In the JJ^es/we have traces of their existence from 287 onwards. Diocletian, according to a somewhat doubtful tradition, condemned its leaders to the stake, and its adherents to decapitation with confiscation of goods. The edict is supposed to have been directed to the pro-consul of Africa where Manichaeans were making great progress. According to an early account, Mani sent a special envoy to Africa. Valentinian (372) and Theodosius (381) issued bloody edicts against them, yet we find them still aggressive in the time of Augustin.
From Africa Manichaeism spread into Spain, Gaul and Aquitaine. Leo the Great and Valentinian III. took measures against them in Italy (440 sq.) They appear, however, to have continued their work, for Gregory the Great mentions them (590 sq.). From this time onwards their influence is to be traced in such parties as the Euchites, Enthusiasts, Bogomiles, Catharists, Beghards, etc. But it is not safe to attach too much importance to the mere fact that these parties were stigmatized as Manichaeans by their enemies. Even in the Reformation time and since, individuals and small parties have appeared which in some features strongly resembled the ancient Manichaeans. Manichaeism was a product of the East, and in the East it met with most acceptance. To the spirit of the West it was altogether foreign, and only in a greatly modified form could it ever have flourished there. It might persist for centuries as a secret society, but it could not endure the light.
I For an account of the controversies in which Augustin was engaged with the Manichjeans, and for the chronological order of the Anti-.Manichsean treatises, see the Preface of the Edinburgh editor. Cf. Bindemann, on the various controversies, in his Der h. Atii;iistinus, passim. See also, a good chronological list of St. Auguslin's works in Cunningham; St. Austin, p. 277 sq.
- Compare Professor George T. Stokes' excellent article MuKicAeeaits, in Smith and Wale: Vict, of Liu. ijwgraphy, vol. III. p. 798 sq.
PREFACE TO THE ANTI-MANICH.MN WRITIXGS.
No reader of the accompanying volume can be expected to take a very lively interest in its contents, unless he has before his mind some facts regarding the extraordinary genius to whom the heresy of Manichseism owes its origin and its name. His history is involved in considerable obscurity, owing to the suspicious nature of the documents from which it is derived, and the difiiculty of constructing a consistent and probable account out of the contradictory statements of the Asiatics and the Greeks. The ascertained facts, therefore, are few, and may be briefly stated.'
According to the Chronicle of Edessa, Mani was born a.d. 240.^ From his original name, Corbicius or Carcubius, Beausobre conjectures that he was born in Carcub, a town of Chaldrea. He belonged to a Magian family, and while still a youth won a distinguished place among the sages of Persia. He was master of all the lore peculiar to his class, and was, besides, so proficient a mathematician and geographer, that he was able to construct a globe. He was a skilled musician, and had some knowledge of the Greek language, — an accomplishment rare among his countrymen. But his fame, and even his ultimate success as a teacher, was due in great measure to his skill in painting, which was so considerable as to earn for him among the Persians the distinctive title, Mani the painter. His disposition was ardent and lively but patient and self-restrained. His appearance was striking, as he wore the usual dress of a Persian sage: the high-soled shoes, the one red, the other green; the mantle of azure blue, that changed color as he moved; the ebony staff in his right hand, and the Babylonish book under his left arm.
