revealed at the last time, 5 that is, at the resurrection of the dead who are reserved not for that eternal death which is called " the second death," but for the eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promises to His saints and faithful serwmts. Now none who shall partake of this life shall be made alive except in Christ, even as all die in Adam.^ For as none whatever, of all those who belong to the generation according to the will of the flesh, die except in Adam, in whom all sinned; so, out of these, none at all who are regenerated by the will of the Spirit are endowed with life except in Christ, in whom all are justified. Because as through one all to condemnation, so through One all to justification.7 Nor is there any middle place for any man, and so a man can only be with the devil who is not with Christ. Accordingly, also, the Lord Himself (wishing to remove from the hearts of wrong-believers ^ that vague and indefinite middle condition, which some would provide for unbaptized infants, — as if, by reason of their innocence, they were embraced in eternal life, but were not, because of their unbaptized state, with Christ in His kingdom) uttered that definitive sentence of His, which shuts their mouths: " He that is not with me is against me."^ Take then the case of any infant you please: If he is already in Christ, why is he baptized? If, however, as the Truth has it, he is baptized just that he may be with Christ, it certainly follows that he who is not baptized is not with Christ; and because he is not " with " Christ, he is " against " Christ; for He has pronounced His own sentence, which is so explicit that we ought not, and indeed cannot, impair it or change it. And how can he be "against" Christ, if not owing to sin? for it cannot possibly be from his soul or his body, both of these being the creation of God. Now if it be owing to sin, what sin can be found at such an age, except the ancient and original sin? Of course that sinful flesh in which all are born to condemnation is one thing, and that Flesh which was made " after the likeness of sinful flesh," whereby also all are freed from condemnation, is another thing. It is, however, by no means meant to be implied that all who are born in sinful flesh are themselves actually cleansed l)y that Flesh which is " like " sinful flesh; " for all men have not faith; " '° but that all who are born from the carnal union are born entirely of sinful flesh, whilst all who are born from the spiritual union are cleansed only by the Flesh which is in the likeness of sinful flesh.
5 I Pet. i. 5.
'' I Cor. XV. 22.
7 Rom. V. 18.
^ Male credentium.
9 Matt. xii. 30.
2>7 In other words, the former class are in Adam unto condemnation, the latter are in Christ unto justification. This is as if we should say, for example, that in such a city there is a certain midwife who delivers all; and in the same place there is an expert teacher who instructs all. By all, in the one case, only those who are born can possibly be understood; by all, in the other, only those who are taught: and it does not follow that all who are born also receive the instruction. But it is obvious to every one, that in the one case it is correcdy said, " she delivers all," since without her aid no one is born; and in the other, it is rightly said, " he teaches all," since without his tutoring, no one learns.
CHAP. 56. — NO ONE IS RECONCILED TO GOD EXCEPT THROUGH CHRIST.
Taking into account all the inspired statements which I have quoted, — whether I regard the value of each passage one by one, or combine their united testimony in an accumulated witness or even include similar passages which I have not adduced, — there can be nothing discovered, but that which the catholic Church holds, in her dutiful vigilance against all profane novelties: that every man is separated from God, except those who are reconciled to God through Christ the Mediator; and that no one can be separated from God, except by sins, which alone cause separation; that there is, therefore, no reconciliation except by the remission of sins, through the one grace of the most merciful Saviour, — through the one sacrifice of the most veritable Priest; and that none who are born of the woman, that trusted the serpent and so was corrupted through desire,' are delivered from the body of this death, except by the Son of the virgin who believed the angel and so conceived without desire.2 CHAP. 5 7 [XXIX.] — THE GOOD OF MARRIAGE; FOUR DIFFERENT CASES OF THE GOOD AND THE EVIL USE OF MATRIMONY.
The good, then, of marriage lies not in the passion of desire, but in a certain legitimate and honourable measure in using that passion, appropriate to the propagation of children, not the gratification of lust.^ That, therefore, which is disobediently excited in the members of the body of this death, and endeavours to draw into itself our whole fallen soul, (neither arising nor subsiding at the bidding of the mind), is that evil of sin in which every man is born. ^Vhen, however, it is curbed from unlawful desires, and ' Gen. iii. 6.
