 11 The City of God is the same to which testimony is borne by that scripture which excels all the writings of all nations by its divine authority, and has brought under its influence all kinds of minds, and this not by a casual intellectual movement, but obviously by an express providential arrangement. For there it is written, Glorious things are spoken of thee, O City of God. And in another Psalm we read, Great is the Lord, and greatly to be praised in the city of our God, in the mountain of His holiness, increasing the joy of the whole earth. And a little after, in the same Psalm, as we have heard, so we have seen, in the city of the Lord of Hosts, in the city of our God, God has established it for ever. And in another, there is a river, the streams whereof shall make glad the city of our God, the holy place of the tabernacles of the Most High. God is in the midst of her, she shall not be moved. From these and similar testimonies, all of which it were tedious to cite, we have learned that there is a city of God, and its founder has inspired us with a love which makes us covet its citizenship. To this founder of the holy city, the citizens of the earthly city prefer their own gods, not knowing that he is the God of gods, not a false, that is, of impious and proud gods, who, being deprived of his unchangeable and freely communicated light, and so reduced to a kind of poverty-stricken power, eagerly grasped at their own private privileges and seek divine honors from their deluded subjects, but of the pious and holy gods who are better pleased to submit themselves to one than to subject many to themselves, and who would rather worship God than be worshiped as God. But to the enemies of this city, we have replied in the ten preceding books, according to our ability and the help afforded by our Lord and King. Now recognizing what is expected of me, and not unmindful of my promise, and relying too on the same succor, I will endeavor to treat of the origin and progress and deserved destinies of the two cities, the earthly and the heavenly, to wit, which, as we said, are in this present world commingled and as it were entangled together. And first I will explain how the foundations of these two cities were originally laid in the difference that arose among the angels. It is a great and very rare thing for a man, after he has contemplated the whole creation, corporeal and incorporeal, and has discerned its mutability, to pass beyond it, and by the continued soaring of his mind, to attain to the unchangeable substance of God, and in that height of contemplation to learn from God himself, that none but he has made all that is not of the divine essence. For God speaks with a man not by means of some audible creature dinning in his ears, so that atmospheric vibrations connect him that makes with him that hears the sound, nor even by means of a spiritual being with the semblance of a body, such as we see in dreams or similar states, for even in this case he speaks as if to the ears of the body because it is by means of the semblance of a body he speaks, and with the appearance of a real interval of space, for visions are exact representations of bodily objects. Not by these, then, does God speak, but by the truth itself, if anyone is prepared to hear with the mind rather than with the body, for he speaks to that part of man which is better than all else that is in him, and then which God himself alone is better. For since man is most properly understood, or if that cannot be, then at least believed, to be made in God's image, no doubt it is that part of him by which he rises above those lower parts he has in common with the beasts, which brings him nearer to the Supreme. But since the mind itself, though naturally capable of reason and intelligence, is not disabled by besotting and inveterate vices, not merely from delighting and abiding in, but even from tolerating his unchangeable light, until it has been gradually healed and renewed and made capable of such felicity, it had in the first place to be impregnated with faith and so purified. And that in this faith it might advance the more confidently towards the truth, the truth itself, God, God's Son, assuming humanity without destroying his divinity, established and founded this faith, that there might be a way for man to man's God through a God-man. For this is the mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, for it is as man that he is the mediator and the way. Since if the way lies between him who goes and the place wither he goes, there is hope of his reaching it. But if there be no way, or if he know not where it is, what boots it to know whether he should go? Now the only way that is infallibly secured against all mistakes is when the very same person is at once God and man. God our end, man our way. CHAPTER 3 This mediator, having spoken what he judged sufficient first by the prophets, then by his own lips, and afterwards by the apostles, has besides produced the scripture which is called canonical, which has paramount authority, and to which we yield ascent in all matters of which we ought not to be ignorant, and yet cannot know of ourselves. For if we attain the knowledge of present objects by the testimony of our own senses, whether internal or external, then, regarding objects remote from our own senses, we need others to bring their testimony, since we cannot know them by our own, and we credit the persons to whom the objects have been or are sensibly present. Biddingly has in the case of visible objects which we have not seen, we trust those who have, and likewise with all sensible objects, so in the case of things which are perceived by the mind and spirit, that is, which are remote from our own interior sense, it behooves us to trust those who have seen them set in that incorporeal light, or abidingly contemplate them. CHAPTER 4 Of all visible things the world is the greatest. Of all invisible the greatest is God. That the world is, we see, that God is, we believe. That God made the world we can believe from no one more safely than from God himself. But where have we heard him? Nowhere more distinctly than in the Holy Scriptures, or his Prophet said, in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Was the Prophet present when God made the heavens and the earth? No, but the wisdom of God by whom all things were made was there, and wisdom insinuates itself into holy souls and makes them the friends of God and his prophets and noiselessly informs them of his works. They are taught also by the angels of God who always behold the face of the Father and announce his will to whom it befits. Of these prophets was he who said and wrote, in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And so fit a witness was he of God that the same spirit of God who revealed these things to him enabled him also so long before to predict that our faith also would be forthcoming. But why did God choose then to create the heavens and earth which up to that time he had not made? If they who put this question wished to make out that the world is eternal and without beginning, and that consequently it has not been made by God, they are strangely deceived and rave in the incurable madness of impiety. For though the voices of the prophets were silent, the world itself by its well-ordered changes and movements and by the fair appearance of all visible things bears the testimony of its own, both that it has been created, and also that it could not have been created safe by God, whose greatness and beauty are unutterable and invisible. As for those who own indeed that it was made by God, and yet ascribe to it not a temporal but only a creational beginning, so that in some scarcely intelligible way the world should always have existed a created world, they make an assertion which seems to them to defend God from the charge of arbitrary hastiness, or of suddenly conceiving the idea of creating the world as a quite new idea, or of casually changing his will, though he be unchangeable. But I do not see how this supposition of theirs can stand in other respects, and chiefly in respect of the soul, for if they contend that it is co-eternal with God, they will be quite at a loss to explain whence there has accrued to it new misery, which through a previous eternity had not existed. For if they said that its happiness and misery ceaselessly alternate, they must say further that this alternation will continue forever, whence will result this absurdity, that though the soul is called blessed, it is not so in this that it perceives its own misery and disgrace. And yet if it does not foresee it, and supposes that it will be neither disgraced nor wretched, but always blessed, then it is blessed because it is deceived in a more foolish statement one cannot make. But if their idea is that the soul's misery has alternated with its bliss during the ages of the past eternity, but that now, when once the soul has been set free, it will return henceforth no more to misery, they are nevertheless of opinion that it has never been truly blessed before, but begins at last to enjoy a new and uncertain happiness. That is to say, they must acknowledge that some new thing, and that an important and signal thing, happens to the soul which never in a whole past eternity happened to it before. And if they deny that God's eternal purpose included this new experience of the soul, they deny that he is the author of its blessedness, which is unspeakable in piety. If on the other hand they say that the future blessedness of the soul is the result of a new decree of God, how will they show that God is not chargeable with that mutability which displeases them? Further, if they acknowledge that it was created in time, it will never perish in time, that it has, like number, a beginning but no end, and that therefore, having once made trial of misery and been delivered from it, it will never again return there to, they will certainly admit that this takes place without any violation of the immutable counsel of God. Let them then in like manner believe regarding the world that it too could be made in time, and yet that God, in making it, did not alter his eternal design. Chapter 5 Next we must see what reply can be made to those who agree that God is the Creator of the world but have difficulties about the time of its creation, and what reply also they can make to difficulties we might raise about the place of its creation. For as they demand why the world was created then, and no sooner, we may ask why it was created just here where it is and not elsewhere. For if they imagine infinite spaces of time before the world, during which God could not have been idle, in like manner they may conceive outside the world infinite realms of space, in which, if anyone says that the Omnipotent cannot hold his hand from working, will it not follow that they must adopt Epicurus's dream of innumerable worlds, with this difference only, that he asserts that they are formed and destroyed by the fortuitous movements of atoms, while they will hold that they are made by God's hand, if they maintain that throughout the boundless immensity of space, stretching interminably in every direction round the world, God cannot rest, and that the worlds which they suppose him to make cannot be destroyed. For here the question is with those who, with ourselves, believe that God is spiritual, and the creator of all existences but himself. As for others, it is a condescension to dispute with them on a religious question, for they have acquired a reputation only