The meaning of his name, Mani, Manes, or Manichceus, has been the subject of endless conjectures. Epiphanius supposes that he was providentially so named, that men might be warned against the mania of his heresy.3 Hyde, whose opinion on any Oriental subject must have weight, tells us that in Persian viani means painter, and that he was so called from his profession. Archbishop Usher conjectured that it was a form of Manaein or Menahcm^ which means Paraclete or Comforter; founding this conjecture on the fact that Sulpicius Severus calls the Israelitish king Menahem,"* Mane. Gataker supplements this idea by the conjecture that Mani took this name at his own instance, and in pursuance of his claim to be the Paraclete. It is more probable that, if his name was really given on account of this meaning, he received it from the wiilow who seems to have adopted him when a boy, and may have called him her Consolation. But it is also possible that Mani was not an uncommon Persian name, and that he adopted it for some reason too trifling to discover.s While still a young man he was ordained as a Christian priest, and distinguished himself in that capacity by his knowledge of Scripture, and the zeal with which he discharged his sacred functions.^ His heretical tendencies, however, were very soon manifested, stimulated, we may suppose, by his anxiety to make the Christian religion more acceptable to those who adhered to the Eastern systems. Excommunicated from the Christian Church, Mani found asylum with Sapor, and won his confidence by presenting only the Magian side of his system. But no sooner did he permit the Christian element to appear, and call himself the apostle of the Lord, and show a desire to reform Magianism, than his sovereign determined to put him to death as a revolutionist. Forced to flee, he took refuge in Turkestan, and gained influence there, partly by decorating the temples with paintings. To lend his doctrines the appearance of divine authority, he adopted the same device as Zoroaster ' Beausobre (Histoire Critique de Manichec et du Manicheisme^ Amst. 1734, 2 vols.) has collected everything that is known of Mani. The original sources are here sifted with unusual acuteness, and with great and solid learning, though the author's strong ' bias in favor of a heretic " frequently leads him to make unwarranted statements. Burton's estimate of this entertaining and indispensable work (Heresies of Apostol. Age, p. xxi.), is much fairer than Pusey's (Aug. Con/, p. 314). A brief account of Mani and his doctrines is given by Milman with his usual accuracy, impartiality and lucidity {Hist. 0/ Christianity, \\. 2$c), ed. 1867). For any one who wishes to investigate the subject further, ample references are there given. A specimen of the confusion that involves the history of Mani will be found in the account given by Socrates (///\r/. i. 22).
- [For the Oriental accounts of Mani's parentage and youth, see the Introductory Essay, and the works there referred to.— A.H.N. ].
3 See also Eusebius: Hist. Eccl. vii. 31, with Heinichen's note.
4 Kings XV. 14.
5 ^'■Pcut-etre cherchons nous du mystere, ou il n'y en a /o/«/."— Beausobre, i. 79. • * [This is in the highest degree improbable.— A.H.N. ] and Mohammed. Having discovered a cave through which there ran a rill of water, he laid up in it a store of provisions, and retired there for a year, giving out that he was on a visit to heaven. In this retirement he produced his Gospel,^ — a work illustrated with symbolical drawings the ingenuity of which has been greatly praised. This book Mani presented to Hormizdas, the son and successor of Sapor, who professed himself favorable to his doctrine, and even built him a castle as a place of shelter and retirement. Unfortunately for Mani, Hormizdas died in the second year of his reign; and though his successor, Varanes, was at first willing to shield him from persecution, yet, finding that the Magians were alarmed for their religion, he appointed a disputation to be held between the opposing parties. Such trials of dialectic in Eastern courts have not unfrequently resulted in very serious consequences to the parties engaged in them. In this instance the result was fatal to Mani. Worsted in argument, he was condemned to die, and thus perished in some sense as a martyr. The mode of his death is uncertain, = but it seems that his skin was stuffed with chaff, and hung up in public in terroreni. This occurred in the year 277, and the anniversary was commemorated as the great religious festival of the Manichjeans.
This is not the place to attempt any account or criticism of the strange eclecticism of Mani. 3 An adequate idea of the system may be gathered from the accompanying treatises. It may, however, be desirable to give some account of the original sources of information regarding it.
