healthfully humbled, willingly lay himself down even beneath things perceptible by the senses, [0034D] apart from God. Sacraments have also been set before man for teaching, that through those things which are done outwardly he may be able to recognize what is shown forth to him inwardly. D. Is it to be believed, then, that in [sic: *ommni*] sacrament there is more than that alone which can be seen and perceived by bodily sense? M. There are two things there: one which we perceive outwardly by bodily sense, which is properly called the sacrament, that is, the sign of a sacred reality; the other which we do not see but believe, which is rightly named the reality or the power of the sacrament. D. What difference is there between a sign and a sacrament? M. A sign signifies only from institution; a sacrament also represents from likeness. Likewise a sign can signify a reality, not confer it. But in a sacrament there is not only signification, but also efficacy; namely, that [0035A] it at once both signifies from institution, and represents from likeness, and confers from sanctification. D. Can a sacrament ever be taken for a sign? M. Improperly it is called a sacrament for the signification alone. D. What if we should say that those figures of the Old Law were only signs of things to come, and not sacraments, and that the spiritual grace (which was given in them) was conferred by the mediation of those sacraments which were to come? M. If anyone shall have denied that the earlier sacraments had the effect of sanctification, he does not seem to me to think rightly; yet in this we without doubt prefer the dignity of the later ones, that those were both visible things and signs of visible things; but these, although they are visible, are themselves the sacraments only of invisible grace. Therefore the sacraments of grace [0035B] first receive sanctification into themselves through the invocation of the Trinity, and thereafter confer sanctification, so that they may be sanctifying out of sanctification, and may confer this out of their own sanctification, given them from heaven, which those were wont to confer through these out of the signification of these alone.

D. What are those things without which salvation could not be had from the beginning? M. There are three, that is, faith, and the sacraments of faith, and good works: which from the beginning seem to have been set before man for the obtaining of salvation. These the soldiers of Christ have always used: receiving strength in faith arms in the sacraments of faith, darts in good works, with which they fought against the devil. Now just as neither strength can profit an unarmed man contending against a strong armed man, nor arms without powers, nor darts, [0035C] so indeed faith without works and the sanctification of the sacraments, and again the sacraments without faith, or works, do not have the effect of salvation.

D. What is faith? M. Paul says *that faith is the substance of things to be hoped for, the argument of things not appearing [n: (Hebr. XI)]*. D. How do you think this is to be taken? Whatsoever things either are to come, and are not yet; or, being past, have now ceased to be; or, being present, hide the truth of themselves from our senses or knowledge: all these things, so far as pertains to us, in a certain way are not; but because through faith a certain certitude is born in us concerning all these things as though they were existing and present, not undeservedly is faith itself called both the substance of things not existing and the argument of things not appearing. [0035D] Further, this is to be considered, that by faith alone no one can please God unless charity be joined to it, so that it may be, namely, faith working out of love. Nevertheless faith is in a certain way the foundation and beginning of good in man, out of which charity is born, and out of charity hope is generated; because faith pertains to thought, but charity is love, hope is confidence.

D. I would that, the definition of these being briefly set forth, they might be more plainly distinguished for me. M. Faith is a voluntary certitude concerning things absent, set above opinion and below knowledge. Charity is the love of God for his own sake, and the love of one's neighbor for God's sake. Hope is confidence in the good things to come, out of the grace of God and a good conscience. In this also faith and hope seem to differ: [0036A] that faith can be concerning things present and past and at the same time things to come; hope, concerning things to come alone; faith, concerning our own things and those of others; hope, only concerning our own. Faith, concerning good things and evil; hope, concerning good things alone.