among men who pay divine honors to a number of gods, and have become conspicuous among the other philosophers for no other reason than that, though they are still far from the truth, they are near it in comparison with the rest. While these, then, neither confine in any place nor limit nor distribute the divine substance, but, as is worthy of God, own it to be holy, though spiritually present everywhere, will they perchance say that this substance is absent from such immense spaces outside the world, and is occupied in one only, and that a very little one compared with the infinity beyond, the one namely, in which is the world. I think they will not proceed to this absurdity. Since they maintain that there is but one world a vast material bulk indeed, yet infinite, and in its own determinate position, and that this was made by the working of God, let them give the same account of God's resting in the infinite times before the world as they give of his resting in the infinite spaces outside of it. And as it does not follow that God set the world on the very spot it occupies, and no other by accident, rather than by divine reason, although no human reason can comprehend why it was so set, and though there was no merit in the spot chosen to give it the precedence of infinite others, so neither does it follow that we should suppose that God was guided by chance when he created the world in that and no earlier time, although previous times had been running by during an infinite past, and though there was no difference by which one time could be chosen in preference to another. But if they say that the thoughts of men are idle when they conceive infinite places since there is no place beside the world, we reply that by the same showing it is vain to conceive of the past times of God's rest since there is no time before the world. CHAPTER VI For if eternity and time are rightly distinguished by this, the time does not exist without some movement and transition while in eternity there is no change, who does not see that there could have been no time had not some creature been made, which by some motion could give birth to change, the various parts of which motion and change as they cannot be simultaneous succeed one another, and thus in these shorter or longer intervals of duration time would begin. Since then God, in whose eternity is no change at all as the creator and ordainer of time, I do not see how he can be said to have created the world after spaces of time had elapsed, unless it be said that prior to the world there was some creature by whose movement time could pass. And if the sacred and infallible scriptures say that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth in order that it may be understood that he had made nothing previously, for if he had made anything before the rest this thing would be rather said to have been made in the beginning, then assuredly the world was made not in time, but simultaneously with time. For that which is made in time is made both after and before some time, after that which is passed before that which is future. But none could then be passed, for there was no creature by whose movements its duration could be measured. But simultaneously with time the world was made, if in the world's creation change and motion were created, as seems evident from the order of the first six or seven days. For in these days the morning and evening are counted, until on the sixth day all things which God then made were finished, and on the seventh the rest of God was mysteriously and sublimely signalized. What kind of days these word is extremely difficult, or perhaps impossible for us to conceive, and how much more to say? CHAPTER VII We see indeed that our ordinary days have no evening but by the setting and no morning but by the rising of the sun. But the first three days of all were passed without sun since it is reported to have been made on the fourth day. And first of all indeed light was made by the word of God, and God, we read, separated it from the darkness, and called the light day and the darkness night. But what kind of light that was, and by what periodic movement it made evening and morning, is beyond the reach of our senses. Neither can we understand how it was, and yet must unhesitatingly believe it. For either it was some material light, whether proceeding from the upper parts of the world, far removed from our sight, or from the spot where the sun was afterwards kindled, or under the name of light the holy city was signified, composed of holy angels and blessed spirits, the city of which the apostle says, Jerusalem which is above is our eternal mother in heaven, and in another place, for ye are all the children of the light and the children of the day, we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Yet in some respects we may appropriately speak of a morning and evening of this day also. For the knowledge of the creature is, in comparison with the knowledge of the creator, but a twilight, and so it dawns and breaks into morning when the creature is drawn to the praise and love of the creator, and night never falls when the creator is not forsaken through love of the creature. In fine scripture, when it would recount those days in order, never mentions the word night. It never says night was, but the evening and the morning were the first day, so of the second and the rest. And indeed the knowledge of created things contemplated by themselves is, so to speak, more colorless than when they are seen in the wisdom of God as in the art by which they were made. Therefore evening is a more suitable figure than night, and yet, as I said, morning returns when the creature returns to the praise and love of the creator. When it does so, when the knowledge of itself, that is the first day. When in the knowledge of the firmament, which is the name given to the sky between the waters above and those beneath, that is the second day. When in the knowledge of the earth and the sea and all things that grow out of the earth, that is the third day. When in the knowledge of the greater and less luminaries and all the stars, that is the fourth day. When in the knowledge of all animals that swim in the waters and that fly in the air, that is the fifth day. When in the knowledge of all animals that live on the earth and of man himself, that is the sixth day. CHAPTER VIII When it is said that God rested on the seventh day from all his works and hallowed it, we are not to conceive of this in a childish fashion as if work were a toil to God who spake and it was done, spake by the spiritual and eternal, not audible and transitory word. But God's rest signifies the rest of those who rest in God as the joy of a house means the joy of those in the house who rejoice, though not the house, but something else, causes the joy. How much more intelligible is such phraseology, then, if the house itself, by its own beauty, makes the inhabitants joyful? For in this case we not only call it joyful by that figure of speech in which the thing containing is used for the thing contained, as when we say, the theatres applaud, the meadows low, meaning that the men in the one applaud and the oxen and the other low, but also by that figure in which the cause is spoken of as if it were the effect, as when a letter is said to be joyful because it makes its readers so. Most appropriately, therefore, the sacred narrative states that God rested, meaning thereby that those rest who are in him and whom he makes to rest. And this the prophetic narrative promises also to the men to whom it speaks, and for whom it was written, that they themselves, after those good works which God does in and by them, if they have managed by faith to get near to God in this life, shall enjoy in him eternal rest. This was prefigured to the ancient people of God by the rest enjoined in their Sabbath law, of which, in its own place, I shall speak more at large. CHAPTER IX At present, since I have undertaken to treat of the origin of the holy city, and first of the holy angels who constitute a large part of this city, and indeed the more blessed part, since they have never been expatriated, I will give myself to the task of explaining, by God's help, and, as far as seems suitable, the scriptures which relate to this point. Where scripture speaks of the world's creation, it is not plainly said whether or when the angels were created, but if mention of them is made, it is implicitly under the name of heaven, when it is said, in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, or perhaps rather under the name of light, of which presently. But that they were wholly omitted, I am unable to believe, because it is written that God, on the seventh day, rested from all his works which he had made. In this very book itself begins, in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, so that before heaven and earth God seems to have made nothing. Since therefore he began with the heavens and the earth, and the earth itself, as scripture adds, was at first invisible and formless, light being as yet not made, and darkness covering the face of the deep. That is to say, covering an undefined chaos of earth and sea, for where light is not, darkness must needs be. And then when all things which are recorded to have been completed in six days were created and arranged, how should the angels be omitted as if they were not among the works of God, from which on the seventh day he rested. Yet, though the fact that the angels are the work of God is not omitted here, it is indeed not explicitly mentioned, but elsewhere holy scripture asserts it in the clearest manner. For in the hymn of the three children in the furnace it was said, O all ye works of the Lord, bless ye the Lord. And among these works mentioned afterwards in detail the angels are named. And in the Psalm it is said, Praise ye the Lord from the heavens, praise him in the heights, praise ye him all his angels, praise ye him all his hosts, praise ye him sun and moon, praise him all ye stars of light, praise him ye heaven of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens, let them praise the name of the Lord, for he commanded and they were created. Here the angels are most expressly and by divine authority said to have been made by God, for of them among the other heavenly things it is said he commanded and they were created. Who then will be bold enough to suggest that the angels were made after the six days creation? If any one is so foolish his folly is disposed of by a scripture of like authority where God says, When the stars were made the angels praised me with a loud voice. The angels therefore existed before the stars and the stars were made the fourth day. Shall we then say that they were made the third day? Far from it, for we know what was made that day. The earth was separated from the water and each element took its own distinct form and the earth produced all that grows on it. On the second day then? Not even on this, for on it the firmament was made between the waters above and beneath, and was called heaven in which firmament the stars were made on the fourth day. There is no question then that if the angels are included in the works of God during these six days they are that light which was called day in whose unity scripture signalizes by calling that day not the first day, but one day. For the second day the third and the rest are not other days, but the same one day is repeated to complete the number six or seven so that there should be knowledge both of God's works and of his rest. For