We study the systems of heresiarchs at a disadvantage when our only means of ascertaining their opinions is from the fragmentary quotations and hostile criticism which occur in the writings of their adversaries. Such, however, is our only source of information regarding the'teaching of Mani. Originally, indeed, this heresy was specially active in a literary direction, assailing the Christian Scriptures with an ingenuity of unbelief worthy of a later age, and apparently ambitious of promulgating a rival canon. Certainly the writings of its early supporters were numerous;* and from the care and elegance with which they were transcribed, the sumptuous character of the manuscripts, and the mysterious emblems with which they were adorned, we should fancy it was intended to inspire the people with respect for an authoritative though as yet undefined code. It is, indeed, nowhere said or implied that the sacred books of the Manichceans were reserved for the eye only of the initiated or elect; and their reception of the New Testament Scriptures (subject to their own revision and emendation) would make it difficult for them to establish any secret code apart from these writing;?. They were certainly, however, doctrines of an esoteric kind, which were not divulged to the catechumens or hearers; and many of their books, being written in Persian, Syriac, or Greek, were practically unavailable for the instruction of the Latin speaking population. It was not always easy, therefore, to obtain an accurate knowledge of their opinions. Commentaries on the whole of the Old and New Testaments were written by Hierax;S a Theosophy by Aristocritus; a book of memoirs, or rather Memorabilia^ of Mani, and other works, by Heraclides, Aphthonius, Adas, and Agapius. Unfortunately all of these books have perished, whether in the flames to which the Christian authorities commanded that all Manichsean books should be consigned, or by the slower if not more critical and impartial processes of time.
Mani himself was the author of several works: a Gospel, the Treasury ofLife{a.r\6. probably an abridgment of the same), the Mysteries, the Foundation Epistle^ a book of Articles or heads of doctrine, one or two works on astronomy or astrology, and a collection of letters so dangerous, that Manichceans who sought restoration to the Church were required to anathematize them.
Probably the most important of these writings was the Foundation Epistle^ so called because it contained the leading articles of doctrine on which the new system was built. This letter was written in Greek or Syriac; but a Tatin version of it was current in Africa, and came into the hands of Augustin, who undertook its refutation. To accomplish this with the greater precision and effect, he quotes the entire text of each passage of the Epistle before proceeding to criticise it. Had Augustin accomplished the whole of his task, we should accordingly have been in possession of the whole of this important document. Unfortunately, for reasons unknown, Augustin stops short at an early point in the Epistle; and though he tells us he had notes on the remainder, and would some day expand and publish them, this promise lay unredeemed for thirty years till the day of his death. Extracts from the same Epistle and from the Freastuy are also given by Augustin in the treatise De iVatura Boni.^ ' Called Erteng or Arzeng, i. e., according to Renaudot, an illustrated book.
2 Bohringer adopts the more horrible tradition. '^ Sein Schicksal war, dass er von den Christen, von den Magiern ver/olgt, nach inajtnig/achcin Wechsel unter Bahratn lebendig geschunden wurde''' (p. 386).
3 Eohringer characterizes it briefly in the words: "Es ist der alte heidnische Dualisiiius mit seiner Naturtheologie, der in Ma7ii s Systeme seine Ictzten Kriifte satninelt vnd unter der gleissenden Hiilte christticher Worte und Formen an den reinen Monotheismus des Chrisletithums und dessen reine Ethik sick heran-Magt."
4 Aug. c. Faustum,,\iii. 6 and 18. [See full list of Mani's writings in Kessler's art. in Herzog, R. E. — A.H.N.]
5 Lardner, however, seems to prove that Hierax was not a IManichaean, though some of his opinions approximated to this heresy. The whole subject of the Manichse*» literature is treated by Lardner {Works, iii. p. 374), with the learning of Beausobre and more than Beausobre's impartiality.
6 The De Natura Boni, written in the year 405, is necessarily very much a reproduction of what is elsewhere affirmed, that all natures are good, and created by God, who alone is immutable and incorruptible. It presents concisely the leading positions of Augus- j PREFACE TO THE ANTI-MANICH.>EAX WRITINGS. 35 Next, we have in the Optis l7nperfectitm of Angustin some extracts from a letter of Mani to Menoch, which Julian had unearthed and republished to convict Augustin of being still tainted with Manichjean sentiments. Th«se extracts give us some insight into the heresiarch's opinions regarding the corruption of nature and the evils of sexual love.
Again, we have Mani's letter to Marcel, preserved by Epiphanius, and given in full by Beausobre;' which, however, merely reiterates two of the doctrines most certainly identified with Mani, — the assertion of two principles, and the tenet that the Son of (iod was man only in appearance.
