--- title: "City of God · De civitate Dei" author: "Augustine" translator: "Marcus Dods" languages: [la, en] shelf: "Church Fathers" section: 45 of 116 url: https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/45/ cite: "Augustine, tr. Marcus Dods, City of God · De civitate Dei, section 45. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/45/" --- # City of God · De civitate Dei *Augustine, tr. Marcus Dods* “Two loves have made two cities.” Augustine’s Latin, in Hoffmann’s critical text, beside Dods’s English, chapter by chapter. > Latin: Augustine, De civitate Dei, ed. Emanuel Hoffmann, CSEL 40 (Vienna: Tempsky, 1899–1900), as encoded by the Open Greek and Latin project, University of Leipzig (stoa0040.stoa003.opp-lat3, CC BY-SA 4.0); apparatus omitted. > English: Marcus Dods, The City of God (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, first series, vol. 2, 1887). > Chapters are matched one to one except where the two editions divide them differently; within a chapter the Latin sentences are shared out over the English paragraphs by position. ## 45. Whether the Intercession of the Demons Can Secure for Men the Friendship of the Celestial Gods. Source: https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/45/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/45/#p-N [¶0] Chapter 9.—Whether the Intercession of the Demons Can Secure for Men the Friendship of the Celestial Gods. > Latin: Caput IX. An amicitia caelestium deorum per intercessionem daemonum possit homini prouideri. [¶1] How, then, can men hope for a favorable introduction to the friendship of the gods by such mediators as these, who are, like men, defective in that which is the better part of every living creature, viz., the soul, and who resemble the gods only in the body, which is the inferior part? For a living creature or animal consists of soul and body, and of these two parts the soul is undoubtedly the better; even though vicious and weak, it is obviously better than even the soundest and strongest body, for the greater excellence of its nature is not reduced to the level of the body even by the pollution of vice, as gold, even when tarnished, is more precious than the purest silver or lead. And yet these mediators, by whose interposition things human and divine are to be harmonized, have an eternal body in common with the gods, and a vicious soul in common with men,—as if the religion by which these demons are to unite gods and men were a bodily, and not a spiritual matter. What wickedness, then, or punishment has suspended these false and deceitful mediators, as it were head downwards, so that their inferior part, their body, is linked to the gods above, and their superior part, the soul, bound to men beneath; united to the celestial gods by the part that serves, and miserable, together with the inhabitants of earth, by the part that rules? For the body is the servant, as Sallust says: “We use the soul to rule, the body to obey;” adding, “the one we have in common with the gods, the other with the brutes.” For he was here speaking of men; and they have, like the brutes, a mortal body. These demons, whom our philosophic friends have provided for us as mediators with the gods, may indeed say of the soul and body, the one we have in common with the gods, the other with men; but, as I said, they are as it were suspended and bound head downwards, having the slave, the body, in common with the gods, the master, the soul, in common with miserable men,—their inferior part exalted, their superior part depressed. And therefore, if any one supposes that, because they are not subject, like terrestrial animals, to the separation of soul and body by death, they therefore resemble the gods in their eternity, their body must not be considered a chariot of an eternal triumph, but rather the chain of an eternal punishment. > Latin: Quales igitur mediatores sunt inter homines et deos, per quos ad deorum amicitias homines ambiant, qui hoc cum hominibus habent deterius, quod est in animante melius, id est animum; hoc autem habent cum dis melius, quod est in animante deterius, id est corpus? Cum enim animans, id est animal, ex anima constet et corpore, quorum duorum anima est utique corpore melior, etsi uitiosa et infirma, melior certe corpore etiam sanissimo adque firmissimo, quoniam natura eius excellentior nec labe uitiorum