2 Luke i. 38.
3 [The editions, but apparently no MSs., add here the somewhat sententious words: "Voluntas isla, non vohiptas ilia, nuptialis est," — which may, perhaps, be rcudered: " Wedded desire is williugness, not wantonness." — W.j thing, giveth his virgin is permitted only for the orderly propagation and renewal of the human race, this is the good of wedlock, by which man is born in the union that is appointed. Nobody, however, is born again in Christ's body, unless he be previously born in the body of sin. But inasmuch as it is evil to make a bad use of a good thing, so is it good to use well a bad thing. These two ideas therefore of good and evil, and those other two of a good use and an evil use, when they are duly combined together, produce four different conditions: — [i.] A man makes a good use of a good thing, when he dedicates his continence to God; [2.] He makes a bad use of a good thing, when he dedicates his continence to an idol; [3.] He makes a bad use of an evil thing, when he loosely gratifies his concupiscence by adultery; [4.] He makes a good use of an evil thing, when he restrains his concupiscence by matrimony. Now, as it is better to make good use of a good thing than to make good use of an evil since both are good, — so " he that in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better." •♦ This question, indeed, I have treated at greater length, and more sufficiently, as God enabled me according to my humble abilities, in two_ works of mine, — one of them, On the Good of Marriage, and the other. On Holy Virginity.
They, therefore, who extol the flesh and blood of a sinful creature, to the prejudice of the Redeemer's flesh and blood, must not defend the evil of concupiscence through the good of marriage; nor should they, from whose infant age the Lord has inculcated in us a lesson of humility,5 be lifted up into pride by the error of others. He only was born without sin whom a virgin conceived without the embrace of a husband, — not by the concupiscence of the flesh, but by the chaste submission of her mind.*^ She alone was able to give birth to One who should heal our wound, who brought forth the germ of a pure offspring without the wound of sin.
CHAP. 58 [XXX.] IN WHAT RESPECT THE PELA- GIANS REGARDED BAPTISM.AS NECESSARY FOR Let us now examine more carefully, so far as the Lord enables us, that very chapter of the Gospel where He says, " Except a man be born again, — of water and the Spirit, — he shall not enter into the kingdom of God." ^ If it were not for the authority which this sentence has, with them, they would not be of opinion that infants ought to be baptized at all. This is their comment on the passage: " Because He does not say, ' Except a man be born again of water [Book I.
and the Spirit, he shall not have salvation or eternal life,' but He merely said, ' he shall not enter into the kingdom of God,' therefore infants are to be baptized, in order that they may be with Christ in the kingdom of God, where they will not be unless they are baptized. Should infants die, however, even without baptism, they will have salvation and eternal life, seeing that they are bound with no fetter of sin." Now in such a statement as this, the first thing that strikes one is, that they never explain lahere the Justice is of separating from the kingdom of God that " image of God " which has no sin. Next, we ought to see whether the Lord Jesus, the one only good Teacher, has not in this very passage of the Gospel intimated, and indeed shown us, that it only comes to pass through the remission of their sins that baptized persons reach the kingdom of God; although to persons of a right understanding, the words, as they stand in the passage, ought to be sufficiently explicit: " Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God; " ' and: " Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." ^ For why should he be born again, unless to be renewed? From what is he to be renewed, if not from some old condition? From what old condition, but that in which " our old man is crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be destroyed? "^ Or whence comes it to pass tliat " the image of God " enters not into the kingdom of God, unless it be that the impediment of sin prevents it? However, let us (as we said before) see, as earnestly and diligently as we are able, what is the entire context of this passage of the Gospel, on the point in question.
CHAP. 59. THE CONTEXT OF THEIR CHIEF TEXT.
" Now there was," we read, " a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: the same came to Jesus' by night, and said unto Him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto Him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? Jesus answered. Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he carmot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Mar\el not that I said unto thee. Ye must be born again.
• John iii. 3. ^ John iii. 5. 3 Rtyn. vi. 6, The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit. Nicodemus answered and said unto Him, How can these things be? Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? Verily, verily, I say unto thee. We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe if I tell you of heavenly things? And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness,'* even so must the Son of man be lifted up; that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. He that believeth on Him is not condemned; but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." 5 Thus far the Lord's discourse wholly relates to the subject of our present inquiry; from this point the sacred historian digresses to another matter, CHAP. 60 [XXXI.] CHRIST, THE HEAD AND THE BODY; OWING TO THE UNION OF THE NATURES IN THE PERSON OF CHRIST, HE BOTH REMAINED IN HEAVEN, AND WALKED ABOUT ON EARTH; HOW THE ONE CHRIST COULD ASCEND TO HEAVEN; THE HEAD, AND THE BODY, THE ONE CHRIST.