Finally, Fabricius has inserted in the fifth volume of his Bibliotkeca Grccca the fragments, such as they are, collected by Grabe.
Such is the fragmentary character of the literary remains of Mani: for fuller information regarding his opinions we must depend on Theodoret, Epiphanius, Alexander of Lycopolis, Titus of Bostra, and Augustin. Beausobre is of opinion that the Fathers derived all that they knew of Manichreus from the Acts of Archelaus.'^ This professes to be a report of a disputation held between Manes and Archelaus, bishop of Caschar in INIesopotamia. Grave doubts have been cast on the authenticity of this document, and Burton and IMilman seem inclined to consider it an imaginary dialogue, and use it on the understanding that while some of its statements are manifestly untrustworthy, a discriminating reader may gather from it some reliable material. ^ In the works of Augustin there are some other pieces which may well be reckoned among the orifTinal sources. In the reply to Faustus, which is translated in this volume, the book of Faustus ia not indeed reproduced; but there is no reason for doubting that his arguments are fairly represented, and we think there is evidence that even the original expression of them is preserved.'* Augustin had been acquainted with Faustus for many years. He first met him at Carthage in 383, and found him nothing more than a clever and agreeable talker, making no pretension to science or philosophy, and with only slender reading. 5 His cleverness is sufficiently apparent in his debate with Augustin; the objections he leads are plausible, and put with acuteness, but at the same time with a flippancy which betrays a want of earnestness and real interest in the questions. In his reply to Faustus. Augustin is very much on the defensive, and his statements are apologetic rather than systematic.^ But in an age when the ability to read was by no means commensurate with the interest taken in theological questions, written discussions were necessarily supplemented by public disputations. These theological contests seem to have been a popular entertainment in North Africa; the people attending in immense crowds, while reporters took down what was said on either side for the sake of appeal as well as for the information of the absent. In tw such disputations Augustin engaged in connection with Manichaeism.^ The first was held on the 28th and 29th of August, 392, with a Manichrean priest, Fortunatus. To this encounter Augustin was invited I by a deputation of Donatists and Catholics,^ who were alike alarmed at the progress which this heresy was iking in the district of Hippo. Fortunatus at first showed some reluctance to meet so formidable an antago- ■.-t, but was prevailed upon by his own sectaries, and shows no nervousness during the debate. His incompetence, however, was manifest to the Manicha^ans themselves; and so hopeless was it to think of any further proselytizing in Hippo, that he left that city, and was too much ashamed of himself ever to return. The character of his reasoning is shifty; he evades Augustin's questions and starts fresh ones. Augustin pushes his ii-ual and fundamental objection to the Manichcean system. If God is impassable and incorruptible, how could lie be injured by the assaults of the kinirdom of darkness? In opposition to the statement of Fortunatus, that liie Almighty produces no evil, he explains that God made no nature evil, but made man free, and that voluntary lin in this controversy, and concludes with an eloquent prayer that his efforts may be blessed to the conversion of the heretics, — not the only passage which demonstrates that he wrote not for the glory of victory so much as for the deliverance of men from fatal error. ' Hisioire, i. 91.
2 Published by Zaccagni in his Collectanea Momiiiientorum Veterittn, Romse, 1698; and by Routhin his Reliquia Sacm, vol.
■, in which all the material for forming an opinion regarding it is collected.
3 Any one vvhoconsults Beausobre on this point will find that historical criticism is not of so recent an origin as some persons seem: hink. It is worth transcribing his own account of the spirit in which he means to do his work: ^'Je traiterai iiton sv.jet en Critique, -ant la Regie de S. Paul, Examinez t antes c/ioses, et 7ie rctencz gue ce qui est ban. L^Histoire en general, et l' Histoire Ecclesi-•qtie en particulier, 7i^est bien souvent qiiun vic'lange con/iis de _faux et de vrai, cntasse par des Ecrivaiiis nial instruits, i/utes on passionez. Cela convient surtout a r Histoire des Herctiqucs et des Heresies. C'est au Lecteur attenti/ et judicieujc n /aire le discernement, a I' aide d^ line critique, qui ne soit trop tiinide, ni teiiieraire. Sans le secours de cet art, on erre dans I / I listoirecomine un Pilate sur les iners. lorsqu'il n^a ni boussole, ni carte marine^' (i. 7).