when God said, Let there be light, and there was light, if we are justified in understanding in this light the creation of the angels then certainly they were created partakers of the eternal light which is the unchangeable wisdom of God by which all things were made and whom we call the only begotten Son of God. So that they being illumined by the light that created them might themselves become light and be called day in participation of that unchangeable light and day which is the Word of God by whom both themselves and all else were made. The true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. This light lighteth also every pure angel that he may be light not in himself but in God, from whom if an angel turn away he becomes impure as are all those who are called unclean spirits and are no longer light in the Lord but darkness in themselves being deprived of the participation of light eternal. For evil has no positive nature but the loss of good has received the name evil. END OF BOOK 11 CHAPTERS ONE THROUGH NINE RECORDING BY DARREN L. SLIDER, FORTWORTH, TEXAS, WWW.LOGOSLIBRE.ORG. CHAPTER X There is accordingly a good which is alone simple and therefore alone unchangeable and this is God. By this good have all others been created but not simple and therefore not unchangeable. Created I say, that is made not begotten. For that which is begotten of the simple good is simple as itself and the same as itself. These two we call the Father and the Son and both together with the Holy Spirit are one God and to this Spirit the Abathet Holy is in Scripture as it were appropriated. And he is another than the Father and the Son for he is neither the Father nor the Son. I say another not another thing because he is equally with them the simple good unchangeable and co-eternal. And this trinity is one God and nonetheless simple because a trinity. For we do not say that the nature of the good is simple because the Father alone possesses it or the Son alone or the Holy Ghost alone nor do we say with the Sibelian heretics that it is only nominally a trinity and has no real distinction of persons. But we say it is simple because it is what it has with the exception of the relation of the persons to one another. For in regard to this relation it is true that the Father has a Son and yet is not himself the Son and the Son has a Father and is not himself the Father. But as regards himself irrespective of relation to the other each is what he has. Thus he is in himself living for he has life and is himself the life which he has. It is for this reason then that the nature of the trinity is called simple because it has not anything which it can lose and because it is not one thing and its contents another as a cup and a liquor or a body and its color or the air and the light or heat of it or a mind and its wisdom. For none of these is what it has. The cup is not liquor nor the body color nor the air, light and heat nor the mind, wisdom. And hence they can be deprived of what they have and can be turned or changed into other qualities and states so that the cup may be emptied of the liquid of which it is full, the body be discolored, the air darken, the mind grows silly. The incorruptible body which is promised to the saints and the resurrection cannot indeed lose its quality of incorruption but the bodily substance and the quality of incorruption are not the same thing. For the quality of incorruption resides entire in each several part, not greater in one and less in another, for no part is more incorruptible than another. The body indeed is itself greater in whole than in part, in one part of it is larger, another smaller, yet is not the larger more incorruptible than the smaller. The body then, which is not in each of its parts a whole body, is one thing, incorruptibility, which is throughout complete, is another thing. For every part of the incorruptible body, however unequal to the rest otherwise, is equally incorrupt. For the hand, for example, is not more incorrupt than the finger because it is larger than the finger. So, though finger and hand are unequal, their incorruptibility is equal. Thus, although incorruptibility is inseparable from an incorruptible body, yet the substance of the body is one thing, the quality of incorruption another, and therefore the body is not what it has. The soul itself, too, though it always be wise, as it will be eternally when it is redeemed, will be so by participating in the unchangeable wisdom which it is not. For though the air be never robbed of the light that is shed abroad in it, it is not on that account the same thing as the light. I do not mean that the soul is air, as has been supposed by some who could not conceive a spiritual nature, but with much dissimilarity the two things have a kind of likeness, which makes it suitable to say that the immaterial soul is illumined with the immaterial light of the simple wisdom of God, as the material air is irradiated with material light, and that, as the air, when deprived of this light, grows dark, for material darkness is nothing else than air wanting light, so the soul, deprived of the light of wisdom, grows dark. According to this, then, those things which are essentially and truly divine are called simple because in them quality and substance are identical, and because they are divine, or wise, or blessed in themselves, and without extraneous supplement. In holy scripture it is true the spirit of wisdom is called manifold, because it contains many things in it, but what it contains, it also is, and it, being one, is all these things. For neither are there many wisdoms, but one, in which are untold and infinite treasures of things intellectual, wherein are all invisible and unchangeable reasons of things visible and changeable which were created by it. For God made nothing unwittingly, not even a human workman can be said to do so. But if he knew all that he made, he made only those things which he had known, when slows a very striking but true conclusion that this world could not be known to us unless it existed, but could not have existed unless it had been known to God. CHAPTER XI And since these things are so, those spirits whom we call angels were never at any time, or in any way darkness, but as soon as they were made, were made light. Yet they were not so created in order that they might exist and live in any way whatever, but were enlightened that they might live wisely and blessedly. Some of them, having turned away from this light, have not won this wise and blessed life, which is certainly eternal, and accompanied with the sure confidence of its eternity, but they have still the life of reason, though darkened with folly, in this they cannot lose even if they would. But who can determine to what extent they were partakers of that wisdom before they fell? And how shall we say that they participated in it equally with those who through it are truly and fully blessed, resting in a true certainty of eternal felicity? For if they had equally participated in this true knowledge, then the evil angels would have remained eternally blessed equally with the good, because they were equally expectant of it. For though a life be never so long, it cannot be truly called eternal if it is destined to have an end. For it is called life in as much as it has lived, but eternal because it has no end. Wherefore, although everything eternal is not therefore blessed, for Hellfire is eternal, yet if no life can be truly and perfectly blessed, except it be eternal, the life of these angels was not blessed, for it was doomed to end, and therefore not eternal, what if they knew it or not? In the one case fear, and the other ignorance, prevented them from being blessed. And even if their ignorance was not so great as to read in them a holy false expectation, but left them wavering in uncertainty whether their good would be eternal or would some time terminate, this very doubt concerning so grand a destiny was incompatible with the plenitude of blessedness which we believe the holy angels enjoyed. For we do not so narrow and restrict the application of the term blessedness as to apply it to God only, though doubtless he is so truly blessed that greater blessedness cannot be, and in comparison of his blessedness what is that of the angels, though according to their capacity they be perfectly blessed. CHAPTER XII And the angels are not the only members of the rational and intellectual creation whom we call blessed. For who will take upon him to deny that those first men in paradise were blessed previously to sin, although they were uncertain how long their blessedness was to last, and whether it would be eternal, and eternal it would have been had they not sinned? Who I say will do so, seeing that even now we not unbecomingly call those blessed whom we see leading a righteous and holy life in hope of immortality, who have no harrowing remorse of conscience, but obtain readily divine remission of the sins of their present infirmity. These, though they are certain that they shall be rewarded if they persevere, are not certain that they will persevere. For what man can know that he will persevere to the end in the exercise and increase of grace, unless he has been certified by some revelation from him, who in his just and secret judgment, while he deceives none, informs few regarding this matter? Accordingly, so far as present comfort goes, the first man in paradise was more blessed than any just man in his insecure state. But as regards the hope of future good, every man who not merely supposes, but certainly knows that he shall eternally enjoy the most high God in the company of the angels and beyond the reach of ill, this man, no matter what bodily torments afflict him, is more blessed than was he who, even in that great felicity of paradise, was uncertain of his fate. CHAPTER XIII From all this it will readily occur to any one that the blessedness which an intelligent being desires as its legitimate object results from a combination of these two things, namely that it uninterruptedly enjoy the unchangeable good, which is God, and that it be delivered from all Dubaiity, and know certainly that it shall eternally abide in the same enjoyment. That it is so with the angels of light we piously believe, but that the fallen angels, who by their own default lost that light, did not enjoy this blessedness even before they sinned, reason bids us conclude. Yet if their life was of any duration before they fell, we must allow them a blessedness of some kind, though not that which is accompanied with foresight. Or, if it seems hard to believe that when the angels were created, some were created in ignorance either of their perseverance or their fall, while others were most certainly assured of the eternity of their felicity, if it is hard to believe that they were not all from the beginning on an equal footing until these who are now evil did of their own free will fall away from the light of goodness, certainly it is much harder to believe that the holy angels are now uncertain of their eternal blessedness, and do not know regarding themselves as much as we have been able to gather regarding them from the holy scriptures. For what Catholic Christian does not know that no new devil will ever arise among the good angels, as he knows that this present devil will never again return into the fellowship of the good. For the truth in the gospel promises to the saints and the faithful that they will be equal to the angels of God, and it is also promised them that they will go away into life