That the Bodies of the Saints Shall After the Resurrection Be Spiritual, and Yet Flesh Shall Not Be Changed into Spirit.

Chapter 22.—That the Bodies of the Saints Shall After the Resurrection Be Spiritual, and Yet Flesh Shall Not Be Changed into Spirit.

Caput XXII. De corporibus sanctorum post resurrectionem, quae sic spiritalia erunt, ut non in spiritum caro uertatur.

The bodies of the righteous, then, such as they shall be in the resurrection, shall need neither any fruit to preserve them from dying of disease or the wasting decay of old age, nor any other physical nourishment to allay the cravings of hunger or of thirst; for they shall be invested with so sure and every way inviolable an immortality, that they shall not eat save when they choose, nor be under the necessity of eating, while they enjoy the power of doing so. For so also was it with the angels who presented themselves to the eye and touch of men, not because they could do no otherwise, but because they were able and desirous to suit themselves to men by a kind of manhood ministry. For neither are we to suppose, when men receive them as guests, that the angels eat only in appearance, though to any who did not know them to be angels they might seem to eat from the same necessity as ourselves. So these words spoken in the Book of Tobit, “You saw me eat, but you saw it but in vision;” that is, you thought I took food as you do for the sake of refreshing my body. But if in the case of the angels another opinion seems more capable of defence, certainly our faith leaves no room to doubt regarding our Lord Himself, that even after His resurrection, and when now in spiritual but yet real flesh, He ate and drank with His disciples; for not the power, but the need, of eating and drinking is taken from these bodies. And so they will be spiritual, not because they shall cease to be bodies, but because they shall subsist by the quickening spirit.

Corpora ergo iustorum, quae in resurrectione futura sunt, neque ullo ligno indigebunt, quo fiat ut nullo morbo uel senectute inueterata moriantur, neque ullis aliis corporalibus alimentis, quibus esuriendi ac sitiendi qualiscumque molestia deuitetur; quoniam certo et omni modo inuiolabili munere inmortalitatis induentur, ut non nisi uelint, possibilitate, non necessitate uescantur. Quod angeli quoque uisibiliter et tractabiliter apparentes, non quia indigebant, sed quia uolebant et poterant, ut hominibus congruerent sui ministerii quadam humanitate, fecerunt. Neque enim in phantasmate angelos edisse credendum est, quando eos homines hospitio susceperunt, quamuis utrum angeli essent ignorantibus simili nobis indigentia uesci uiderentur. Unde est quod ait angelus in libro Tobiae: Videbatis me manducare, sed uisu ueatro uidebatis; id est necessitate reficiendi corporis, sicut uos facitis, me cibum sumere putabatis. Sed si forte de angelis aliud credibilius disputari potest, certe fides Christiana de ipso Saluatore non dubitat, quod etiam post resurrectionem, iam quidem in spiritali carne, sed tamen uera, cibum ac potum cum discipulis sumsit. Non enim potestas, sed egestas edendi ac bibendi talibus corporibus auferetur. Unde et spiritalia erunt, -non quia corpora esse desistent, sed quia spiritu uiuificante subsistent.

Chapter 23.—What We are to Understand by the Animal and Spiritual Body; Or of Those Who Die in Adam, And of Those Who are Made Alive in Christ.

Caput XXIII. Quid intellegendum sit de corpore animali et de corpore spiritali, et qui moriantur in Adam, qui uero uiuificentur in Christo.

For as those bodies of ours, that have a living soul, though not as yet a quickening spirit, are called soul-informed bodies, and yet are not souls but bodies, so also those bodies are called spiritual,—yet God forbid we should therefore suppose them to be spirits and not bodies,—which, being quickened by the Spirit, have the substance, but not the unwieldiness and corruption of flesh. Man will then be not earthly but heavenly,—not because the body will not be that very body which was made of earth, but because by its heavenly endowment it will be a fit inhabitant of heaven, and this not by losing its nature, but by changing its quality. The first man, of the earth earthy, was made a living soul, not a quickening spirit,—which rank was reserved for him as the reward of obedience. And therefore his body, which required meat and drink to satisfy hunger and thirst, and which had no absolute and indestructible immortality, but by means of the tree of life warded off the necessity of dying, and was thus maintained in the flower of youth,—this body, I say, was doubtless not spiritual, but animal; and yet it would not have died but that it provoked God’s threatened vengeance by offending. And though sustenance was not denied him even outside Paradise, yet, being forbidden the tree of life, he was delivered over to the wasting of time, at least in respect of that life which, had he not sinned, he might have retained perpetually in Paradise, though only in an animal body, till such time as it became spiritual in acknowledgment of his obedience.