Now when Nicodemus understood not what was being told him, he inquired of the Lord how such things could be. Let us look at what the Lord said to him in answer to his inquiry; for of course, as He deigns to answer the question. How can these things be? He will in fact tell us how spiritual regeneration can come to a man who springs from carnal generation. After noticing briefly the ignorance of one who assumed a superiority over others as a teacher, and having blamed the unbelief of all such, for not Chap. 6i.]
accepting His witness to tlie truth, He went on to inquire and wonder whetlier, as He had told them about earthly things and they had not believed they would believe heavenly things. He nevertheless pursues the subject, and gives an answer such as others should believe — though these refuse — to the question that he was asked. How these things can be? " No man," says He, " hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." ' Thus, He says, shall come the spiritual birth, — men, from being earthly, shall become heavenly; and this they can only obtain by being made members of me; so that he may ascend who descended, since no one ascends who did not descend. All, therefore, who have to be changed and raised must meet together in a union with Christ, so that the Christ who descended may ascend, reckoning His body (that is to say, His Church) as nothing else than Himself, because it is of Christ and the Church that this is most truly understood: " And they twain shall be one flesh; " - concerning which very subject He expressly said Himself, " So then they are no more twain, but one flesh." ^ To ascend, therefore, they would be wholly unable, since " no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." ' For although it was on earth that He was made the Son of man, yet He did not deem it unworthy of that divinity, in which, although remaining in heaven. He came down to earth, to designate it by the name of the Son of man, as He dignified His flesh with the name of Son of God: that they might not be regarded as if they were two Christs, — the one God, the other man,'* — but one and the same God and man, — God, because " in the beginning was the Word, and the Word w^as with God, and the Word was God; " 5 and man, inasmuch as " the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us." ^ By this means — by the difference between His divinity and His humiliation — He remained in heaven as Son of God, and as Son of man w-alked on earth; whilst, by that unity of His person which made His two natures one Christ, He both walked as Son of God on earth, and at the same time as the very Son of man remained in heaven. Faith, therefore, in more credible things arises from the beUef of such things as are more incredible. For if His divine nature, though a far more distant object, and more sublime in its incomparable diversity, had ability so to take upon itself * This was the error which was subsequently condemned in the heresy of Nestorius. 5 John i. I. '' John 1. 14.
the nature of man on our account as to become one Person, and whilst appearing as Son of man on earth in the weakness of the flesh, was able to remain all the while in heaven in the divinity which partook of the flesh, how much easier for our fliith is it to suppose that other men, who are His faithful saints, become one Christ with the Man Christ, so that, when all ascend by His grace and fellowship, the one Christ Himself ascends to hea\'en who came down from heaven? It is in this sense that the aposUe says, " As we have many members in one body, and all the members of the body, being many, are one body, so likewise is Christ."? He did not say, " So also i? Christ's " — meaning Christ's body, or Christ^ nembers — but his words are, "So likejiiise is CJirist,'' thus calling the head and body one Christ.
CHAP. 61 [XXXII.] THE SERPENT LIFTED UP IN THE WILDERXESS PREFIGURED CHRIST SUS- PENDED ON THE CROSS; EVEN INFANTS THEM- SELVES POISONED BV THE SERPENT'S BITE.
And since this great and wonderful dignity can only be attained by the remission of sins. He goes on to say, "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up; that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life." ^ We know what at that time happened in the wilderness. Many were dying of the bite of serpents: the people then confessed their sins, and, through iNIoses, besought the Lord to take away from them this poison; accordingly, Moses, at the Lord's command, lifted up a brazen serpent in the wilderness, and admonished the people that every one who had been serpent-bitten should look upon the uplifted figure. When they did so they were immediately healed. 9 What means the uplifted serpent but the death of Christ, by that mode of expressing a sign, whereby the thing which is effected is signified by that which effects it? Now death came by the serpent, which persuaded man to commit the sin, by which he deserved to die. The Lord, however, transferred to His own flesh not sin, as the poison of the serpent, but He did transfer to it death, that the penalty without the fault might transpire in the likeness of sinful flesh, whence, in the sinful flesh, both the fault might be removed and the penalty. As, therefore, it then came to pass that whoever looked at the raised serpent was both healed of the poison and freed from death, so also now, whosoever is conformed to the likeness of the death of Christ by faith in Him and His baptism, is freed both from sin by justification, and from death by resurrection. For this [Book I.