postponitur corpori, sicut aurum etiam sordidum argento seu plumbo, licet purissimo, carius aestimatur: ista mediatores deorum et hominum, per quos interpositos diuinis humana iunguntur, cum dis habent corpus aeternum, uitiosum autem cum hominibus animum: quasi religio, qua uolunt dis homines per daemones iungi, in corpore sit, non in animo constituta. Quaenam tandem istos mediatores falsos adque fallaces quasi capite deorsum nequitia uel poena suspendit, ut inferiorem animalis partem, id est corpus, cum superioribus, superiorem uero, id est animum, cum inferioribus habeant, et cum dis caelestibus in parte seruiente coniuncti, cum hominibus autem terrestribus in parte dominante sint miseri? Corpus quippe seruum est, sicut etiam Sallustius ait: ‘Animi imperio, corporis seruitio magis utimur.’ Adiunxit autem ille: ‘Alterum nobis cum dis, alterum cum beluis commune est,’ quoniam de hominibus loquebatur, quibus sicut beluis mortale corpus est. Isti autem, quos inter nos et deos mediatores nobis philosophi prouiderunt, possunt quidem dicere de animo et corpore: alterum nobis cum dis, alterum cum hominibus commune est; sed, sicut dixi, tamquam in peruersum ligati adque suspensi, seruum corpus cum dis beatis. dominum animum cum hominibus miseris habentes, parte inferiore exaltati, superiore deiecti. Unde etiamsi quisquam propter hoc eos putauerit aeternitatem habere cum dis, quia nulla morte, sicut animalium terrestrium, animi eorum soluuntur a corpore: nec sic existimandum est eorum corpus tamquam honoratorum aeternum uehiculum, sed aeternum uinculum damnatorum. ### That, According to Plotinus, Men, Whose Body is Mortal, are Less Wretched Than Demons, Whose Body is Eternal. [¶3] Chapter 10.—That, According to Plotinus, Men, Whose Body is Mortal, are Less Wretched Than Demons, Whose Body is Eternal. > Latin: Caput X. Quod secundum Plotini sententiam minus miseri sint homines in corpore mortali quam daemones in aeterno. [¶4] Plotinus, whose memory is quite recent, enjoys the reputation of having understood Plato better than any other of his disciples. In speaking of human souls, he says, “The Father in compassion made their bonds mortal;” that is to say, he considered it due to the Father’s mercy that men, having a mortal body, should not be forever confined in the misery of this life. But of this mercy the demons have been judged unworthy, and they have received, in conjunction with a soul subject to passions, a body not mortal like man’s, but eternal. For they should have been happier than men if they had, like men, had a mortal body, and, like the gods, a blessed soul. And they should have been equal to men, if in conjunction with a miserable soul they had at least received, like men, a mortal body, so that death might have freed them from trouble, if, at least, they should have attained some degree of piety. But, as it is, they are not only no happier than men, having, like them, a miserable soul, they are also more wretched, being eternally bound to the body; for he does not leave us to infer that by some progress in wisdom and piety they can become gods, but expressly says that they are demons forever. > Latin: Plotinus certe nostrae memoriae uicinis temporibus Platonem ceteris excellentius intellexisse laudatur. Is cum de humanis animis ageret: Tater, inquit, misericors mortalia illis uincla faciebat.’ Ita hoc ipsum, quod mortales sunt homines corpore, ad misericordiam Dei patris pertinere arbitratus est, ne semper huius uitae miseria tenerentur. Hac misericordia indigna iudicata est iniquitas daemonum, quae in animi passiui miseria non mortale sicut homines, sed aeternum corpus accepit. Essent quippe feliciores hominibus, si mortale cum eis haberent corpus et cum dis animum beatum. Essent autem pares hominibus, si cum animo misero corpus saltem mortale cum eis habere meruissent; si tamen adquirerent aliquid pietatis, ut ab aerumnis uel in morte requiescerent. Nunc uero non solum feliciores hominibus non sunt animo misero, sed etiam miseriores sunt perpetuo corporis uinculo. Non enim aliqua pietatis et sapientiae disciplina proficientes intellegi uoluit ex daemonibus fieri deos, cum apertissime dixerit daemones aeternos. ### Of the Opinion of the Platonists, that the Souls of Men Become Demons When Disembodied. [¶6] Chapter 11.