Nam sicut ista, quae habent animam uiuentem, nondum spiritum uiuificantem, animalia dicuntur corpora, nec tamen animae sunt, sed corpora: ita illa spiritalia uocantur corpora; absit tamen ut spiritus ea credamus futura, sed corpora carnis habitura substantiam, sed nullam tarditatem corruptionemque carnalem spiritu uiuificante passura. Tunc iam non terrenus, sed caelestis homo erit; non quia corpus, quod de terra factum est, non ipsum erit; sed quia dono caelesti iam tale erit, ut etiam caelo incolendo non amissa natura, sed mutata qualitate conueniat. Primus autem homo de terra terrenus in animam uiuentem factus est, non in spiritum uiuificantem, quod ei post oboedientiae meritum seruabatur. Ideo corpus eius, quod cibo ac potu egebat, : ne fame adficeretur ac siti, et non inmortalitate illa absoluta adque indissolubili, sed ligno uitae a mortis necessitate prohibebatur adque in iuuentutis flore tenebatur, non spiritale, sed animale fuisse non dubium est, nequaquam tamen moriturum, nisi in Dei praedicentis minantisque sententiam delinquendo conruisset et alimentis quidem etiam extra paradisum non negatis, a ligno tamen uitae prohibitus traditus esset tempori uetustatique finiendus, in ea dumtaxat uita, quam in corpore licet animali, donec spiritale oboedientiae merito fieret, posset in paradiso nisi peccasset habere perpetuam.

Wherefore, although we understand that this manifest death, which consists in the separation of soul and body, was also signified by God when He said, “In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die,” it ought not on that account to seem absurd that they were not dismissed from the body on that very day on which they took the forbidden and death-bringing fruit. For certainly on that very day their nature was altered for the worse and vitiated, and by their most just banishment from the tree of life they were involved in the necessity even of bodily death, in which necessity we are born. And therefore the apostle does not say, “The body indeed is doomed to die on account of sin,” but he says, “The body indeed is dead because of sin.” Then he adds, “But if the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His Spirit that dwelleth in you.” Then accordingly shall the body become a quickening spirit which is now a living soul; and yet the apostle calls it “dead,” because already it lies under the necessity of dying. But in Paradise it was so made a living soul, though not a quickening spirit, that it could not properly be called dead, for, save through the commission of sin, it could not come under the power of death. Now, since God by the words, “Adam, where art thou?” pointed to the death of the soul, which results when He abandons it, and since in the words, “Earth thou art, and unto earth shalt thou return,” He signified the death of the body, which results when the soul departs from it, we are led, therefore, to believe that He said nothing of the second death, wishing it to be kept hidden, and reserving it for the New Testament dispensation, in which it is most plainly revealed. And this He did in order that, first of all, it might be evident that this first death, which is common to all, was the result of that sin which in one man became common to all. But the second death is not common to all, those being excepted who were “called according to His purpose. For whom He did foreknow, He also did pre destinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren.” Those the grace of God has, by a Mediator, delivered from the second death.

Quapropter etiamsi mortem istam manifestam, qua fit animae a corpore separatio, intellegamus simul significatam in eo quod Deus dixerat: Qua die ederitis ex illo, morte moriemini: non ideo debet absurdum uideri, quia non eo prorsus die a corpore sunt soluti, quo cibum interdictum mortiferumque sumserunt. Eo quippe die mutata in deterius uitiataque natura adque a ligno uitae separatione iustissima mortis in eis etiam corporalis necessitas facta est, cum qua nos necessitate nati sumus. Propter quod apostolus non ait: Corpus quidem moriturum est propter peccatum, sed ait: Corpus quidem mortuum est. propter peccatum, spiritus autem uita est propter iustitiam. Deinde subiunxit: Si autem spiritus eius, qui suscitauit Christum a mortuis, habitat in uobis: qui suscitauit Christum a mortuis uiuificabit et mortalia corpora uestra per inhabitantem spiritum eius in uobis. Tunc ergo erit corpus in spiritum uiuificantem, quod nunc est in animam uiuentem; et tamen mortuum dicit apostolus, quia iam moriendi necessitate constrictum est. Tunc autem ita erat in, animam uiuentem, quamuis non in spiritum uiuificantem, ut tamen mortuum dici non recte posset, quia nisi perpetratione peccati necessitatem moriendi habere non posset. Cum uero Deus et dicendo: Adam, ubi es? mortem significauerit animae, quae facta est illo deserente, et dicendo: Terra es et in terram ibis mortem significauerit corporis, quae illi fit anima discedente: propterea de morte secunda nihil dixisse credendus est, quia occultam esse uoluit propter dispensationem testamenti noui, ubi secunda mors apertissime declaratur; ut prius ista mors prima, quae communis est omnibus, proderetur ex illo uenisse peccato, quod in uno commune factum est omnibus; mors uero secunda non utique communis est omnibus propter eos, qui secundum propositum uocati sunt, quos ante praesciuit et praedestinauit, sicut ait apostolus, conformes imaginis filii sui, ut sit ipse primogenitus in multis fratribus, quos a secunda morte per Mediatorem Dei gratia liberauit. In corpore ergo animali primum hominem factum sic apostolus loquitur.