## On the Sacraments of the Natural Law and of the Written Law (cont.)

D. What is the sacrament of faith? M. In two ways can the sacrament of faith be understood: either that very sacrament which is faith; or the sacrament of faith, that is, of the faithful, which the faithful use and by which they are sanctified. D. For what reason is faith called a sacrament? M. Just as, when the sacrament of baptism is spoken of, no other sacrament is signified than that very thing which is baptism, so also by the sacrament of faith we are sometimes wont to understand faith itself, which is a sacrament. Further, all the rest are called sacraments of faith for this reason, that they were instituted for the sanctifying of those only who have faith. [0036B] But faith itself, as has been said, is a sacrament, for this reason: that, as in baptism and in the other sacraments one thing is that which is shown outwardly, and another the spiritual power which is exhibited within; so the faith is one thing by which *now,* as the Apostle says, we behold God as it were *through a glass in a dark manner [n: (I Cor. XIII)]*; and another is the manifest vision by which we shall hereafter see him, beholding him *face to face [n: (ibid.)]*. Faith, therefore, is the sacrament of the vision to come; and that vision itself is the power of that sacrament which is faith. D. I would now be taught: what things pertain to faith? M. There are two: the Creator and the creature. Sound faith ought so to distinguish these that it neither attribute to the creature the divinity of the Creator, nor ascribe to the Creator the weakness of the creature; that is, that it neither enclose God within time, [0036C] nor stretch out the creature with eternity. For whichever of these be done, faith must needs suffer loss. And it follows that faith, when it has rightly divided between the Creator and the creature, should rightly study also to offer to the Creator his own honor by rendering it to him: namely, that it confess that all things were made by him and through him, but that he himself subsists not from elsewhere but from himself, without beginning and end. Then follows the third: namely, that him whom it confesses to be the Creator of all things it should also believe and await as the savior of men. And, to sum up briefly, these are the things than which right faith could never have less: that one God be believed, the maker of all things and the savior of men. For those who, worshipping the creature for God [0036D] and deceived by a twofold error, believed either that the creature was eternal or that God was temporal — what else are they to be said to have done than to have attributed the excellence of the maker to the work and the weakness of the thing made to the Creator? Again, the philosophers of the Gentiles, because they had not faith concerning the Savior, although they were not in the least mistaken in distinguishing between the Creator and his work, are nevertheless by no means to be called faithful, because they had not the faith of the Savior. D. What sort of faith had the ancients concerning the Savior who was to come, especially those who, existing about the first beginnings of the age, had not yet received the Scriptures in which his advent was promised? M. It is not necessary that we should say that to all who were then faithful his coming in the flesh, his cross and resurrection, had been manifestly revealed; since even [0037A] the apostles, who saw him present in the flesh (whose faith and justice is preached by the Savior himself), are read to have been ignorant of this. Yet they believed themselves to be saved through him in whatever way and at whatever time it should please him; but that they were ignorant that they were to be redeemed by his death (excepting a few to whom this had been revealed by God) is plainly shown from this, that Peter strove to gainsay the Lord when he foretold his own death [n: (Matth. XVI)]; and all the other apostles are read rather to have despaired at his death, so much so that they themselves, already despairing on account of the cross, said: *But we hoped that it was he that should have redeemed Israel [n: (Luc. XXIV)]*. For they who had hoped for redemption while he was living, but afterwards despaired when he was dying, plainly show that they knew not that they were to be redeemed [0037B] through his death.

D. Could this suffice unto salvation for those earlier men, that they should believe him the creator of all things and await him as the savior to come? M. This could then suffice for them, together with the other things without which, as has been said, faith could not please: at least in those who had time for working well, that is, with the receiving of the sacraments and the exercise of good works, through charity and hope strengthened by faith. D. Did faith, then, afterwards increase? M. In two ways faith increases: by constancy and by knowledge. Some have a faith great in knowledge, and small in constancy; others small in knowledge and great in constancy. But with God a great constancy of faith is more precious than great knowledge. The ancient [0037C] saints, therefore, for the most part had a faith small in knowledge and great in constancy; just as, on the contrary, many now have a faith great in knowledge and small in constancy.

D. What sacraments were there under the natural law? M. Oblations and sacrifices and tithes. D. For what reason are these called sacraments? M. Because they are signs of a sacred reality. D. Of what? M. Of the remission of sins. D. How? M. The substance of man is twofold: one inward, which he himself is; the other outward, in the things which he possesses. God willed, therefore, that man should make an oblation to him out of his outward substance, so that, by a just recompense, while he devoutly rendered that which he had outwardly received from God, he might, by God's bestowing, recover that which he had inwardly lost of himself. Through faith, therefore, and through oblations or sacrifices they then received the remission [0037D] of sins, whoever, putting off the old man, that is, Adam, were made members of the new, that is, of Christ. For oblations and sacrifices, faith mediating, wrought the same in them which circumcision afterwards wrought under the written law, or baptism under grace; namely, that they too, justified from all sin whether original or actual, should be reckoned among the members of him by whose faith and sacraments they were sanctified. For indeed the passion of the Savior conferred upon the preceding sacraments, that is, either upon oblation under the natural law or upon circumcision under the written law, the same power and efficacy of sanctification which it confers upon those that follow and succeed: with this alone excepted, that sacrifices and oblations under the natural [0038A] law were not made unto the necessity of salvation, as circumcision was under the written law and baptism under grace, but unto the worship of devotion, faith alone then justifying and purifying believers. And again, with this also excepted in the case of circumcision, that those earlier fathers, however just and pleasing to God, could not enter the gate of the heavenly kingdom before the victim was given; but were kept only in the bosom of Abraham, that is, in a tranquil rest, until he should come who, dying and rising again for us, should through the flesh he assumed ascend the heavens, and open the way to all believing in him and following him.