—Of the Opinion of the Platonists, that the Souls of Men Become Demons When Disembodied. > Latin: Caput XI. De opinione Platonicorum, qua putant animas hominum daemones esse post corpora. [¶7] He says, indeed, that the souls of men are demons, and that men become Lares if they are good, Lemures or Larvæ if they are bad, and Manes if it is uncertain whether they de serve well or ill. Who does not see at a glance that this is a mere whirlpool sucking men to moral destruction? For, however wicked men have been, if they suppose they shall become Larvæ or divine Manes, they will become the worse the more love they have for inflicting injury; for, as the Larvæ are hurtful demons made out of wicked men, these men must suppose that after death they will be invoked with sacrifices and divine honors that they may inflict injuries. But this question we must not pursue. He also states that the blessed are called in Greek εὐδαίμονες, because they are good souls, that is to say, good demons, confirming his opinion that the souls of men are demons. > Latin: Dicit quidem et animas hominum daemones esse et ex hominibus fieri lares, si boni meriti sunt; lemures, si mali, seu laruas; manes autem deos dici, si incertum est bonorum eos seu malorum esse meritorum. In qua opinione quantam uoraginem aperiant sectandis perditis moribus, quis non uideat, si uel paululum adtendat? Quando quidem quamlibet nequam homines fuerint, uel laruas se fieri dum opinantur, uel dum manes deos, tanto peiores fiunt, quanto sunt nocendi cupidiores, ut etiam quibusdam sacrificiis tamquam diuinis honoribus post mortem se inuitari opinentur, ut noceant. Laruas quippe dicit esse noxios daemones ex hominibus factos. Sed hinc alia quaestio est. Inde autem perhibet appellari Graece beatos εὐδαίμονας, quod boni sint animi, hoc est boni daemones, animos quoque hominum daemones esse confirmans. ### Of the Three Opposite Qualities by Which the Platonists Distinguish Between the Nature of Men and that of Demons. [¶9] Chapter 12.—Of the Three Opposite Qualities by Which the Platonists Distinguish Between the Nature of Men and that of Demons. > Latin: Caput XII. De ternis contrariis, quibus secundum Platonicos daemonum hominumque natura distinguitur. [¶10] But at present we are speaking of those beings whom he described as being properly intermediate between gods and men, in nature animals, in mind rational, in soul subject to passion, in body aerial, in duration eternal. When he had distinguished the gods, whom he placed in the highest heaven, from men, whom he placed on earth, not only by position but also by the unequal dignity of their natures, he concluded in these words: “You have here two kinds of animals: the gods, widely distinguished from men by sublimity of abode, perpetuity of life, perfection of nature; for their habitations are separated by so wide an interval that there can be no intimate communication between them, and while the vitality of the one is eternal and indefeasible, that of the others is fading and precarious, and while the spirits of the gods are exalted in bliss, those of men are sunk in miseries.” Here I find three opposite qualities ascribed to the extremes of being, the highest and lowest. For, after mentioning the three qualities for which we are to admire the gods, he repeated, though in other words, the same three as a foil to the defects of man. The three qualities are, “sublimity of abode, perpetuity of life, perfection of nature.” These he again mentioned so as to bring out their contrasts in man’s condition. As he had mentioned “sublimity of abode,” he says, “Their habitations are separated by so wide an interval;” as he had mentioned “perpetuity of life,” he says, that “while divine life is eternal and indefeasible, human life is fading and precarious;” and as he had mentioned “perfection of nature,” he says, that “while the spirits of the gods are exalted in bliss, those of men are sunk in miseries.” These three things, then, he predicates of the gods, exaltation, eternity, blessedness; and of man he predicates the opposite, lowliness of habitation, mortality, misery. > Latin: Sed nunc de his agimus, quos in natura propria descripsit inter deos et homines genere animalia, mente rationalia, animo passiua, corpore aeria, tempore aeterna. Nempe cum prius deos in sublimi caelo, homines autem in terra infima disiunctos locis et naturae dignitate secerneret, ita conclusit: ‘Habetis. inquit, interim bina animalia: deos ab hominibus plurimum differentes loci sublimitate, uitae perpetuitate, naturae perfectione, nullo inter se propinquo communicatu, cum et habitacula summa ab infimis tanta intercapedo fastigii dispescat, et uiuacitas illic aeterna et indefecta sit, hic caduca et subsiciua, et ingenia illa ad beatitudinem sublimata, haec ad miserias infimata..’ Hic terna uideo commemorata contraria de duabus naturae partibus ultimis, id est summis adque infimis. Nam tria quae proposuit de dis laudabilia, eadem repetiuit, aliis quidem uerbis, ut eis aduersa alia tria ex hominibus redderet. Tria deorum haec sunt: loci sublimitas, uitae perpetuitas. perfectio naturae. Haec aliis uerbis ita repetiuit, ut eis tria contraria hnmanae condicionis obponeret. ‘Cum et habitacula, inquit, summa ab infimis tanta intercapedo fastigii dispescat’, quia dixerat loci sublimitatem; et uiuacitas, inquit, illic aeterna et indefecta sit, hic caduca et subsiciua,) quia dixerat uitae perpetuitatem; (et ingenia illa, inquit, ad beatitudinem sublimata, haec ad miserias infimata’, quia dixerat naturae perfectionem. Tria igitur ab eo posita sunt deorum, id est locus sublimis, aeternitas, beatitudo; et his contraria tria hominum, id est locus infimus, mortalitas, miseria. ### How the Demons Can Mediate Between Gods and Men If They Have Nothing in Common with Both, Being Neither Blessed Like the Gods, Nor Miserable Like Men. [¶12] Chapter 13.—How the Demons Can Mediate Between Gods and Men If They Have Nothing in Common with Both, Being Neither Blessed Like the Gods, Nor Miserable Like Men. > Latin: Caput XIII. Quo modo daemones, si nec cum dis beati nec cum hominibus sunt miseri, inter utramque partem sine utriusque communione sint medii. [¶13] If, now, we endeavor to find between these opposites the mean occupied by the demons, there can be no question as to their local position; for, between the highest and lowest place, there is a place which is rightly considered and called the middle place. The other two qualities remain, and to them we must give greater care, that we may see whether they are altogether foreign to the demons, or how they are so bestowed upon them without infringing upon their mediate position. We may dismiss the idea that they are foreign to them. For we cannot say that the demons, being rational animals, are neither blessed nor wretched, as we say of the beasts and plants, which are void of feeling and reason, or as we say of the middle place, that it is neither the highest nor the lowest. The demons, being rational, must be either miserable or blessed. And, in like manner, we cannot say that they are neither mortal nor immortal; for all living things either live eternally or end life in death. Our author, besides, stated that the demons are eternal. What remains for us to suppose, then, but that these mediate beings are assimilated to the gods in one of the two remaining qualities, and to men in the other? For if they received both from above, or both from beneath, they should no longer be mediate, but either rise to the gods above, or sink to men beneath. Therefore, as it has been demonstrated that they must possess these two qualities, they will hold their middle place if they receive one from each party. Consequently, as they cannot receive their eternity from beneath, because it is not there to receive, they must get it from above; and accordingly they have no choice but to complete their mediate position by accepting misery from men. > Latin: Inter haec terna deorum et hominum quoniam daemones medios posuit, de’loco nulla est controuersia; inter sublimem quippe et infimum medius locus aptissime habetur et dicitur. Cetera bina restant, quibus cura adtentior adhibenda est, quem ad modum uel aliena esse a daemonibus ostendantur, uel si eis distribuantur, ut medietas uidetur exposcere. Sed ab eis aliena esse non possunt. Non enim sicut dicimus locum medium nec summum esse nec infimum, ita daemones, cum sint animalia rationalia, nec beatos esse nec miseros, sicuti sunt arbusta uel pecora, quae sunt sensus uel rationis expertia, recte possumus dicere. Quorum ergo ratio mentibus inest, aut miseros esse aut beatos necesse est. Item non possumus recte dicere nec mortales esse daemones nec aeternos. Omnia namque uiuentia aut in aeternum uiuunt, aut finiunt morte quod uiuunt. Iam uero iste tempore aeternos daemones dixit. Quid