Thus the apostle states that the first man was made in an animal body. For, wishing to distinguish the animal body which now is from the spiritual, which is to be in the resurrection, he says, “It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption: it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power: it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.” Then, to prove this, he goes on, “There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.” And to show what the animated body is, he says, “Thus it was written, The first man Adam was made a living soul, the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.” He wished thus to show what the animated body is, though Scripture did not say of the first man Adam, when his soul was created by the breath of God, “Man was made in an animated body,” but “Man was made a living soul.” By these words, therefore, “The first man was made a living soul,” the apostle wishes man’s animated body to be understood. But how he wishes the spiritual body to be understood he shows when he adds, “But the last Adam was made a quickening spirit,” plainly referring to Christ, who has so risen from the dead that He cannot die any more. He then goes on to say, “But that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.” And here he much more clearly asserts that he referred to the animal body when he said that the first man was made a living soul, and to the spiritual when he said that the last man was made a quickening spirit. The animal body is the first, being such as the first Adam had, and which would not have died had he not sinned, being such also as we now have, its nature being changed and vitiated by sin to the extent of bringing us under the necessity of death, and being such as even Christ condescended first of all to assume, not indeed of necessity, but of choice; but afterwards comes the spiritual body, which already is worn by anticipation by Christ as our head, and will be worn by His members in the resurrection of the dead.

Volens enim ab spiritali, quod in resurrectione futurum est, hoc quod nunc est animale discernere: Seminatur, inquit, in corruptione, surget in in corruptione; seminatur in contumelia, surget in gloria; seminatur in infirmitate, surget in uirtute; seminatur corpus animale, surget corpus spiritale. Deinde ut hoc probaret: Si est, inquit, corpus animale, est et spiritale. Et ut quid esset animale corpus ostenderet: Sic, inquit, scriptum est: Factus est primus homo in animam uiuentem. Isto igitur modo uoluit ostendere quid sit corpus animale, quamuis scriptura non dixerit de homine primo, qui est appellatus Adam, quando illi anima flatu Dei creata est: Et factus est homo in corpore animali; sed: Factus est homo in animam uiuentem. In eo ergo quod scriptum est: Factus est primus homo in animam uiuentem, uoluit apostolus intellegi corpus hominis animale. Spiritale autem quem ad modum intellegendum esset, ostendit addendo: Nouissimus Adam in spiritum uiuificantem, procul dubio Christum significans, qui iam ex mortuis ita resurrexit, ut mori deinceps omnino non possit. Denique sequitur et dicit: Sed non primum quod spiritale est, sed quod animale, postea spiritale. Ubi multo apertius declarauit se animale corpus insinuasse in eo quod scriptum est factum esse primum hominem in animam uiuentem, spiritale autem in eo quod ait: Nouissimus Adam in spiritum uiuificantem. Prius est enim animale corpus, quale habuit primus Adam, quamuis non moriturum, nisi peccasset; quale nunc habemus et nos, hactenus eius mutata uitiataque natura, quatenus in illo, postea quam peccauit, effectum est, unde haberet iam moriendi necessitatem; tale pro nobis etiam Christus primitus habere dignatus est, non quidem necessitate, sed potestate; postea uero spiritale, quale iam praecessit in Christo tamquam in capite nostro, secuturum est autem in membris eius ultima resurrectione mortuorum. Adiungit deinde apostolus duorum istorum hominum euidentis simam differentiam dicens: Primus homo de terra terrenus, secundus homo de caelo caelestis.

Then the apostle subjoins a notable difference between these two men, saying, “The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy, and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.” So he elsewhere says, “As many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ;” but in very deed this shall be accomplished when that which is animal in us by our birth shall have become spiritual in our resurrection. For, to use his words again,” We are saved by hope.” Now we bear the image of the earthly man by the propagation of sin and death, which pass on us by ordinary generation; but we bear the image of the heavenly by the grace of pardon and life eternal, which regeneration confers upon us through the Mediator of God and men, the Man Christ Jesus. And He is the heavenly Man of Paul’s passage, because He came from heaven to be clothed with a body of earthly mortality, that He might clothe it with heavenly immortality. And he calls others heavenly, because by grace they become His members, that, together with them, He may become one Christ, as head and body. In the same epistle he puts this yet more clearly: “Since by man came death, by Man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive,”—that is to say, in a spiritual body which shall be made a quickening spirit. Not that all who die in Adam shall be members of Christ,—for the great majority shall be punished in eternal death,—but he uses the word “all” in both clauses, because, as no one dies in an animal body except in Adam, so no one is quickened a spiritual body save in Christ. We are not, then, by any means to suppose that we shall in the resurrection have such a body as the first man had before he sinned, nor that the words, “As is the earthy such are they also that are earthy,” are to be understood of that which was brought about by sin; for we are not to think that Adam had a spiritual body before he fell, and that, in punishment of his sin, it was changed into an animal body. If this be thought, small heed has been given to the words of so great a teacher, who says, “There is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body; as it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul.” Was it after sin he was made so? or was not this the primal condition of man from which the blessed apostle selects his testimony to show what the animal body is?