D. If the same power was in those sacraments which is in these, what was the cause that those should cease and these succeed? M. A more manifest truth is declared in these; [0038B] and it was just that, as the acknowledgment of faith grew with the gradual advance of time, so also other sacraments should be instituted, which, even if they conferred no other sanctification of spiritual grace, should nevertheless more manifestly display the same. For indeed there was the same Savior, the same faith, the same grace: there of one to come, here of one exhibited. But because he through whom salvation was given was still far off, the signs of that same salvation had to be obscure, that gradually, as his advent drew near, both faith might increase the more and grace might manifest itself the more evidently. Therefore first through oblation, and afterwards through circumcision, and at the last through baptism, the sacrament of expiation and justification was instituted to be formed; because the form and likeness of the same cleansing is indeed hinted at secretly in oblation, [0038C] but is more evidently expressed in circumcision, while through baptism it is manifestly declared. For man received the first justification, that for the remedies of salvation he should offer to God a part of his outward substance and retain a part for his own use, so that in this deed he might learn to ascribe to God those things which were inwardly good, but to impute to himself those which were evil. But this sign, taken from afar, taught man rather what he was than what was being done. Therefore, when the time had come in which the truth had to be declared, there was given to him as a remedy the sacrament of circumcision, where, while from the inward substance of man a part is cut away — not indeed naturally superfluous, but the figure of that which is superfluous — that circumcision of sin which grace accomplishes in the inward man is now more manifestly [0038D] shown. But since circumcision cuts off outward filth and the excesses which are without, whereas washing cleanses even inward stains, therefore, when the manifest truth had come with Christ, circumcision had to cease, that that sacrament might succeed which could declare the perfect cleansing of man and the inward whiteness of the soul (which in it and [sic: *ot*] through it the sacrament obtains). Those first sacraments, therefore, seem to be as it were a certain shadow of spiritual grace; but those which followed afterwards as it were a certain image, and (if it must be so said) having the lineaments of truth. But these are now not shadow or image, but the body of truth; in which (because the effect of salvation is fully given, and evidently [0039A] shown) as the spirit in a living body betrays itself by outward motion, so in them the life of invisible grace is most clearly demonstrated.

D. It remains now that you open what things are to be said concerning works. M. There are three kinds of deeds: some are altogether good, which can never lawfully be passed over; some are altogether evil, which can never lawfully be committed; some are indifferent, which, whether they be done or not done, are neither fault nor merit. Those, therefore, which are so constituted that they can never lawfully be done, these only did the natural law forbid; but those which can never lawfully be passed over it alone commanded, leaving all indifferent things to either alternative. But concerning those which were either to be commanded or to be left free, it set one precept only in the heart of man: [0039B] *What thou wilt for thyself, that do thou to others; what thou wilt not for thyself, do not thou to others [n: (Matth. VII; Tobiae IV)]*, that from the consideration of himself, namely, man might learn how he ought to show himself toward his neighbor. But afterwards, when the law had entered in, and was setting forth a stricter discipline of living it began to except certain things out of those which were indifferent, and out of these to place some by precept, some by prohibition, on one side only; so that, just as to the first man in paradise God had excepted out of the natural concession one showing forth for the precept of discipline, so now, to his sons, who did not stand in one truth but were scattered through various errors, he formed not one precept of discipline out of the natural concession, as for men to be proved, but many, as for men to be corrected and restored; that by how much the more they learned [0039C] to temper themselves in indifferent things, by so much the more lightly they might be able to guard against things not conceded.

## On the Sacraments of the Natural Law and of the Written Law (cont.)

D. What were those things which the natural law had set forth to be done or to be shunned? M. Those seven which the written law afterwards commanded in the second table concerning the love of one's neighbor. The first was: *Honor thy father and thy mother, that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest be long-lived upon the earth;* the second: *Thou shalt not kill;* the third: *Thou shalt not commit adultery;* the fourth: *Thou shalt not steal;* the fifth: *Thou shalt not speak false testimony;* the sixth: *Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife;* the seventh: *Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods [n: (Deut. V)]*. The first was made according to precept; the six others according to prohibition. D. Why was one precept only given concerning things not to be done, and more concerning things to be done? [0039D] M. The first sin of man was disobedience; and therefore this life, which is granted to man for penitence, is wholly assigned to obedience. Since therefore man, in doing evil things, is drawn in divers directions by his own concupiscence, but in doing good things is governed by the rule of obedience alone; therefore in guarding against evils, which he has of himself and can do through himself, he had to be instructed one by one, but for doing good things he had only to be recalled to obedience, that there, through the judgment of another, he might more healthfully learn what he himself ought to do. For when man is bidden to render honor to father and mother, this is not to be referred to carnal parents only; but rather this is commanded him, that what he once despised in his own commandments, [0040A] he should now, for God's sake, not disdain to show forth toward a man set above him in obedience and honor.