eternal. But if we are certain that we shall never lapse from eternal felicity, while they are not certain, then we shall not be their equals, but their superiors. But as the truth never deceives, and as we shall be their equals, they must be certain of their blessedness. And because the evil angels could not be certain of that, since their blessedness was destined to come to an end, it follows either that the angels were unequal, or that if equal, the good angels were assured of the eternity of their blessedness after the perdition of the others. Unless possibly someone may say that the words of the Lord about the devil, he was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, or to be understood as if he was not only a murderer from the beginning of the human race, when man whom he could kill by his deceit was made, but also that he did not abide in the truth from the time of his own creation, and was accordingly never blessed with the holy angels, but refused to submit to his Creator and proudly exalted as if in a private lordship of his own, and was thus deceived and deceiving. For the dominion of the Almighty cannot be eluded, and he who will not piously submit himself to things as they are proudly feigns and mocks himself with a state of things that does not exist, so that what the Blessed Apostle John says thus becomes intelligible, the devil's smith from the beginning. That is, from the time he was created he refused righteousness, which none but a will piously subject to God can enjoy. Whoever adopts this opinion at least disagrees with those heretics the manatees, and with any other pestilential sect that may suppose that the devil has derived from some adverse evil principle and nature proper to himself. These persons are so befooled by error that although they acknowledge with ourselves the authority of the Gospels they do not notice that the Lord did not say, the devil was naturally a stranger to the truth, but the devil abode not in the truth, by which he meant us to understand that he had fallen from the truth, in which if he had abode he would have become a partaker of it, and have remained in blessedness along with the holy angels. CHAPTER XIV Moreover, as if we had been inquiring why the devil did not abide in the truth, our Lord subjoins the reason, saying, because the truth is not in him. Now it would be in him had he abode in it, but the phraseology is unusual. For as the words stand, he abode not in the truth because the truth is not in him, it seems as if the truths not being in him were the cause of his not abiding in it, whereas his not abiding in the truth is rather the cause of its not being in him. The same form of speech is found in the Psalm. I have called upon thee, for thou hast heard me, O God, for we should expect it to be said, Thou hast heard me, O God, for I have called upon thee. But when he had said, I have called, then as if someone were seeking proof of this, he demonstrates the effectual earnestness of his prayer by the effect of God's hearing it, as if he had said, the proof that I have prayed is that thou hast heard me. CHAPTER XV As for what John says about the devil, the devil's sinneth from the beginning, they who suppose it is meant hereby that the devil was made with a sinful nature misunderstand it, for if sin be natural it is not sin at all. And how do they answer the prophetic proofs, either what Isaiah says when he represents the devil unto the person of the king of Babylon, how art thou fallen, O Lucifer, son of the morning? Or what Ezekiel says, thou hast been in Eden, the garden of God, every precious stone was thy covering, or it is meant that he was some time without sin, for a little after it is still more explicitly said, thou was perfect in thy ways. And if these passages cannot well be otherwise interpreted, we must understand by this one also, he abode not in the truth, that he was once in the truth, but did not remain in it. And from this passage, the devil's sinneth from the beginning, it is not to be supposed that he sinned from the beginning of his created existence, but from the beginning of his sin, when by his pride he had once commenced to sin. There is a passage too in the book of Job of which the devil is the subject, this is the beginning of the creation of God which he made to be a sport to his angels, which agrees with the psalm where it is said, there is that dragon which thou hast made to be a sport therein. But these passages are not to lead us to suppose that the devil was originally created to be the sport of the angels, but that he was doomed to this punishment after his sin. His beginning then is the handy work of God, for there is no nature, even among the least and lowest and last of the beasts, which was not the work of him from whom has preceded all measure, all form, all order, without which nothing can be planned or conceived. How much more then is this angelic nature which surpasses in dignity all else that he has made, the handy work of the Most High? CHAPTER XVI For among those beings which exist, and which are not of God the Creator's essence, those which have life are ranked above those which have none, those that have the power of generation or even of desiring above those which want this faculty, and among things that have life the sentient are higher than those which have no sensation, or animals are ranked above trees, and among the sentient the intelligent are above those that have not intelligence, men, for example, above cattle, and among the intelligent the immortal such as the angels above the mortal such as men. These are the gradations according to the order of nature, but according to the utility each man finds in a thing there are various standards of value so that it comes to pass that we prefer some things that have no sensation to some sentient beings. And so strong is this preference that had we the power we would abolish the latter from nature altogether, whether in ignorance of the place they hold in nature or, though we knew it, sacrificing them to our own convenience. Who, for example, would not rather have bread in his house than mice, gold than fleas. But there is little to wonder at in this, seeing that even when valued by men themselves whose nature is certainly of the highest dignity, more is often given for a horse than for a slave, for a jewel than for a maid. Thus the very reason of one contemplating nature prompts very different judgments from those dictated by the necessity of the needy or the desire of the voluptuous, for the former considers what value a thing in itself has on the scale of creation, while necessity considers how it meets its need. Reason looks for what the mental light will judge to be true, while pleasure looks for what pleasantly titillates the bodily sense. But of such consequence in rational natures is the weight, so to speak, of will and of love, that though in the order of nature angels rank above men, yet by the scale of justice good men are of greater value than bad angels. Chapter 17 It is with reference to the nature, then, and not to the wickedness of the devil, that we are to understand these words, this is the beginning of God's handiwork. For without doubt wickedness can be a flaw or vice only where the nature previously was not vitiated. Vice, too, is so contrary to nature that it cannot but damage it. And therefore departure from God would be no vice unless in a nature whose property it was to abide with God, so that even the wicked will is a strong proof of the goodness of the nature. But God, as he is the supremely good creator of good natures, so is he of evil wills the most just ruler, so that while they make an ill use of good natures he makes a good use even of evil wills. Accordingly he caused the devil, good by God's creation, wicked by his own will, to be cast down from his high position and to become the mockery of his angels, that is, he caused his temptations to benefit those whom he wishes to injure by them. And because God, when he created him, was certainly not ignorant of his future malinity and foresaw the good which he himself would bring out of this evil, therefore says the psalm, this leviathan whom thou hast made to be a sport therein, that we may see that even while God in his goodness created him good, he yet had already foreseen and arranged how he would make use of him when he became wicked. CHAPTER XVIII For God would never have created any, I do not say angel, but even man, whose future wickedness he foreknew, unless he had equally known to what uses in behalf of the good he could turn him, thus embellishing the course of the ages as it were an exquisite poem set off with antitheses. For what are called antitheses are among the most elegant of the ornaments of speech. They might be called in Latin oppositions, or to speak more accurately contrapositions, but this word is not in common use among us, though the Latin and indeed the languages of all nations avail themselves of the same ornaments of style. In the second epistle to the Corinthians the apostle Paul also makes a graceful use of antithesis in that place where he says, By the armor of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, by honor and dishonor by evil report and good report, as deceivers and yet true, as unknown and yet well known, as dying and behold we live, as chastened and not killed, as sorrowful yet always rejoicing, as poor yet making many rich, as having nothing and yet possessing all things. As then these oppositions of contraries lend beauty to the language, so the beauty of the course of this world is achieved by the opposition of contraries, arranged as it were by an eloquence not of words, but of things. This is quite plainly stated in the book of Ecclesiasticus in this way. Good is set against evil and life against death, so is the sinner against the godly. So look upon all the works of the Most High, and these are two and two, one against another. CHAPTER XIX Accordingly though the obscurity of the Divine Word has certainly this advantage, that it causes many opinions about the truth to be started and discussed, each reader seeing some fresh meaning in it, yet whatever is said to be meant by an obscure passage should be either confirmed by the testimony of obvious facts, or should be asserted in other and less ambiguous texts. This obscurity is beneficial, what are the sense of the author is at last reached after the discussion of many other interpretations, or whether or though that sense remain concealed, other truths are brought out by the discussion of the obscurity. To me it does not seem incongruous with the working of God if we understand that the angels were created when that first light was made, and that a separation was made between the holy and the unclean angels when, as is said, God divided the light from the darkness, and God called the light day, and the darkness he called night. For he alone could make this discrimination, who was able also before they fell to foreknow that they would fall, and that being deprived of the light of truth they would abide in the darkness of pride. For so far as regards the day and night, with which we are familiar, he commanded those luminaries of heaven that are obvious to our senses to divide between the light and the darkness. Let there be, he says, lights and the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night, and shortly after, he says, and God made two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night, the stars also, and God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. But