Qualis terrenus, tales et terreni; qualis caelestis, tales et caelestes. Et quo modo induimus imaginem terreni, induamus et imaginem eius, qui de caelo est. Hoc apostolus ita posuit, ut nunc quidem in nobis secundum sacramentum regenerationis fiat, sicut alibi dicit: Quotquot in Christo baptizati estis, Christum induistis; re autem ipsa tunc perficietur, cum et in nobis, quod est animale nascendo, spiritale factum fuerit resurgendo. Ut enim eius itidem uerbis utar: Spe salui facti sumus. Induimus autem imaginem terreni hominis propagatione prae. uaricationis et mortis, quam nobis intulit generatio; sed induimus imaginem caelestis hominis gratia indulgentiae uitaeque perpetuae, quod nobis praestat regeneratio, non nisi per mediatorem Dei et hominum, hominem Christum Iesum; quem caelestem hominem uult intellegi, quia de caelo uenit, ut terrenae mortalitatis corpore uestiretur, quod caelesti inmortalitate uestiret. Caelestes uero ideo appellat et alios, quia fiunt per gratiam membra eius, ut cum illis sit unus Christus, uelut caput et corpus. Hoc in, eadem epistula euidentius ita ponit: Per hominem mors, et per hominem resurrectio mortuorum. Sicut enim in Adam omnes moriuntur, sic et in Christo omnes uiuificabuntur; iam utique in corpore spiritali quod erit in spiritum uiuificantem; non quia omnes, qui in Adam moriuntur, membra erunt Christi (ex illis enim multo plures secunda in aeternum morte plectentur); sed ideo dictum est omnes adque omnes, quia, sicut nemo corpore animali nisi in Adam moritur, ita nemo corpore spiritali nisi in Christo uiuificatur. Proinde nequaquam putandum est nos in resurrectione tale corpus habituros, quale habuit homo primus ante peccatum; nec illud, quod dictum est: Qualis terrenus, tales et terreni, secundum id intellegendum, quod factum est admissione peccati. Non enim existimandum est eum prius, quam peccasset, spiritale corpus habuisse et peccati merito in animale mutatum. Ut enim hoc putetur, parum adtenduntur tanti uerba doctoris, qui ait: Si est corpus animale, est et spiritale; sic et scriptum est: Factus est primus homo Adam in animam uiuentem. Numquid hoc post peccatum factum est, cum sit ista hominis prima conditio, de qua beatissimus £aulus ad corpus animale monstrandum hoc testimonium legis adsumsit?

Chapter 24.—How We Must Understand that Breathing of God by Which “The First Man Was Made a Living Soul,” And that Also by Which the Lord Conveyed His Spirit to His Disciples When He Said, “Receive Ye the Holy Ghost.”

Caput XXIV. Qualiter accipienda sit uel illa insufflatio Dei, qua primus homo factus est in animam uiuentem, uel illa, quam Dominus fecit dicens discipulis - suis: Accipite Spiritum sanctum.

Some have hastily supposed from the words, “God breathed into Adam’s nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul,” that a soul was not then first given to man, but that the soul already given was quickened by the Holy Ghost. They are encouraged in this supposition by the fact that the Lord Jesus after His resurrection breathed on His disciples, and said, “Receive ye the Holy Spirit.” From this they suppose that the same thing was effected in either case, as if the evangelist had gone on to say, And they became living souls. But if he had made this addition, we should only understand that the Spirit is in some way the life of souls, and that without Him reasonable souls must be accounted dead, though their bodies seem to live before our eyes. But that this was not what happened when man was created, the very words of the narrative sufficiently show: “And God made man dust of the earth;” which some have thought to render more clearly by the words, “And God formed man of the clay of the earth.” For it had before been said that “there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground,” in order that the reference to clay, formed of this moisture and dust, might be understood. For on this verse there immediately follows the announcement, “And God created man dust of the earth;” so those Greek manuscripts have it from which this passage has been translated into Latin. But whether one prefers to read “created” or “formed,” where the Greek reads ἔπλασεν, is of little importance; yet “formed” is the better rendering. But those who preferred “created” thought they thus avoided the ambiguity arising from the fact, that in the Latin language the usage obtains that those are said to form a thing who frame some feigned and fictitious thing. This man, then, who was created of the dust of the earth, or of the moistened dust or clay,—this “dust of the earth” (that I may use the express words of Scripture) was made, as the apostle teaches, an animated body when he received a soul. This man, he says, “was made a living soul;” that is, this fashioned dust was made a living soul.