igitur restat, nisi ut hi medii de duobus summis unum habeant et de duobus infimis alterum? Nam si utraque de imis habebunt aut utraque de summis, medii non erunt, sed in alterutram partem uel resiliunt uel recumbunt. Quia ergo his binis, sicut demonstratum est, carere utrisque non possunt, acceptis ex utraque parte singulis mediabuntur. Ac per hoc quia de infimis habere non possunt aeternitatem, quae ibi non est, unum hoc de summis habent; et ideo non est alterum ad conplendam medietatem suam, quod de infimis habeant, nisi miseriam. [¶14] According to the Platonists, then, the gods, who occupy the highest place, enjoy eternal blessedness, or blessed eternity; men, who occupy the lowest, a mortal misery, or a miserable mortality; and the demons, who occupy the mean, a miserable eternity, or an eternal misery. As to those five things which Apu leius included in his definition of demons, he did not show, as he promised, that the demons are mediate. For three of them, that their nature is animal, their mind rational, their soul subject to passions, he said that they have in common with men; one thing, their eternity, in common with the gods; and one proper to themselves, their aerial body. How, then, are they intermediate, when they have three things in common with the lowest, and only one in common with the highest? Who does not see that the intermediate position is abandoned in proportion as they tend to, and are depressed towards, the lowest extreme? But perhaps we are to accept them as intermediate because of their one property of an aerial body, as the two extremes have each their proper body, the gods an ethereal, men a terrestrial body, and because two of the qualities they possess in common with man they possess also in common with the gods, namely, their animal nature and rational mind. For Apuleius himself, in speaking of gods and men, said, “You have two animal natures.” And Platonists are wont to ascribe a rational mind to the gods. Two qualities remain, their liability to passion, and their eternity,—the first of which they have in common with men, the second with the gods; so that they are neither wafted to the highest nor depressed to the lowest extreme, but perfectly poised in their intermediate position. But then, this is the very circumstance which constitutes the eternal misery, or miserable eternity, of the demons. For he who says that their soul is subject to passions would also have said that they are miserable, had he not blushed for their worshippers. Moreover, as the world is governed, not by fortuitous haphazard, but, as the Platonists themselves avow, by the providence of the supreme God, the misery of the demons would not be eternal unless their wickedness were great. > Latin: Est itaque secundum Platonicos sublimium deorum uel beata aeternitas uel aeterna beatitudo; hominum uero infimorum uel miseria mortalis uel mortalitas misera; daemonum autem mediorum uel misera aeternitas uel aeterna miseria. Nam et quinque illis, quae in definitione daemonum posuit, non eos medios, sicut promittebat, ostendit;. quoniam tria dixit eos habere nobiscum, quod genere animalia, quod mente rationalia, quod animo passiua sunt; cum dis autem unum, quod tempore aeterna; et unum proprium, quod corpore aeria. Quo modo ergo medii, quando unum habent cum summis, tria cum infimis? Quis non uideat relicta medietate quantum inclinentur et deprimantur ad infima? Sed plane etiam ibi medii possunt ita inueniri, ut unum habeant proprium, quod est corpus aerium, sicut et illi de summis adque infimis singula propria, di corpus aetherium hominesque terrenum; duo uero communia sint omnibus, quod genere sunt animalia et mente rationalia. Nam et ipse cum de dis et hominibus loqueretur: ‘Habetis, inquit, bina animalia’, et non solent isti deos nisi rationales mente perhibere. Duo sunt residua, quod sunt animo passiua et tempore aeterna; quorum habent unum cum infimis, cum summis alterum, ut proportionali ratione librata medietas neque sustollatur in summa, neque in infima deprimatur. Ipsa est autem illa daemonum misera aeternitas uel aeterna miseria. Qui enim ait animo passiua’, etiam […] dixisset, nisi eorum cultoribus erubuisset. Porro quia prouidentia summi Dei, sicut etiam ipsi fatentur, non fortuita temeritate regitur mundus, numquam esset istorum aeterna miseria, nisi esset magna malitia. Si igitur beati recte