4 Beausobre and Cave suppose that we have the whole of Faustus' book embodied in Augustin's review of it. Lardner is of opin-1 II that the commencement, and perhaps the greater part, of the work is given, but not the whole.
I 5 See the interesting account of Faustus in the Confessions, v. 10.
I ^ [This estimate of Faustus is somewhat too disparaging. For fuller bibliography, see Introductory Essay. — A. H. N.] I 7 His willingness to do so, and the success with which he encountered the most renowned champions of this heresy, should have i()revented Beausobre from charging hiiu with misunderstanding or misrepresenting the Manichacan doctrine. The retractation of I- i-lix tells strongly against this view of Augustin's incompetence to deal with Manicha;ism. 8 Possidius, I'ita A ug. vi.
o sin is the grand original evil. The most remarkable circumstance in the discussion is the desire of Fortunatus to direct the conversation to the conduct of tlie Manichasans, and the refusal of Augustin to make good the charges which had been made against them, or to discuss anything but the doctrine.'
Twelve years after this, a similar disputation was held between Augustin and one of the elect among the Manichceans, who had come to Hippo to propagate his religion. This man, Felix, is described by Augustin = as being ill-educated, but more adroit and subtle than Fortunatus. After a keen discussion, which occupied two days, the proceedings terminated by Felix signing a recantation of his errors in the form of an anathema ou Mani, his doctrines, and the seducing spirit that possessed him. These two disputations are valuable, as exhibiting the points of the Manichoean system to which its own adherents were accustomed to direct attention, and the arguments on which they specially relied for their support.
The works given in the accompanying volume comprehend by no means the whole of Augustin's writings against this heresy. Before his ordination he wrote five anti-Manichaean books, entitled, De Libera Arbitriu, De Gene si contra AlanichcEos^ De Moribtis Ecclesia Caiholicce, De Moribus ManichcBoruin, and De Vera Religione. These Paulinus called his anti-Manichsean Pentateuch. After his ordination he was equally diligent, publishing a little treatise in the year 391, under the title De Utilitate Credendi,^ which was immediately followed by a small work, De Duabiis Aniinabtts. In the following year the report of the Dispuiatio contra Fo}--tiinaium was published; and after this, at short intervals, there appeared the books Contra Aditnanttmi, Contra Epistolam Matiichiri qztam vocant Fundamenti^ Contra Faiistum, Disptitatio contra Felicem, De A'atura Boni, and Contra Secnndinum.
Besides these writings, which are exclusively occupied with Manichaeism. there are others in which the Manichasan doctrines are handled with more or less directness. These are the Confessions^ the 79th and 236th Letters, the Lecture on Psalm 140, Sermons i, 2, 12, 50, 153, 182, 237, the Liber de Agone Christiano, and the De Continentia.
Of these writings, Augustin himself professed a preference for the reply to the letter of Secundinus.'* It is a pleasing feature of the times, that a heretic whom he did not know even by sight should write to Augustin entreating him to abstain from writing against the Manichoeans, and reconsider his position, and ally himself with those whom he had till now fancied to be in error. His language is respectful, and illustrates the esteem in which Augustin was held by his contemporaries; though he does not scruple to insinuate that his conversion from Manichaeism was due to motives not of the highest kind. We have not given this letter and its reply, because the preference of Augustin has not been ratified by the judgment of his readers.