Unde et illud parum considerate quibusdam uisum est, in eo quod legitur: Inspirauit Deus in faciem eius spiritum uitae, et factus est homo in animam uiuentem, non tunc animam primo homini datam, sed eam, quae iam inerat, Spiritu sancto uiuificatam. Mouet enim eos, quod Dominus Iesus, postea quam resurrexit a mortuis, insufflauit dicens discipulis suis: Accipite Spiritum sanctum. Unde tale aliquid factum existimant, quale tunc factum est, quasi et hic secutus euangelista dixerit: Et facti sunt in animam uiuentem. Quod quidem si dictum esset, hoc intellegeremus, quod animarum quaedam uita sit Spiritus Dei, sine quo animae rationales mortuae deputandae sunt, quamuis earum praesentia uiuere corpora uideantur. Sed non ita factum, quando est conditus homo, satis ipsa libri uerba testantur, quae ita se habent: Et formauit Deus hominem puluerem de terra. Quod quidam planius interpretandum putantes dixerunt: Et finxit Deus hominem de limo terrae, quoniam superius dictum fuerat: Fons autem ascendebat de terra et inrigabat omnem faciem terrae; ut ex hoc limus intellegendus uideretur, umore scilicet terraque concretus. Ubi enim hoc dictum est, continuo sequitur: Et formauit Deus hominem puluerem de terra, sicut Graeci codices habent, unde in Latinam linguam scriptura ipsa conuersa est. Siue autem formauit siue finxit quis dicere uoluerit, quod Graece dicitur licXaasv, ad rem nihil interest; magis tamen proprie dicitur finxit. Sed ambiguitas uisa est deuitanda eis, qui formauit dicere maluerunt, eo quod in Latina lingua illud magis obtinuit consuetudo, ut hi dicantur fingere, qui aliquid mendacio simulante conponunt. Hunc igitur formatum hominem de terrae puluere siue limo (erat enim puluis umectus) — hunc, inquam, ut expressius dicam, sicut scriptura locuta est, puluerem de terra animale corpus factum esse docet apostolus, cum animam accepit: Et factus est iste homo in animam uiuentem’, id est, formatus iste puluis factus est in animam uiuentem.

They say, Already he had a soul, else he would not be called a man; for man is not a body alone, nor a soul alone, but a being composed of both. This, indeed, is true, that the soul is not the whole man, but the better part of man; the body not the whole, but the inferior part of man; and that then, when both are joined, they receive the name of man, which, however, they do not severally lose even when we speak of them singly. For who is prohibited from saying, in colloquial usage, “That man is dead, and is now at rest or in torment,” though this can be spoken only of the soul; or “He is buried in such and such a place,” though this refers only to the body? Will they say that Scripture follows no such usage? On the contrary, it so thoroughly adopts it, that even while a man is alive, and body and soul are united, it calls each of them singly by the name “man,” speaking of the soul as the “inward man,” and of the body as the “outward man,” as if there were two men, though both together are indeed but one. But we must understand in what sense man is said to be in the image of God, and is yet dust, and to return to the dust. The former is spoken of the rational soul, which God by His breathing, or, to speak more appropriately, by His inspiration, conveyed to man, that is, to his body; but the latter refers to his body, which God formed of the dust, and to which a soul was given, that it might become a living body, that is, that man might become a living soul.

Iam, inquiunt, habebat animam, alioquin non appellaretur homo, quoniam homo non est corpus solum uel anima sola, sed qui et anima constat et corpore. Hoc quidem uerum est, quod non totus homo, sed pars melior hominis anima est; nec totus homo corpus, sed inferior hominis pars est; sed cum est utrumque coniunctum simul, habet hominis nomen; quod tamen et singula non amittunt, etiam cum de singulis loquimur. Quis enim dicere prohibetur cottidiani quadam lege sermonis: Homo ille defunctus est et nunc in requie est uel in poenis. cum de anima sola possit hoc dici, et: Illo aut illo loco homo ille sepultus est, cum hoc nisi de solo corpore non possit intellegi? An dicturi sunt sic loqui scripturam non solere diuinam? Immo uero illa ita nobis in hoc adtestatur, ut etiam cum duo ista coniuncta sunt et uiuit homo, tamen etiam singula hominis uocabulo appellet, animam scilicet interiorem hominem, corpus autem exteriorem hominem uocans, tamquam duo sint homines, cum simul utrumque sit homo unus. Sed intellegendum est, secundum quid dicatur homo ad imaginem Dei et homo terra adque iturus in terram. Illud enim secundum animam rationalem dicitur, qualem Deus insufflando uel, si commodius dicitur, inspirando indidit homini, id est hominis corpori; hoc autem secundum corpus, qualem hominem Deus finxit ex puluere, cui data est anima, ut fieret corpus animale, id est homo in animam uiuentem.