dicuntur eudaemones, non sunt eudaemones daemones, quos inter homines et deos isti in medio locauerunt. [¶15] If, then, the blessed are rightly styled eudemons, the demons intermediate between gods and men are not eudemons. What, then, is the local position of those good demons, who, above men but beneath the gods, afford assistance to the former, minister to the latter? For if they are good and eternal, they are doubtless blessed. But eternal blessedness destroys their intermediate character, giving them a close resemblance to the gods, and widely separating them from men. And therefore the Platonists will in vain strive to show how the good demons, if they are both immortal and blessed, can justly be said to hold a middle place between the gods, who are immortal and blessed, and men, who are mortal and miserable. For if they have both immortality and blessedness in common with the gods, and neither of these in common with men, who are both miserable and mortal, are they not rather remote from men and united with the gods, than intermediate between them. They would be intermediate if they held one of their qualities in common with the one party, and the other with the other, as man is a kind of mean between angels and beasts,—the beast being an irrational and mortal animal, the angel a rational and immortal one, while man, inferior to the angel and superior to the beast, and having in common with the one mortality, and with the other reason, is a rational and mortal animal. So, when we seek for an intermediate between the blessed immortals and miserable mortals, we should find a being which is either mortal and blessed, or immortal and miserable. > Latin: Quis ergo est locus bonorum daemonum, qui supra homines, infra deos istis praebeant adiutorium, illis ministerium? Si enim boni aeternique sunt, profecto et beati sunt. Aeterna autem beatitudo medios eos esse non sinit, quia multum cum dis conparat multumque ab hominibus separat. Unde frustra isti conabuntur ostendere, quo modo daemones boni, si et inmortales sunt et beati, recte medii constituantur inter deos inmortales ac beatos et homines mortales ac miseros. Cum enim utrumque habeant cum dis, et beatitudinem scilicet et inmortalitatem, nihil autem horum cum hominibus et miseris et mortalibus: quo modo non potius remoti sunt ab hominibus disque coniuncti, quam inter utrosque medii constituti? Tunc enim medii essent, si haberent et ipsi duo quaedam sua, non cum binis alterutrorum, sed cum singulis utrorumque communia; sicut homo medium quiddam est, sed inter pecora et angelos, ut, quia pecus est animal inrationale adque mortale, angelus autem rationale et inmortale, medius homo est, sed inferior angelis, superior pecoribus, habens cum pecoribus mortalitatem, rationem cum angelis, animal rationale mortale. Ita ergo cum quaerimus medium inter beatos inmortales miserosque mortales, hoc inuenire debemus, quod aut mortale sit beatum, aut inmortale sit miserum. ### Whether Men, Though Mortal, Can Enjoy True Blessedness. [¶17] Chapter 14.—Whether Men, Though Mortal, Can Enjoy True Blessedness. > Latin: Caput XIV. An homines, cum sint mortales, possint uera beatitudine esse felices. [¶18] It is a great question among men, whether man can be mortal and blessed. Some, taking the humbler view of his condition, have denied that he is capable of blessedness so long as he continues in this mortal life; others, again, have spurned this idea, and have been bold enough to maintain that, even though mortal, men may be blessed by attaining wisdom. But if this be the case, why are not these wise men constituted mediators between miserable mortals and the blessed immortals, since they have blessedness in common with the latter, and mortality in common with the former? Certainly, if they are blessed, they envy no one (for what more miserable than envy?), but seek with all their might to help miserable mortals on to blessedness, so that after death they may become immortal, and be associated with the blessed and immortal angels. > Latin: Utrum et beatus et mortalis homo esse possit, magna est inter homines quaestio. Quidam enim condicionem suam humilius inspexerunt negaueruntque hominem capacem esse posse beatitudinis, quamdiu mortaliter uiuit. Quidam uero extulerunt se et ausi sunt dicere sapientiae compotes beatos esse posse mortales. Quod si ita est, quur non ipsi potius medii constituuntur inter mortales miseros et inmortales beatos, beatitudinem habentes cum inmortalibus beatis; mortalitatem cum mortalibus miseris? Profecto enim, si beati sunt, inuident nemini (nam quid miserius inuidentia?) et ideo mortalibus miseris, quantum possunt, ad consequendam beatitudinem consulunt, ut etiam inmortales ualeant esse post mortem et angelis inmortalibus beatisque coniungi. ### Of the Man Christ Jesus, the Mediator Between God and Men. [¶20] Chapter 15.