is what He says: " That whosoever beheveth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life." ' What necessity then could there be for an infant's being conformed to the death of Christ by baptism, if he were not altogether poisoned by the bite of the serpent?
CHAP. 62 [XXXIII.] — NO OXE CAN BE RECON- CILED TO GOD, EXCEPT BY CHRIST.
He then proceeds thus, saying: " God so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." ^ Every infant, therefore, was destined to perish, and to lose everlasting life, if through the sacrament of baptism he believed not in the only-begotten Son of God; while nevertheless, He comes not so that he may judge the world, but that the world through Him may be saved. This especially appears in the following clause, wherein He says, " He that believeth in Him is not condemned; but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God." ^ In what class, then, do we place baptized infants but amongst believers, as the authority of the catholic Church everywhere asserts? They belong, therefore, among those who have believed; for this is obtained for them by virtue of the sacrament and the answer of their sponsors. And from this it follows that such as are not baptized are reckoned among those who have not believed. Now if they who are baptized are not condemned, these last, as not being baptized, are condemned. He adds, indeed: " But this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light." ■♦ Of what does He say, " Light is come into the world," if not of His own advent? and without the sacrament of His advent, how are infants said to be in the light? And why should we not include this fact also in " men's love of darkness," that as they do not themselves believe, so they refuse to think that their infants ought to be baptized, although they are afraid of their incurring the death of the body? "In God," however, he declares are the " works of him wrought, who cometh to the light," s because he is quite aware that his justification results from no merits of his own, but from the grace of God. "For it is God," says the apostle, " who worketh in you both to will and to do of His own good pleasure."^ This then is the way in which spiritual regeneration is effected in all who come to Christ from their carnal generation. He explained it ■ John iii. 15. ^ John iii. 16. 3 John iii. 18. * John iii. 19. ' John iii. 21, "hil. ii. 13.
Himself, and pointed it out, when He was asked, How these things could be? He left it open to no man to settle such a question by human reasoning, lest infants should be deprived of the grace of the remission of sins. There is no other passage leading to Christ; no man can be reconciled to God, or can come to God otherwise, than through Christ.
CHAP. 6^ [XXXIV.] — THE FORM, OR RITE, OF BAPTISM. EXORCISM.
What shall I say of the actual form of this sacrament? I only wish some one of those who espouse the contrary side would bring me an infant to be baptized. What does my exorcism work in that babe, if he be not held in the devil's family? The man who brought the infant would certainly have had to act as sponsor for him, for he could not answer for himself. How would it be possible then for him to declare that he renounced the devil, if there was no devil ir him? that he was converted to God, if he had never been averted from Him? that he believed, besides other articles, in the forgiveness of sins, if no sins were attributable to him? For my own part, indeed, if I thought that his opinions were opposed to this faith, I could not permit him to bring the infant to the sacraments. Nor can I imagine with what countenance before men, or what mind before God, he can conduct himself in this. But I do not wish to say anything too severe. That a false or fallacious form of baptism should be administered to infants, in which there might be the sound and semblance of something being done, but yet no remission of sins actually ensue, has been seen by some amongst them to be as abominable and hateful a thing as it was possible to mention or conceive. Then, again, in respect of the necessity of baptism to infants, they admit that even infants stand in need of redemption, — a concession which is made in a short treatise written by one of their party, — but yet there is not found in this work any open admission of the forgiveness of a single sin. According, however, to an intimation dropped in your letter to me, they now acknowledge, as you say, that a remission of sins takes place even in infants through baptism. No wonder; for it is impossible that 7-edemption should be understood in any other way. Their own words are these: " It is, however, not originally, but in their own actual hfe, after they have been born, that they have begun to have sin."
You see how great a difference there is amongst those whom I have been opposing at such length and persistency in this work, — one of wliom has Chap. 66.]