Wherefore, when our Lord breathed on His disciples, and said, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost,” He certainly wished it to be understood that the Holy Ghost was not only the Spirit of the Father, but of the only begotten Son Himself. For the same Spirit is, indeed, the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, making with them the trinity of Father, Son, and Spirit, not a creature, but the Creator. For neither was that material breath which proceeded from the mouth of His flesh the very substance and nature of the Holy Spirit, but rather the intimation, as I said, that the Holy Spirit was common to the Father and to the Son; for they have not each a separate Spirit, but both one and the same. Now this Spirit is always spoken of in sacred Scripture by the Greek word πνεῦμα, as the Lord, too, named Him in the place cited when He gave Him to His disciples, and intimated the gift by the breathing of His lips; and there does not occur to me any place in the whole Scriptures where He is otherwise named. But in this passage where it is said, “And the Lord formed man dust of the earth, and breathed, or inspired, into his face the breath of life;” the Greek has not πνεῦμα, the usual word for the Holy Spirit, but πνοή, a word more frequently used of the creature than of the Creator; and for this reason some Latin interpreters have preferred to render it by “breath” rather than “spirit.” For this word occurs also in the Greek in Isaiah chapter vii, verse 16 where God says, “I have made all breath,” meaning, doubtless, all souls. Accordingly, this word πνοή is sometimes rendered “breath,” sometimes “spirit,” sometimes “inspiration,” sometimes “aspiration,” sometimes “soul,” even when it is used of God. Πνεῦμα, on the other hand, is uniformly rendered “spirit,” whether of man, of whom the apostle says, “For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him?” or of beast, as in the book of Solomon, “Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?” or of that physical spirit which is called wind, for so the Psalmist calls it: “Fire and hail; snow and vapors; stormy wind;” or of the uncreated Creator Spirit, of whom the Lord said in the gospel, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost,” indicating the gift by the breathing of His mouth; and when He says, “Go ye and baptize all nations in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” words which very expressly and excellently commend the Trinity; and where it is said, “God is a Spirit;” and in very many other places of the sacred writings. In all these quotations from Scripture we do not find in the Greek the word πνοή used, but πνεῦμα, and in the Latin, not flatus, but spiritus. Wherefore, referring again to that place where it is written, “He inspired,” or to speak more properly, “breathed into his face the breath of life,” even though the Greek had not used πνοή (as it has) but πνεῦμα, it would not on that account necessarily follow that the Creator Spirit, who in the Trinity is distinctively called the Holy Ghost, was meant, since, as has been said, it is plain that πνεῦμα is used not only of the Creator, but also of the creature.

Quapropter in eo, quod Dominus fecit, quando insufflauit dicens: Accipite Spiritum sanctum, nimirum hoc intellegi uoluit, quod Spiritus sanctus non tantum sit Patris, uerum etiam ipsius Unigeniti Spiritus. Idem ipse est quippe Spiritus. et Patris et Filii, cum quo est trinitas Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus, non creatura, sed Creator. Neque enim flatus ille corporeus de carnis ore procedens substantia erat Spiritus sancti adque natura, sed potius significatio, qua intellegeremus, ut dixi, Spiritum sanctum Patri esse Filioque communem, quia non sunt eis singulis singuli, sed unus amborum est. Semper autem iste Spiritus in scripturis sanctis Graeco uocabulo rcveufia dicitur, sicut eum et hoc loco Iesus appellauit, quando eum corporalis sui oris flatu significans discipulis dedit; et locis omnibus diuinorum eloquiorum non mihi aliter umquam nuncupatus occurrit. Hic uero, ubi legitur: Et finxit Deus hominem puluerem de terra et insufflauit siue inspirauit in faciem eius spiritum uitae, non ait Graecus rcveofta, quod solet dici Spiritus sanctus, sed 7cvoVjv, quod nomen in creatura quam in Creatore frequentius legitur; unde nonnulli etiam Latini propter differentiam hoc uocabulum non spiritum, sed flatum appellare maluerunt. Hoc enim est in Graeco etiam illo loco aput Esaiam, ubi Deus dicit: Omnem flatum ego feci, omnem animam sine dubitatione significans. Quod itaque Graece nvoifj dicitur, nostri aliquando flatum, aliquando spiritum, aliquando inspirationem uel aspirationem, quando etiam Dei dicitur, interpretati sunt; Trveufjia uero numquam nisi spiritum, siue hominis (de quo ait apostolus: Quis enim scit hominum quae sunt hominis, nisi spiritus hominis qui in ipso est?) siue pecoris (sicut in Salomonis libro scriptum est: Quis scit si spiritus hominis ascendat sursum in caelum et spiritus pecoris descendat deorsum in terram?) siue istum corporeum, qui etiam uentus dicitur, (nam eius hoc nomen est, ubi in psalmo canitur: Ignis, grando, nix, glacies spiritus tempestatis) siue iam non creatum, sed Creatorem, sicut est de quo dicit Dominus in euangelio: Accipite Spiritum sanctum, eum corporei sui oris flatu significans, et ubi ait: Ite, baptizate[omnes] gentes in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus sancti, ubi ipsa trinitas excellentissime et euidentissime commendata est, et ubi legitur: Deus spiritus est, et aliis plurimis sacrarum litterarum locis. In his quippe omnibus testimoniis scripturarum, quantum ad Graecos adtinet, non TWOTJV uidemus scriptum esse, sed πνεῡμα; quantum autem ad Latinos, non flatum, sed spiritum.