—Of the Man Christ Jesus, the Mediator Between God and Men. > Latin: Caput XV. De mediatore Dei et hominum, homine Christo lesu. [¶21] But if, as is much more probable and credible, it must needs be that all men, so long as they are mortal, are also miserable, we must seek an intermediate who is not only man, but also God, that, by the interposition of His blessed mortality, He may bring men out of their mortal misery to a blessed immortality. In this intermediate two things are requisite, that He become mortal, and that He do not continue mortal. He did become mortal, not rendering the divinity of the Word infirm, but assuming the infirmity of flesh. Neither did He continue mortal in the flesh, but raised it from the dead; for it is the very fruit of His mediation that those, for the sake of whose redemption He became the Mediator, should not abide eternally in bodily death. Wherefore it became the Mediator between us and God to have both a transient mortality and a permanent blessedness, that by that which is transient He might be assimilated to mortals, and might translate them from mortality to that which is permanent. Good angels, therefore, cannot mediate between miserable mortals and blessed immortals, for they themselves also are both blessed and immortal; but evil angels can mediate, because they are immortal like the one party, miserable like the other. To these is opposed the good Mediator, who, in opposition to their immortality and misery, has chosen to be mortal for a time, and has been able to continue blessed in eternity. It is thus He has destroyed, by the humility of His death and the benignity of His blessedness, those proud immortals and hurtful wretches, and has prevented them from seducing to misery by their boast of immortality those men whose hearts He has cleansed by faith, and whom He has thus freed from their impure dominion. > Latin: Si autem, quod multo credibilius et probabilius disputatur. omnes homines, quamdiu mortales sunt, etiam miseri sint necesse est, quaerendus est medius, qui non solum homo. uerum etiam deus sit, ut homines ex mortali miseria ad beatam inmortalitatem huius medii beata mortalitas interueniendo perducat; quem neque non fieri mortalem oportebat. neque permanere mortalem. Mortalis quippe factus est non infirmata Verbi diuinitate, sed carnis infirmitate suscepta; non autem permansit in ipsa carne mortalis, quam resuscitauit a mortuis; quoniam ipse est fructus mediationis eius, ut nec ipsi, propter quos liberandos mediator effectus est, in perpetua uel carnis morte remanerent. Proinde mediatorem inter nos et Deum et mortalitatem habere oportuit transeuntem et beatitudinem permanentem, ut per id, quod transit, congrueret morituris, et ad id, quod permanet, transferret ex mortuis. Boni igitur angeli inter miseros mortales et beatos inmortales medii esse non possunt, quia ipsi quoque et beati et inmortales sunt; possunt autem medii esse angeli mali, quia inmortales sunt cum illis, miseri cum istis. His contrarius est mediator bonus, qui aduersus eorum inmortalitatem et miseriam et mortalis esse ad tempus uoluit, et beatus in aeternitate persistere potuit; ac sic eos et inmortales superbos et miseros noxios, ne inmortalitatis iactantia seducerent ad miseriam, et suae mortis humilitate et suae beatitudinis benignitate destruxit in eis, quorum corda per suam fidem mundans ab illorum inmundissima dominatione liberauit. [¶22] Man, then, mortal and miserable, and far removed from the immortal and the blessed, what medium shall he choose by which he may be united to immortality and blessedness? The immortality of the demons, which might have some charm for man, is miserable; the mortality of Christ, which might offend man, exists no longer. In the one there is the fear of an eternal misery; in the other, death, which could not be eternal, can no longer be feared, and blessedness, which is eternal, must