between that light, which is the holy company of the angels spiritually radiant with the illumination of the truth, and that opposing darkness, which is the noisome foulness of the spiritual condition of those angels who were turned away from the light of righteousness, only he himself could divide, from whom their wickedness, not of nature, but of will, while yet it was future, could not be hidden or uncertain. Chapter 20 Then we must not pass from this passage of scripture without noticing that when God said, Let there be light, and there was light, it was immediately added, and God saw the light that it was good. No such expression followed the statement that he separated the light from the darkness, and called the light day and the darkness night, lest the seal of his approval might seem to be set on such darkness as well as on the light. For when the darkness was not subject of disapprovation, as when it was divided by the heavenly bodies from this light which our eyes discern, the statement that God saw that it was good is inserted not before, but after the division is recorded. And God set them, so runs the passage, in the firmament of the heaven, to give light upon the earth, and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness, and God saw that it was good. For he approved of both because both were sinless. But where God said, Let there be light, and there was light, and God saw the light that it was good, and the narrative goes on, and God divided the light from the darkness, and God called the light day and the darkness he called night, there was not in this place subjoined the statement, and God saw that it was good, lest both should be designated good while one of them was evil, not by nature, but by its own fault. And therefore, in this case, the light alone received the approbation of the Creator, while the angelic darkness, though it had been ordained, was yet not approved. Chapter 21 For what else is to be understood by that invariable refrain, and God saw that it was good, than the approval of the work in its design, which is the wisdom of God? For certainly God did not in the actual achievement of the work first learn that it was good, but on the contrary, nothing would have been made had it not first been known by him. While therefore he sees that that is good, which, had he not seen it before it was made, would never have been made, it is plain that he is not discovering, but teaching that it is good. Plato indeed was bold enough to say that when the universe was completed God was, as it were, elated with joy. And Plato was not so foolish as to mean by this that God was rendered more blessed by the novelty of his creation, but he wished thus to indicate that the work now completed met with his maker's approval, as it had while yet in design. It is not as if the knowledge of God were of various kinds, knowing in different ways things which has yet are not, things which are, and things which have been. For not in our fashion does he look forward to what is future, nor at what is present, nor back upon what is past, but in a manner quite different and far and profoundly remote from our way of thinking. For he does not pass from this to that by transition of thought, but beholds all things with absolute unchangeableness. So that of those things which emerge in time, the future indeed are not yet, and the present are now, and the past no longer are, that all of these are by him comprehended in his stable and eternal presence. Neither does he see in one fashion by the eye, and another by the mind, for he is not composed of mind and body. Nor does his present knowledge differ from that which it ever was, or shall be, for those variations of time, past, present, and future, though they alter our knowledge, do not affect his, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. Neither is there any growth from thought to thought in the conceptions of him in whose spiritual vision all things which he knows are at once embraced. For as without any movement that time can measure, he himself moves all temporal things, so he knows all times with the knowledge that time cannot measure. And therefore he saw that what he had made was good when he saw that it was good to make it. And when he saw it made he had not on that account a twofold nor anyway increased knowledge of it, as if he had less knowledge before he made what he saw. For certainly he would not be the perfect worker he is unless his knowledge were so perfect as to receive no addition from his finished works. Wherefore, if the only object had been to inform us who made the light, it had been enough to say, God made the light. And if further information regarding the means by which it was made had been intended, it would have suffice to say, and God said, Let there be light, and there was light. That we might know not only that God had made the world, but also that he had made it by the word. But because it was right that three leading truths regarding the creature be intimated to us, that is, who made it, by what means, and why, it is written, God said, Let there be light, and there was light, and God saw the light that it was good. If then we ask who made it, it was God. If by what means, he said, Let it be, and it was. If we ask why he made it, it was good. Neither is there any author more excellent than God, nor any skill more efficacious than the word of God, nor any cause better than that good might be created by the good God. This also Plato has assigned as the most sufficient reason for the creation of the world that good works might be made by a good God. Whether he read this passage, or perhaps was informed of these things by those who had read them, or by his quick-sided genius penetrated to things spiritual and invisible through the things that are created, or was instructed regarding them by those who had discerned them. CHAPTER XXII This cause, however, of a good creation, namely the goodness of God. This cause, I say, so just and fit, which, when piously and carefully weighed, terminates all the controversies of those who inquire into the origin of the world, has not been recognized by some heretics, because there are, forsooth, many things, such as fire, frost, wild beasts, and so forth, which do not sooth but injure this thin-blooded and frail mortality of our flesh, which is at present under just punishment. They do not consider how admirable these things are in their own places, how excellent in their own natures, how beautifully adjusted to the rest of creation, and how much grace they contribute to the universe by their own contributions as to a commonwealth, and how serviceable they are even to ourselves if we use them with the knowledge of their fit adaptations, so that even poisons, which are destructive when used injudiciously, become wholesome and medicinal when used in conformity with their qualities and design, just as, on the other hand, those things which give us pleasure, such as food, drink, and the light of the sun, are found to be hurtful when immoderately or unseasonably used. And thus divine providence admonishes us not foolishly to vituperate things, but to investigate their utility with care, and where our mental capacity or infirmity is at fault to believe that there is a utility, though hidden, as we have experienced that there were other things which we all but failed to discover. For this concealment of the use of things is itself either an exercise of our humility or a leveling of our pride, for no nature at all is evil, and this is a name for nothing but the want of good. But from things earthly to things heavenly, from the visible to the invisible, there are some things better than others, and for this purpose are they unequal in order that they might all exist. Now God is in such sort a great worker and great things that he is not less in little things, for these little things are to be measured not by their own greatness, which does not exist, but by the wisdom of their designer, as in the visible appearance of a man if one eyebrow be shaved off how nearly nothing is taken from the body, but how much from the beauty. For that is not constituted by bulk, but by the proportion and arrangement of the members. But we do not greatly wonder that persons who suppose that some evil nature has been generated and propagated by a kind of opposing principle proper to it refuse to admit that the cause of the creation was this, that the good God produced a good creation. For they believe that he was driven to this enterprise of creation by the urgent necessity of repulsing the evil that warred against him, and that he mixed his good nature with the evil for the sake of restraining and conquering it, and that this nature of his, being thus shamefully polluted, and most cruelly oppressed and held captive, he labors to cleanse and deliver it, and with all his pains does not wholly succeed, but such part of it as could not be cleansed from that defilement is to serve as a prison and chain of the conquered and incarcerated enemy. The Manicheans would not drivel, or rather rave in such a style as this, if they believed the nature of God to be, as it is, unchangeable and absolutely incorruptible and subject to no injury. And if moreover they held in Christian sobriety that the soul which has shown itself capable of being altered for the worse by its own will, and of being corrupted by sin, and so of being deprived of the light of eternal truth, that this soul, I say, is not a part of God, nor of the same nature as God, but is created by him and is far different from its creator. CHAPTER X-XXIV of the City of God This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Darren L. Slider, www.logoslibrary.org. The City of God by St. Augustine of Hippo, Book XI. CHAPTER XXIII. But it is much more surprising that some, even of those who, with ourselves, believe that there is only one source of all things, and that no nature which is not divine can exist unless originated by that creator, have yet refused to accept with a good and simple faith this so good and simple or reason of the world's creation that a good God made it good, and that the things created being different from God were inferior to him, and yet were good, being created by none other than he. But they say that souls, though not indeed parts of God but created by him, sinned by abandoning God, that in proportion to their various sins they merited different degrees of debasement from heaven to earth and diverse bodies as prison-houses, and that this is the world, and this is the cause of its creation, not the production of good things, but the restraining of evil. Origin is justly blamed for holding this opinion. For in the books which he entitles Perry Archon, that is, of origins, this is his sentiment, this his utterance. And I cannot sufficiently express my astonishment that a man so erudite and well versed in ecclesiastical literature should not have observed in the first place how opposed this is to the meaning of this authoritative scripture which, in recounting all the works of God, regularly adds, and God saw that it was good, and when all were completed, inserts the words, and God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. Was it not obviously meant to be understood that there was no other cause of the world's creation than that good creatures should be made by a good God? In this creation, had no one sinned, the world would have been filled and beautified with nature's good without exception, and though there is sin, all things are not therefore full of