But, say they, when the Scripture used the word “spirit,” it would not have added “of life” unless it meant us to understand the Holy Spirit; nor, when it said, “Man became a soul,” would it also have inserted the word “living” unless that life of the soul were signified which is imparted to it from above by the gift of God. For, seeing that the soul by itself has a proper life of its own, what need, they ask, was there of adding living, save only to show that the life which is given it by the Holy Spirit was meant? What is this but to fight strenuously for their own conjectures, while they carelessly neglect the teaching of Scripture? Without troubling themselves much, they might have found in a preceding page of this very book of Genesis the words, “Let the earth bring forth the living soul,” when all the terrestrial animals were created. Then at a slight interval, but still in the same book, was it impossible for them to notice this verse, “All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died,” by which it was signified that all the animals which lived on the earth had perished in the deluge? If, then, we find that Scripture is accustomed to speak both of the “living soul” and the “spirit of life” even in reference to beasts; and if in this place, where it is said, “All things which have the spirit of life,” the word πνοή, not πνεῦμα, is used; why may we not say, What need was there to add “living,” since the soul cannot exist without being alive? or, What need to add “of life” after the word spirit? But we understand that Scripture used these expressions in its ordinary style so long as it speaks of animals, that is, animated bodies, in which the soul serves as the residence of sensation; but when man is spoken of, we forget the ordinary and established usage of Scripture, whereby it signifies that man received a rational soul, which was not produced out of the waters and the earth like the other living creatures, but was created by the breath of God. Yet this creation was ordered that the human soul should live in an animal body, like those other animals of which the Scripture said, “Let the earth produce every living soul,” and regarding which it again says that in them is the breath of life, where the word πνοή and not πνεῦμα is used in the Greek, and where certainly not the Holy Spirit, but their spirit, is signified under that name.

Quapropter in eo, quod scriptum est: Inspirauit, uel si magis proprie dicendum est: Insufflauit in faciem eius spiritum uitae, si Graecus non irvoVjv, sicut ibi legitur, sed πνεῡμα; posuisset, nec sic esset consequens, ut Creatorem Spiritum, qui proprie dicitur in trinitate Spiritus sanctus, intellegere cogeremur; quando quidem πνεῡμα, ut dictum est, non solum de Creatore, sed etiam de creatura dici solere manifestum est. Sed cum dixisset, inquiunt, spiritum, non adderet uitae, nisi illum sanctum Spiritum uellet intellegi; et cum dixisset: Factus est homo in animam, non adderet uiuentem,. nisi animae uitam significaret, quae illi diuinitus inpertitur dono Spiritus Dei. Cum enim uiuat anima, inquiunt, proprio suae uitae modo, quid opus erat addere uiuentem, nisi ut ea uita intellegeretur, quae illi per sanctum Spiritum datur? Hoc quid est aliud nisi diligenter pro humana suspicione contendere et scripturas sanctas neglegenter adtendere? Quid enim magnum erat non ire longius, sed in eodem ipso libro paulo superius legere: Producat terra animam uiuentem, quando animalia terrestria cuncta creata sunt? Deinde aliquantis interpositis, in eodem tamen ipso libro quid magnum erat aduertere quod scriptum est: Et omnia, quae habent spiritum uitae, et omnis, qui erat super aridam, mortuus est, cum insinuaret omnia quae uiuebant in terra perisse diluuio? Si ergo et animam uiuentem et spiritum uitae etiam in pecoribus inuenimus, sicut loqui diuina scriptura consueuit, et cum hoc quoque loco, ubi legitur: Omnia quae habent spiritum uitae, non Graecus πνεῡμα, sed πνοην dixerit: quur non dicimus: Quid opus erat ut adderet uiuentem, cum anima nisi uiuat esse non possit? aut quid opus erat ut adderet uitae, cum dixisset spiritum? Sed intellegimus animam uiuentem et spiritum uitae scripturam suo more dixisse, cum animalia, id eat animata corpora, uellet intellegi, quibus inesset per animam perspicuus iste etiam corporis sensus. In hominis autem conditione obliuiscimur, quem ad modum loqui scriptura consueuerit, cum suo prorsus more locuta sit, quo insinuaret hominem etiam rationali anima accepta, quam non sicut aliarum carnium aquis et terra producentibus, sed Deo flante creatam uoluit intellegi, sic tamen factum, ut in corpore animali, quod fit anima in eo uiuente, sicut illa animalia uiueret, de quibus dixit: Producat terra animam uiuentem, et quae itidem dixit habuisse in se spiritum uitae; ubi etiam in Graeco non dixit πνεῡμα, sed ffvoVjv; non utique Spiritum sanctum, sed eorum animam tali exprimens nomine.

But, again, they object that breath is understood to have been emitted from the mouth of God; and if we believe that is the soul, we must consequently acknowledge it to be of the same substance, and equal to that wisdom, which says, “I come out of the mouth of the Most High.” Wisdom, indeed, does not say it was breathed out of the mouth of God, but proceeded out of it. But as we are able, when we breathe, to make a breath, not of our own human nature, but of the surrounding air, which we inhale and exhale as we draw our breath and breathe again, so almighty God was able to make breath, not of His own nature, nor of the creature beneath Him, but even of nothing; and this breath, when He communicated it to man’s body, He is most appropriately said to have breathed or inspired,—the Immaterial breathing it also immaterial, but the Immutable not also the immutable; for it was created, He uncreated. Yet that these persons who are forward to quote Scripture, and yet know not the usages of its language, may know that not only what is equal and consubstantial with God is said to proceed out of His mouth, let them hear or read what God says: “So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.”