be loved. For the immortal and miserable mediator interposes himself to prevent us from passing to a blessed immortality, because that which hinders such a passage, namely, misery, continues in him; but the mortal and blessed Mediator interposed Himself, in order that, having passed through mortality, He might of mortals make immortals (showing His power to do this in His own resurrection), and from being miserable to raise them to the blessed company from the number of whom He had Himself never departed. There is, then, a wicked mediator, who separates friends, and a good Mediator, who reconciles enemies. And those who separate are numerous, because the multitude of the blessed are blessed only by their participation in the one God; of which participation the evil angels being deprived, they are wretched, and interpose to hinder rather than to help to this blessedness, and by their very number prevent us from reaching that one beatific good, to obtain which we need not many but one Mediator, the uncreated Word of God, by whom all things were made, and in partaking of whom we are blessed. I do not say that He is Mediator because He is the Word, for as the Word He is supremely blessed and supremely immortal, and therefore far from miserable mortals; but He is Mediator as He is man, for by His humanity He shows us that, in order to obtain that blessed and beatific good, we need not seek other mediators to lead us through the successive steps of this attainment, but that the blessed and beatific God, having Himself become a partaker of our humanity, has afforded us ready access to the participation of His divinity. For in delivering us from our mortality and misery, He does not lead us to the immortal and blessed angels, so that we should become immortal and blessed by participating in their nature, but He leads us straight to that Trinity, by participating in which the angels themselves are blessed. Therefore, when He chose to be in the form of a servant, and lower than the angels, that He might be our Mediator, He remained higher than the angels, in the form of God,—Himself at once the way of life on earth and life itself in heaven. > Latin: Homo itaque mortalis et miser longe seiunctus ab inmortalibus et beatis quid eligat medium, per quod inmortalitati et beatitudini copuletur? Quod possit delectare in daemonum in mortalitate, miserum est; quod posset offendere in Christi mortalitate, iam non est. Ibi ergo cauenda est miseria sempiterna; hic mors timenda non est, quae non esse potuit sempiterna, et beatitudo amanda est sempiterna. Ad hoc se quippe interponit medius inmortalis et miser, ut ad inmortalitatem beatam transire non sinat, quoniam persistit quod inpedit, id est ipsa miseria; ad hoc se autem interposuit mortalis et beatus, ut mortalitate transacta et ex mortuis faceret inmortales, quod in se resurgendo monstrauit, et ex miseris beatos, unde numquam ipse discessit. Alius est ergo medius malus, qui separat amicos; alius bonus, qui reconciliat inimicos. Et ideo multi sunt medii separatores, quia multitudo. quae beata est, unius Dei participatione fit beata; cuius participationis priuatione misera multitudo malorum angelorum. quae se obponit potius ad inpedimentum, quam interponit ad beatitudinis adiutorium, etiam ipsa multitudine obstrepit quodam modo, ne possit ad illud unum beatificum perueniri, ad quod ut perduceremur, non multis, sed uno mediatore opus erat, et hoc eo ipso, cuius participatione simus beati, hoc est Verbo Dei non facto, per quod facta sunt omnia. Nec tamen ob hoc mediator est, quia Verbum; maxime quippe inmortale et maxime beatum Verbum longe est a mortalibus miseris; sed mediator, per quod homo, eo ipso utique ostendens ad illud non solum beatum, uerum etiam beatificum bonum non oportere quaeri alios mediatores, per quos arbitremur nobis peruentionis gradus esse moliendos, quia beatus et beatificus Deus factus particeps humanitatis nostrae conpendium praebuit participandae diuinitatis suae. Neque enim nos a mortalitate et miseria liberans ad angelos inmortales beatosque ita perducit, ut eorum participatione etiam nos inmortales et beati simus; sed ad illam Trinitatem, cuius et angeli participatione beati sunt. Ideo quando in forma serui. ut mediator esset, infra angelos esse uoluit, in forma Dei supra angelos mansit; idem in inferioribus uia uitae, qui in superioribus uita.