sin, for the great majority of the heavenly inhabitants preserve their nature's integrity. And the sinful will, though it violated the order of its own nature, did not on that account escape the laws of God, who justly orders all things for good. For as the beauty of a picture is increased by well-managed shadows, so to the eye that has skill to discern it, the universe is beautified even by sinners, though, considered by themselves, their deformity is a sad blemish. In the second place, origin, and all who think with him, ought to have seen that if it were the true opinion that the world was created in order that souls might, for their sins, be accommodated with bodies in which they should be shut up as in houses of correction, the more venial sinners receiving lighter and more ethereal bodies, while the grosser and graver sinners received bodies more crass and groveling, then it would follow that the devils who were deepest in wickedness ought, rather than even wicked men, to have earthly bodies, since these are the grossest and least ethereal of all. But, in point of fact, that we might see that the desserts of souls are not to be estimated by the qualities of bodies, the wickedest devil possesses an ethereal body, while man, wicked, it is true, but with a wickedness small and venial in comparison with his, received even before his sin a body of clay. And what more foolish assertion could be advanced than that God, by this son of ours, did not design to benefit the material creation or lend lustre to its loveliness, and therefore created one single son for this single world, but that it so happened that one soul only had sinned, so as to deserve to be enclosed in such a body as it is. On this principle have it a chance that not one, but two, yea, or ten, or a hundred had sinned similarly, and with a like degree of guilt, then this world would have one hundred sons. And that such is not the case as do not to the considerate foresight of the creator, contriving the safety and beauty of things material, but rather to the fact that so fine a quality of sinning was hit upon by only one soul so that it alone has merited such a body. Manifestly persons holding such opinions should aim at confining not souls of which they know not what they say, but themselves, lest they fall and deservedly far indeed from the truth. And as to these three answers which I formally recommended, when in the case of any creature the questions are put, who made it, by what means, why, that it should be replied, God, by the word, because it was good. As to these three answers that is very questionable what of the trinity itself is thus mystically indicated, that is, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, or whether there is some good reason for this acceptation and this passage of Scripture, this I say is questionable and one can't be expected to explain everything in one volume. We believe, we maintain, we faithfully preach, that the Father begat the word, that is, wisdom, by which all things were made, the only begotten Son, one as the Father is one, eternal as the Father is eternal, and equally with the Father, supremely good, and that the Holy Spirit is the spirit alike of Father and of Son, and is himself consubstantial and co-eternal with both, and that this whole is a trinity by reason of the individuality of the persons, and one God by reason of the indivisible divine substance, as also one Almighty by reason of the indivisible omnipotence. Yet so that, when we inquire regarding each singly, it is said that each is God and Almighty, and when we speak of altogether, it is said that there are not three gods, nor three Omities, but one God Almighty. So great is the indivisible unity of these three which requires that it be so stated. But whether the Holy Spirit of the Father and of the Son, who are both good, can be with propriety called the goodness of both, because he is common to both, I do not presume to determine hastily. Nevertheless, I would have less hesitation in saying that he is the holiness of both, not as if he were a divine attribute merely, but himself also the divine substance and the third person in the trinity. I am the rather emboldened to make this statement, because, though the Father is a Spirit, and the Son a Spirit, and the Father holy, and the Son holy, yet the third person is distinctively called the Holy Spirit as if he were the substantial holiness consubstantial with the other two. But if the divine goodness is nothing else than the divine holiness, then certainly it is a reasonable studiousness, and not presumptuous intrusion, to inquire whether the same trinity be not hinted at in an enigmatic mode of speech by which our inquiry is stimulated, when it is written who made each creature, and by what means, and why. For it is the Father of the Word who said, Let there be, and that which was made when he spoke was certainly made by means of the Word. And by the words God saw that it was good, it is sufficiently intimated, that God made what was made not from any necessity, nor for the sake of supplying any want, but solely from his own goodness, that is, because it was good. And this is stated after the creation had taken place that there might be no doubt that the thing made satisfied the goodness on account of which it was made. And if we are right in understanding that this goodness is the Holy Spirit, then the whole trinity is revealed to us in the creation. In this, too, is the origin, the enlightenment, the blessedness of the holy city, which is above among the holy angels. For if we inquire whence it is, God created it, or whence its wisdom, God illumined it, or whence its blessedness, God is its bliss. It has its form by subsisting in him, its enlightenment by contemplating him, its joy by abiding in him. It is, it sees, it loves. In God's eternity is its life, in God's truth its light, in God's goodness its joy. Chapter 25 As far as one can judge, it is for the same reason that philosophers had aimed at a threefold division of science, or rather were unable to see that there was a threefold division, for they did not invent, but only discovered it, of which one part is called physical, another logical, the third ethical. The Latin equivalents of these names are now naturalized in the writings of many authors, so that these divisions are called natural, rational, and moral, on which I have touched slightly in the eighth book. Not that I would conclude that these philosophers in this threefold division had any thought of a trinity in God, although Plato is said to have been the first to discover and promulgate this distribution, and he saw that God alone could be the author of nature, the bestower of intelligence, and the kindler of love by which life becomes good and blessed. But certain it is that though philosophers disagree both regarding the nature of things and the mode of investigating truth and of the good to which all our actions ought to tend, yet in these three great general questions all their intellectual energy is spent. And though there be a confusing diversity of opinion, every man striving to establish his own opinion in regard to each of these questions, yet no one of them all doubts that nature has some cause, science, some method, life, some end, and aim. Then again there are three things which every artificer must possess if he is to affect anything—nature, education, practice. Nature is to be judged by capacity, education by knowledge, practice by its fruit. I am aware that, properly speaking, fruit is what one enjoys, use, practice what one uses. And this seems to be the difference between them that we are said to enjoy that which in itself and irrespective of other ends delights us, to use that which we seek for the sake of some end beyond. For which reason things of time are to be used rather than enjoyed, that we may deserve to enjoy things eternal, and not as those perverse creatures who would feign enjoy money and use God, not spending money for God's sake but worshiping God for money's sake. However, in common parlance we both use fruits and enjoy uses, for we correctly speak of the fruits of the field which certainly we all use in the present life. And it was in accordance with this usage that I said that there were three things to be observed in a man— nature, education, practice. From these the philosophers have elaborated, as I said, the threefold division of that science by which a blessed life is attained, the natural having respect to nature, the rational to education, the moral to practice. If then we were ourselves the authors of our nature we should have generated knowledge in ourselves and should not require to reach it by education, that is, by learning it from others. Our love, too, proceeding from ourselves and returning to us, would suffice to make our life blessed, and would stand in need of no extraneous enjoyment. But now, since our nature has God as its requisite author, it is certain that we must have him for our teacher that we may be wise, him, too, to dispense to us spiritual sweetness that we may be blessed. And we indeed recognize in ourselves the image of God, that is, of the supreme trinity, an image which, though it be not equal to God, or rather, though it be very far removed from him, being neither co-eternal nor, to say all in a word, consubstantial with him, is yet nearer to him in nature than any other of his works, and is destined to be yet restored, that it may bear a still closer resemblance. For we both are, and know that we are, and bear light in our being, and our knowledge of it. Moreover, in these three things no true-seeming illusion disturbs us, for we do not come into contact with these by some bodily sense as we perceive the things outside of us. Colors, for example, by seeing, sounds by hearing, smells by smelling, tastes by tasting, hard and soft objects by touching. Of all which sensible objects it is the images resembling them, but not themselves which we perceive in the mind and hold in the memory, and which excite us to desire the objects. But without any delusive representation of images or fantasms I am most certain that I am, and that I know and delight in this. In respect of these truths I am not at all afraid of the arguments of the academicians who say, What if you are deceived? For if I am deceived, I am. He who is not cannot be deceived, and if I am deceived, by this same token, I am. And since I am if I am deceived, how am I deceived in believing that I am? For it is certain that I am if I am deceived. Since therefore I, the person deceived, should be, even if I were deceived, certainly I am not deceived in this knowledge that I am. And consequently, neither am I deceived in knowing that I know. For as I know that I am, though I know this also, that I know. And when I love these two things, I add to them a certain third thing, namely my love which is of equal moment. For neither am I deceived in this, that I love, since in those things which I love I am not deceived. Though even if these were false, it would still be true that I loved false things. For how could I justly be blamed and prohibited from loving false things if it were false to that I loved them? But since they are true and real, who doubts that when they are loved, the love of them is itself true and real. Further, as there is no one who does not wish to be happy, so there is no one who does not wish to be. For how can he be happy, if he is nothing? CHAPTER 27 And truly the very fact of existing is by some natural spell so pleasant that even the wretched