D. Behold, you have shown three things, that is, faith, and the sacraments of faith, and works. Now it remains that you show what and how great a restoration has been wrought in those who had these things. M. If the highest good of man were the contemplation of God present, especially since the first man is believed to have been founded for the full enjoyment of this, deservedly is faith, through which he begins in a certain way to see him who is absent, called the beginning of good and the first principle of his restoration. For since man, who by sinning lost the knowledge of God, is again enlightened through faith, that he may be able to see and to know him; it is plain that that through which the first good which he had lost is given back to him is rightly called the outset of his restoration. [0040B] And this restoration grows, of course, according to the increases of faith, while man is the more enlightened through acknowledgment and inflamed [sic: *perdilectionem*]. Faith, therefore, is that itself through which man is repaired, and in which the lost good is given back to him, so that through it, growing gradually alike in knowledge and in love, he may deserve to attain to that full felicity of vision. For thus the just man, so long as, existing in this body, he journeys away from the Lord, has to live by faith, just as the blessed man, when he shall have been led out of this workhouse and brought into the joy of his Lord, will have to live by contemplation. But by a wondrous dispensation of God it comes about that now for the meanwhile the malice of the ancient enemy is let loose to assail and persecute the faithful, so that, namely, this may be reckoned to man for merit, if [0040C] now, walking through faith, he forsake not the way of truth even when assailed — he who before, strengthened by the vision of God present, was laid low by persuasion alone. But that he may be able to stand unconquered in this battle and to guard his good unharmed, there are given to him, as has already been said, arms in the sacraments with which to fortify himself, and darts in good works with which to lay low the enemy; namely, that with charity and hope joined to faith he may alike be strengthened inwardly and conquer. Now (as I judge) it has been sufficiently shown you what faith and what sacraments or what works were necessary to those first saints for the obtaining of salvation.

D. How long did that state of the earlier men last? M. Unto Abraham. For then God, willing to gather his people into one and to set them apart from the fellowship of the unbelieving, [0040D] that they might be not only in one faith but also in one society, called Abraham, that he might lead him out of his own land, so that through that one man and in that one man he might, leading out from their former manner of life all who were to be born of him or to follow him, gather them into one society of a new life. To whom also he commanded that he should circumcise the skin of his foreskin as a sign for himself, as an example for those who should come after; adding to the former state only so far as that through this little sign the people of God might be distinguished from the unbelieving, until he should live who would gather the faithful not only from the sons of Abraham but even from all the nations, and through this would set them apart no longer by the little sign of the flesh in the race, but by the little sign of baptism in cleansing. [0041A] D. Were not the faithful also distinguished from the unbelieving of old before the flood? M. They were; but after the flood the human race, brought back again to one people, began a second time to be distinguished in Abraham. D. In what manner was circumcision performed? M. It was commanded that a male child on the eighth day of his birth should be circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin with a little knife made of stone. D. What was the reason that it was commanded to be done thus? M. There are three circumcisions: one in the flesh only, outwardly, which is the sacrament; two others which are the reality and the power of the sacrament. The one which is done in the present, when through the laying aside of iniquity the mind is circumcised. The other which will be done in the future, when through the laying aside of corruption the body will be circumcised. The first, therefore, is in the flesh; the second in the mind; the third [0041B] in the body. But the number eight in Holy Scripture sometimes signifies the time of the resurrection, which follows after the present life (which runs through seven days); sometimes the time of grace, in which eternal goods are promised to those who serve God. Deservedly, therefore, that first circumcision, which was the sacrament of the other two, was commanded to be done on the eighth day, that it might show that in the time of grace hearts were to be circumcised [0042A] through the cleansing away of iniquity, and in the time of the resurrection bodies through the laying aside of corruption. And the circumcision of the flesh was given to males alone for this reason, that Holy Scripture is wont to signify the soul by the male sex, but the flesh by the female; so that, namely, it might be shown that that outward circumcision conferred justification upon souls, but did not take away corruption from the flesh. The little knife made of stone signifies Christ, of whom the Apostle says: *But the rock was Christ [n: (I Cor. X)]*, *who taketh away the sins of the world [n: (Joan. I)]*. It was commanded to be done in the flesh of the foreskin for this reason, that it was given as a remedy against original sin, which we contract from our parents, being propagated through that member. D. What remedy, then, had women, who were not circumcised? [0042B] M. Faith and oblations or sacrifices: circumcision itself also; yet not by receiving it, but by believing it. D. What is to be said of infants dying before the eighth day, since they could not attain to that remedy — had they been saved or damned? M. This seems to me to be left to the judgment of God.

license_source: Public Domain Mark 1.0

license_translation: CC BY-NC 4.0

license_apparatus: CC BY-NC 4.0