The present volume gives a fair sample of Augustin's controversial powers. His nine years' personal experience of the vanity of Manichoeism made him thoroughly earnest and sympathetic in his efforts to disentangle other men from its snares, and also equipped him with the knowledge requisite for this task. No doubt the Pelagian controversy was more congenial to his mind. His logical acuteness and knowledge of Scripture availed him more in combating men who fought with the same weapons, than in dealing with a system which threw around its positions the mist of Gnostic speculation, or veiled its doctrine under a grotesque mythology, or based itself on a cosmogony too fantastic for a Western mind to tolerate.5 But however Augustin may have misconceived the strange forms in which this system was presented, there is no doubt that he comprehended and demolished its fundamental principles; * that he did so as a necessary part of his own personal search for the truth; and that in doing so he gained possession, vitally and permanently of ideas and principles which subsequently entered into all he thought and wrote. In finding his way through the mazes of the obscure region into which Mani had led him, he once for all ascertained the true relation subsisting between God and His creatures, formed his opinion regarding the respective provinces of reason and faith, and the connection of the Old and New Testaments, and found the root of all evil in the created will. THE EDITOR.
Some knowledge of the Magianism of the time of Mani may be obtained from the sacred books of the Parsis, especially from the Vendidad Sade, an account of which is given by Dr. Wilson, of Bombay, in his book on the Parsi Religion. — Tr.
1 This cannot but make us cautious in receiving the statements of the tract. On the Morals 0/ the Manichtsans. There can be httle doubt that many of the Manichaeans practiced the ascetic virtues, and were recognizable by the gauntness and pallor of their looks, so that Manichasan became a by-word for any one who did not appreciate the felicity of good living. Thus Jerome says of a certain class of women, "y«'!:'« viderint pallentem aique tristein, Miseratn, J\Io>iacham,et Manichcean vocant '' {De Ctistod. Virg. Ep. t8). Lardner throws light on the practices of the Manichaeans, and effectually disposes of some of the calumnies uttered regarding them. Pusey's appendix to his translation of the Confessions may also be referred to with advantage.
2 Retract, ii. 8. 3 Epist. A ugust. xxv, 4 Retract, ii. 10: " quod, mea senteiitia, omnibus guas adversus illavi pestem scribere potui, facile prceponoy The reason of this preference is explained by Bindemann, Der heilige Augustinus, iii. 168.
5 '■'■Wo Entwickelungen, dialektische Begriffe sein solltejt, stellt sich ein Bitd, ein Mythus e/«."— Bohringer, p. 390.
6 Some have thought Augustin more successful here than elsewhere. Cassiodorus may have thought so when he said; " diligentius atque vivacius adversus eos quam contra hxreses alias disseruit" {Instit. i. quoted by Lardner).
ST. AUGUSTIN ON THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH [DE MORIBUS ECCLESI^ CATHOLIC^E].
A.D. 388.
BOMBAY CONTENTS OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
Chap. I. — How the pretensions of the Manichzeans are to be refuted. Two Manichsean falsehoods...41 Chap. II. — He begins with arguments, in compliance with the mistaken method of the Manichaans.. 42 Chap. III. — Happiness is in the enjoyment of man's chief good. Two conditions of the chief good: ist, nothing is better than it; 2d, it cannot be lost against the will 42 Chap. V. — Man's chief good is not the chief good of the body only, but the chief good of the soul...43 Chap. VI. — Virtue gives perfection to the soul; the soul obtains virtue by following God; following God is the happy life 43 CriAP. VII. — The knowledge of God to be obtained from the Scripture. The plan and principal mysteries of the divine scheme of redemption 44 Thap. VIII. — God is the chief good, whom we are to seek after with supreme affection 44 J HAP. IX. — Harmony of the Old and New Testament on the precepts of charity 45 Jhap. X. — What the church teaches about God. The two gods of the Manichseans 46 Jhap. XI. — God is the one object of love; therefore He is man's chief good. Nothing is better than God. God cannot be lost against our will 46 2h\?. XII.