are, for no other reason, unwilling to perish. And when they feel that they are wretched, wish not that they themselves be annihilated, but that their misery be so. Take even those who both in their own esteem and in point of fact are utterly wretched, and who are reckoned so not only by wise men on account of their folly, but by those who count themselves blessed, and who think them wretched because they are poor in destitute. If any one should give these men an immortality in which their misery should be deathless, and should offer the alternative, that if they shrank from existing eternally in the same misery they might be annihilated, and exist nowhere at all, nor in any condition, on the instant they would joyfully, nay exultantly, make election to exist always, even in such a condition, rather than not exist at all. The well-known feeling of such men witnesses to this. For when we see that they fear to die, and will rather live in such misfortune than end it by death, is it not obvious enough how nature shrinks from annihilation? And accordingly, when they know that they must die, they seek, as a great boon, let this mercy be shown them, that they may a little longer live in the same misery, and delay to end it by death. And so they indubitably prove with what glad alacrity they would accept in mortality, even though it's secured to them endless destruction. What? Do not even all irrational animals, to whom such calculations are unknown, from the huge dragons down to the least worms, all testify that they wish to exist, and therefore shun death by every movement in their power? Nay, the very plants and shrubs which have no such life as enables them to shun destruction by movements we can see, do not they all seek in their own fashion to conserve their existence by rooting themselves more and more deeply in the earth, so that they may draw nourishment and throw out healthy branches towards the sky? In fine even the lifeless bodies which want not only sensation but seminal life, yet either seek the upper air or sink deep or are balanced in an intermediate position, so that they may protect their existence in that situation where they can exist in most accordance with their nature? And how much human nature loves the knowledge of its existence, and how it shrinks from being deceived, will be sufficiently understood from this fact that every man prefers to grieve in a sane mind rather than to be glad in madness? And this grand and wonderful instinct belongs to men alone of all animals, for though some of them have keener eyesight than ourselves for this world's light, they cannot attain to that spiritual light with which our mind is somehow irradiated, so that we can form right judgments of all things, for our power to judge is proportion to our acceptance of this light. Nevertheless the irrational animals, though they have not knowledge, have certainly something resembling knowledge, whereas the other material things are said to be sensible not because they have senses, but because they are objects of our senses. Yet among plants their nourishment and generation have some resemblance to sensible life. However, both these and all material things have their causes hidden in their nature, but their outward forms which lend beauty to this visible structure of the world are perceived by our senses, so that they seem to wish to compensate for their own want of knowledge by providing us with knowledge. But we perceive them by our bodily senses in such a way that we do not judge of them by these senses. For we have another and far superior sense belonging to the inner man by which we perceive what things are just and what unjust, just by means of an intelligible idea, unjust by the want of it. This sense is aided in its functions neither by the eyesight, nor by the orifice of the ear, nor by the air-holes of the nostrils, nor by the palate's taste, nor by any bodily touch. By it I am assured both that I am and that I know this, and these two I love, and in the same manner I am assured that I love them. CHAPTER XXVIII We have said as much as the scope of this work demands regarding these two things, to wit, our existence and our knowledge of it, and how much they are loved by us, and how there is found even in the lower creatures a kind of likeness of these things, and yet with a difference. We have yet to speak of the love wherewith they are loved to determine whether this love itself is loved, and doubtless it is, and this is the proof. Because in men who are justly loved it is rather love itself that is loved, for he is not justly called a good man who knows what is good, but who loves it. Is it not then obvious that we love in ourselves the very love wherewith we love whatever good we love? For there is also a love wherewith we love that which we ought not to love, and this love is hated by him who loves that wherewith he loves what ought to be loved. For it is quite possible for both to exist in one man, and this coexistence is good for a man, to the end that this love which conduces to our living well may grow, and the other which leads us to evil may decrease, until our whole life be perfectly healed and transmuted into good. For if we were beasts we should love the fleshly and sensual life, and this would be our sufficient good, and when it was well with us in respect of it we should seek nothing beyond. In like manner if we were trees we could not indeed in the strict sense of the word love anything, nevertheless we should seem as it were to long for that by which we might become more abundantly and luxuriously fruitful. If we were stones or waves or winds or flame or anything of that kind we should want indeed both sensation and life, yet should possess a kind of attraction towards our own proper position and natural order. For the specific gravity of bodies is, as it were, their love, whether they are carried downwards by their weight or upwards by their levity. For the body is born by its gravity, as the spirit by love, whether so ever it is born. But we are men created in the image of our Creator, whose eternity is true and whose truth is eternal, whose love is eternal and true, and who himself is the eternal true and adorable trinity, without confusion, without separation. And therefore while as we run over all the works which he has established we may detect, as it were, his footprints, now more and now less distinct, even in those things that are beneath us, since they could not so much as exist, or be bodied forth in any shape, or follow and observe any law, had they not been made by him who supremely is and is supremely good and supremely wise. Yet in ourselves beholding his image let us, like that younger son of the gospel, come to ourselves and arise and return to him from whom by our sin we had departed. There our being will have no death, our knowledge no error, our love no mishap. But now, though we are assured of our possession of these three things, not on the testimony of others, but by our own consciousness of their presence, and because we see them with our own most truthful interior vision, yet as we cannot of ourselves know how long they are to continue, and whether they shall never cease to be, and what issue their good or bad use will lead to, we seek for others who can acquaint us of these things if we have not already found them. Of the trustworthiness of these witnesses there will, not now, but subsequently be an opportunity of speaking. But in this book let us go on as we have begun, with God's help to speak of the city of God, not in its state of pilgrimage and mortality, but as it exists ever immortal in the heavens. That is, let us speak of the holy angels who maintain their allegiance to God, who never were, nor ever shall be, apostate, between whom and those who forsook light eternal and became darkness, God, as we have already said, made at the first a separation. Those holy angels come to the knowledge of God not by audible words, but by the presence to their souls of immutable truth, that is, of the only begotten word of God, and they know this word himself, and the Father, and their Holy Spirit, and that this trinity is indivisible, and that the three persons of it are one substance, and that there are not three gods, but one God. In this they so know that it is better understood by them than we are by ourselves. Thus, too, they know the creature also, not in itself, but by this better way in the wisdom of God as if in the art by which it was created, and consequently they know themselves better in God than in themselves, though they have also this latter knowledge, for they were created and are different from their creator. In him therefore they have, as it were, a noonday knowledge, in themselves a twilight knowledge according to our former explanations. For there is a great difference between knowing a thing and the design and conformity to which it was made, and knowing it in itself. For example, the straightness of lines and correctness of figures is known in one way when mentally conceived, in another when described on paper, and justice is known in one way in the unchangeable truth in another in the spirit of a just man. So is it with all other things, as the firmament between the water above and below, which was called the heaven, the gathering of the waters beneath, and the laying bare of the dry land, and the production of plants and trees, the creation of sun, moon, and stars, and of the animals out of the waters, fowls, and fish, and monsters of the deep, and of everything that walks or creeps on the earth, and of man himself who excels all that is on the earth. All these things are known in one way by the angels in the word of God in which they see the eternally abiding causes and reasons according to which they were made, and in another way in themselves, in the former with a clearer knowledge, in the latter with a knowledge dimmer, and rather of the bare works than of the design. Yet when these works are referred to the praise and adoration of the Creator Himself, it is as if mourning dawned in the minds of those who contemplate them. CHAPTER XXIII. These works are recorded to have been completed in six days, the same day being six times repeated, because six is a perfect number. Not because God required a protracted time as if he could not at once create all things, which then should mark the course of time by the movements proper to them, but because the perfection of the works was signified by the number six. For the number six is the first which is made up of its own parts, that is, of its sixth, third, and half, which are respectively one, two, and three, and which make a total of six. In this way of looking at a number, those are said to be its parts which exactly divide it as a half, a third, a fourth, or a fraction with any denominator. For example, four is a part of nine, but not therefore an aliquot part, but one is for it is the ninth part, and three is for it is the third. Yet these two parts, the ninth and the third, or one and three, are far from making its whole sum of nine. So again, in the number ten, four is a part, yet does not divide it, but one is an aliquot part, for it is a tenth, so it has a fifth, which is two, and a half, which is five. But these three parts, a tenth, a fifth, and a half, or one, two, and five added together, do not make ten, but eight. Of the number twelve, again, the parts added together exceed the whole, for it has a twelfth, that is one, a sixth, or two, a fourth, which is three, a third, which is four, and a half, which is six. But one, two, three, four, and six make up not twelve, but more. Sixteen. So much I have thought fit to state for the sake of illustrating the perfection of the number six, which is, as I said, the first which is exactly made up of its own parts added together, and in this number of days God finished his work. And therefore we must not despise the science of numbers, which in many passages of holy scripture is found to be of eminent service to the careful interpreter. Neither has it been without reason numbered among God's praises, thou hast ordered all things in number, and measure, and wait. CHAPTER 31 But on the seventh day, that is, the same day repeated seven times which number is also a perfect one, though for another reason, the rest of God is set forth, and then, too, we first hear of its being hallowed. So that God did not wish to hallow this day by his works, but by his rest, which has no evening, for it is not a creature. So that, being known in one way in the word of God, and in another in itself, it should make a twofold knowledge, daylight and dusk, day and evening. Much more might be said about the perfection of the number seven, but this book is already too long, and I fear lest I should seem to catch that an opportunity of erring my little smattering of science more childishly than profitably. I must speak therefore in moderation, and with dignity, lest, in two keenly following number, I be accused of forgetting weight and measure. Suffice it here to say that three is the first whole number that is odd, four the first that is even, and of these two seven is composed. On this account it is often put for all numbers together, as a just man falleth seven times and riseeth up again. That is, let him fall never so often, he will not perish, and this was meant to be understood not of sins, but of afflictions conducing to lowliness. Again, seven times a day will I praise thee, which elsewhere is expressed thus, I will bless the Lord at all times. And many such instances are found in the divine authorities, in which the number seven is, as I said, commonly used to express the whole or the completeness of anything. And so the Holy Spirit, of whom the Lord says, He will teach you all truth, is signified by this number. In it is the rest of God, the rest his people find in him. For rest is in the whole, that is, in perfect completeness, while in the part there is labor. And thus we labor as long as we know in part, but when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. It is even with toil we search into the scriptures themselves. But the holy angels, towards whose society and assembly we sigh while in this our toilsome pilgrimage, as they already abide in their eternal home, so do they enjoy a perfect facility of knowledge and felicity of rest. It is without difficulty that they help us, for their spiritual movements, pure and free, cost them no effort. CHAPTER 32 But if someone oppose our opinion, and say that the holy angels are not referred to, when it is said, Let there be light, and there was light. If he suppose or teach that some material light, then first created was meant, and that the angels were created not only before the firmament dividing the waters, and named to the heaven, but also before the time signified in the words, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. If he allege that this phrase in the beginning does not mean that nothing was made before, for the angels were, but that God made all things by his wisdom or word who is named in scripture the beginning, as he himself in the gospel replied to the Jews when they asked him who he was, that he was the beginning. I will not contest the point chiefly because it gives me the liveliest satisfaction to find the trinity celebrated in the very beginning of the book of Genesis. For having said, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, meaning that the Father made them in the sun, as the psalm testifies, where it says, How manifold are thy works, O Lord, in wisdom hast thou made them all. A little afterwards mention is fitly made of the Holy Spirit also. For when it had been told us what kind of earth God created at first, or what the mass of matter was which God, under the name of heaven and earth, had provided for the construction of the world, as is told in the additional words, and the earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. Then, for the sake of completing the mention of the trinity, it is immediately added, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. Let each one then take it as he pleases, for it is so profound a passage that it may well suggest, for the exercise of the reader's tact, many opinions, and none of them widely departing from the rule of faith. At the same time let none doubt that the holy angels and their heavenly abodes are, though not indeed co-eternal with God, yet secure and certain of eternal and true felicity. To their company the Lord teaches that his little ones belong, and not only says they shall be equal to the angels of God, but shows to what blessed contemplation the angels themselves enjoy, saying, Take he that ye despise not one of these little ones, for I say unto you that in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. CHAPTER XXXIII That certain angels sinned, and were thrust down to the lowest parts of this world, where they are as it were incarcerated till their final damnation, and the day of judgment, the Apostle Peter very plainly declares, when he says that God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness to be reserved into judgment. Who then can doubt that God, either in foreknowledge or in act, separated between these and the rest, and who will dispute that the rest are justly cold light? For even we who are yet living by faith, hoping only, and not yet enjoying equality with them, are already cold light by the Apostle. For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord. But as for these apostate angels, all who understand or believe them to be worse than unbelieving men are well aware that they are cold darkness. Wherefore, though light and darkness are to be taken in their literal signification in these passages of Genesis, in which it is said, God said, Let there be light, and there was light, and God divided the light from the darkness. Yet for our part we understand these two societies of angels, the one enjoying God, the other swelling with pride, the one to whom it is said, Praise ye him, all his angels, the other whose prince says, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. The one blazing with the holy love of God, the other reeking with the unclean lust of self-advancement. And since, as it is written, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble, we may say, the one dwelling in the heaven of heavens, the other cast thence and raging through the lower regions of the air. The one tranquil in the brightness of piety, the other tempest-tossed with beclouding desires. The one, at God's pleasure, tenderly succoring, justly avenging. The other, set on by its own pride, boiling with the lust of subduing and hurting. The one, the minister of God's goodness to the utmost of their good pleasure. The other, held in by God's power from doing the harm it would. The former, laughing at the latter, when it does good unwillingly by its persecutions, the latter envying the former when it gathers in its pilgrims. These two angelic communities, then, dissimilar and contrary to one another, the one, both by nature good and by will upright, the other also good by nature, but by will depraved, as they are exhibited in other and more explicit passages of holy writ. So I think they are spoken of in this book of Genesis, under the names of light and darkness. And even if the author perhaps had a different meaning, yet our discussion of the obscure language has not been wasted time. For though we have been unable to discover his meaning, yet we have adhered to the rule of faith which is sufficiently ascertained by the faithful from other passages of equal authority. For though it is the material works of God which are here spoken of, they have certainly a resemblance to the spiritual so that Paul can say, You are all the children of light and the children of the day, we are not of the night nor of darkness. If, on the other hand, the author of Genesis saw in the words what we see, then our discussion reaches this more satisfactory conclusion that the man of God so eminently and divinely wise, or rather that the spirit of God who by him recorded God's works which were finished on the sixth day, may be supposed not to have omitted all mention of the angels, whether he included them in the words in the beginning, because he made them first, or, which seems most likely, because he made them in the only begotten word. And, under these names heaven and earth, the whole creation is signified, either as divided into spiritual and material, which seems the more likely, or into the two great parts of the world in which all created things are contained, so that first of all the creation is presented in some, and then its parts are enumerated according to the mystic number of the days. Some, however, have supposed that the angelic hosts are somehow referred to under the name of waters, and that this is what is meant by, let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, that the waters above should be understood of the angels, and those below, either of the visible waters, or of the multitude of bad angels, or of the nations of men. If this be so, then it does not here appear when the angels were created, but when they were separated. Though there had not been wanting men foolish and wicked enough to deny that the waters were made by God, because it is nowhere written, God said, let there be waters. With equal folly they might say the same of the earth, for nowhere do we read, God said, let the earth be. But, say they, it is written, in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Yes, and there the water is meant, for both are included in one word. For the sea is his, as the psalm says, and he made it, and his hands formed the dry land. But those who would understand the angels by the waters above the skies have a difficulty about the specific gravity of the elements, and fear that the waters, owing to their fluidity and weight, could not be set in the upper parts of the world. So that if they were to construct a man upon their own principles, they would not put in his head any moist humours, or phlegm, as the Greeks call it, and which acts the part of water among the elements of our body. But in God's handiwork the head is the seat of the phlegm, and truly most fitly, and yet, according to their supposition, so absurdly that if we were not aware of the fact, and were informed by this same record that God had put a moist and cold and therefore heavy humour in the uppermost part of man's body, these worldwares would refuse belief. And if they were confronted with the authority of Scripture they would maintain that something else must be meant by the words. But were we to investigate and discover all the details which are written in this divine book regarding the creation of the world, we should have much to say and should widely digress from the proposed aim of this work. Since then we have now said what seemed needful regarding these two diverse and contrary communities of angels in which the origin of the two human communities, of which we intend to speak anon, is also found, let us at once bring this book also to a conclusion.