^\Ve are united to God by love, in subjection to Him 47 ^HAP. XIII. — We are joined inseparably to God by Christ and His Spirit 48 Chap. XIV. — We cleave to the Trinity, our chief good, by love 48 'hap. XV. — The Christian definition of the four virtues 48 HAP. XVI. — Harmony of the Old and New Testaments 49 HAP. XVII. — Appeal to the Manichceans, calling oil them to repent 50 Chap. XVIII. — Only in the Catholic church is perfect truth established on the harmony of both Testaments. 50 HAP. XIX. — Description of the duties of temperance, according to the sacred Scriptures 51 Chap. XX. — We are required to despise all sensible things, and to love God alone 52 HAP. XXI. — Popular renown and inquisitiveness are condemned in the sacred Scriptures 52 "hap. XXII. — Fortitude comes from the love of God 53 hap. XXIII. — Scripture precepts and examples of fortitude 53 Hap. XXIV. — Of justice and prudence 54 it.^p. XXV.— Four moral duties regarding the love of God, of which love the reward is eternal life and the knowledge of the truth 54 hap. XXVI. — Love of ourselves and of our neighbor 55 ^KAP. XXVII. — On doing good to the body of our neighbor 55 Chap. XXVIII. — On doing good to the soul of our neighbor. Two parts of discipline, restraint and instruction. Through good conduct we arrive at the knowledge of the truth 56 40 CONTENTS OF- THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
Chap. XXIX. — Of the authority of the Scriptures 57 Chap. XXX. — The Church apostrophized as teacher of all wisdom. Doctrine of the Catholic Church.. 58 Chap. XXXI. — The life of the Anachoretes and Coenobites set against the continence of the ^lanichceans. 59 Chap. XXXII. — Praise of the clergy 60 Chap. XXXIII. — Another kind of men living together in cities. Fasts of three days 60 Chap. XXXIV. — The Church is not to be blamed for the conduct of bad Christians, worshippers of tombs and pictures...,„ 61 Chap. XXXV. — Marriage and property allowed to be baptized by the apostles, o,,,„...62 OF THE MORALS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH/ [DE MORIBUS ECCLESI/E CATHOLICyE]. A.D. 388.
IT IS LAID DOWN AT THE OUTSET THAT THE CUSTOMS OF THE HOLY LIFE OF THE CHURCH SHOULD BE REFERRED TO THE CHIEF GOOD OF MAN, THAT IS, GOD. WE MUST SEEK AFTER GOD WITH SUPREME AFFECTION; AND THIS DOCTRINE IS SUPPORTED IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BY THE AUTHORITY OF BOTH TESTAMENTS. THE FOUR VIRTUES GET THEIR NAMES FROM DIFFERENT FORMS OF THIS LOVE. THEN FOLLOW THE DUTIES OF LOVE TO OUR NEIGH-BOR. IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WE FIND EXAMPLES OF CONTINENCE AND OF TRUE CHRISTIAN CONDUCT.
CHAP. I.- -HOW THE PRETENSIONS OF THE MAN- ICH^ANS ARE TO BE REFUTED. TWO MANI- CHvEAN FALSEHOODS.
I. Enough, probably, has been done in our other books "" in the way of answering the ignorant and profane attacks which the Manichjeans make on the law, which is called the Old Testament, in a spirit of vainglorious boasting, and with the approval of the uninstructed. Here, too, I may shortly touch upon the sul)ject. For every one with average intelligence can easily see that the explanation of the Scriptures should be sought for from those who are the professed teachers of the Scriptures; and that it may happen, and indeed always happens, that many things seem absurd to the ignorant, which, when they are explained by the learned, appear all the more excellent, and are received in the explanation with the greater pleasure on account ' Written in the year 388. In his Retractations (i. 7) Augfustin says- " When I was at Rome after my baptism, and could not bear in silence the vaunting of the Manichajans about their pretended and misleading continence or abstinence, in which, to deceive the inexperienced, they claim superiority over true Christians, to whom they are not to be compared, I wrote two books, one on the morals of the Catholic Church, the other on the morals of the ^^anicha:ans."
- [This is commonly supposed to have been the first work of any importance written by the Author atrainst Manicha;ism. What he here refers to it is not easy to conjecture. — A. H. N.J