Sed enim Dei flatus, inquiunt, Dei ore exisse intellegitur, quem si animam crediderimus, consequens erit, ut eiusdem fateamur esse substantiae paremque illius sapientiae, quae dicit: Ego ex ore Altissimi prodii. Non quidem dixit sapientia ore Dei efflatam se fuisse, sed ex eius ore prodisse. Sicut autem nos possumus non de nostra natura, qua homines sumus, sed de isto aere circumfuso, quem spirando ac respil’ando ducimus ac reddimus, flatum facere cum sufflamus: ita omnipotens Deus non de sua natura neque subiacenti creatura, sed etiam de nihilo potuit facere flatum, quem corpori hominis inserendo inspirasse uel insufflasse conuenientissime dictus est, incorporeus incorporeum, sed inmutabilis mutabilem, quia non creatus creatum. Verum tamen ut sciant isti, qui de scripturis loqui uolunt et scripturarum locutiones non aduertunt, non hoc solum dici exire ex ore Dei, quod est aequalis eiusdemque naturae, audiant uel legant quod Deo dicente scriptum est: Quoniam tepidus es et neque calidus neque frigidus, incipiam te reicere ex ore meo.

There is no ground, then, for our objecting, when the apostle so expressly distinguishes the animal body from the spiritual—that is to say, the body in which we now are from that in which we are to be. He says, “It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy; and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.” Of all which words of his we have previously spoken. The animal body, accordingly, in which the apostle says that the first man Adam was made, was not so made that it could not die at all, but so that it should not die unless he should have sinned. That body, indeed, which shall be made spiritual and immortal by the quickening Spirit shall not be able to die at all; as the soul has been created immortal, and therefore, although by sin it may be said to die, and does lose a certain life of its own, namely, the Spirit of God, by whom it was enabled to live wisely and blessedly, yet it does not cease living a kind of life, though a miserable, because it is immortal by creation. So, too, the rebellious angels, though by sinning they did in a sense die, because they forsook God, the Fountain of life, which while they drank they were able to live wisely and well, yet they could not so die as to utterly cease living and feeling, for they are immortals by creation. And so, after the final judgment, they shall be hurled into the second death, and not even there be deprived of life or of sensation, but shall suffer torment. But those men who have been embraced by God’s grace, and are become the fellow-citizens of the holy angels who have continued in bliss, shall never more either sin or die, being endued with spiritual bodies; yet, being clothed with immortality, such as the angels enjoy, of which they cannot be divested even by sinning, the nature of their flesh shall continue the same, but all carnal corruption and unwieldiness shall be removed.

Nulla itaque causa est, quur apertissime loquenti resistamus apostolo, ubi ab spiritali corpore corpus animale discernens, id est ab illo in quo futuri sumus hoc in quo nunc sumus, ait: Seminatur corpus animale, surget corpus spiritale; si est corpus animale, est et spiritale; sic et scriptum est: Factus est primus homo Adam in animam uiuentem, nouissimus Adam in spiritum uiuificantem. Sed non primum quod spiritale est, sed quod animale, postea spiritale. Primus homo de terra terrenus, secundus homo de caelo caelestis. Qualis terrenus, tales et terreni, et qualis caelestis, tales et caelestes. Et quo modo induimus imaginem terreni, induamus et imaginem eius qui de caelo est. De quibus omnibus apostolicis uerbis superius locuti sumus. Corpus igitur animale, in quo primum hominem Adam factum esse dicit apostolus, sic erat factum, non ut mori omnino non posset, sed ut non moreretur, nisi homo peccasset. Nam illud, quod spiritu uiuificante spiritale erit et inmortale, mori omnino non poterit, sicut anima creata est inmortalis, quae licet peccato mortua perhibeatur carens quaiam uita sua, hoc est dei Spiritu, quo etiam sapienter et beate uiuere poterat, tamen propria quadam, licet misera, uita sua non desinit uiuere, quia inmortalis est creata; sicut etiam desertores angeli, licet secundum quendam modum mortui sint peccando, quia fontem uitae deseruerunt, qui Deus est, quem potando sapienter et beate poterant uiuere, tamen non sic mori potuerunt, ut omni modo desisterent uiuere adque sentire, quoniam inmortales creati sunt; adque ita in secundam mortem post ultimum praecipitabuntur iudicium, ut nec illic uita careant, quando quidem etiam sensu, cum in doloribus futuri sunt, nori’carebunt. Sed homines ad Dei gratiam pertinentes, ciues sanctorum angelorum in beata uita manentium, ita spiritalibus corporibus induentur, ut neque peccent amplius neque. moriantur; ea tamen inmortalitate uestiti, quae. sicut angelerum, nec peccato possit auferri; natura quidem manente ca s, sed nulla omnino carnali corruptibilitate uel tarditate remanente.

There remains a question which must be discussed, and, by the help of the Lord God of truth, solved: If the motion of concupiscence in the unruly members of our first parents arose out of their sin, and only when the divine grace deserted them; and if it was on that occasion that their eyes were opened to see, or, more exactly, notice their nakedness, and that they covered their shame because the shameless motion of their members was not subject to their will,—how, then, would they have begotten children had they remained sinless as they were created? But as this book must be concluded, and so large a question cannot be summarily disposed of, we may relegate it to the following book, in which it will be more conveniently treated.

Sequitur autem quaestio necessario pertractanda et Domino Deo ueritatis adiuuante soluenda: Si libido membrorum inoboedientium ex peccato inoboedientiae in illis primis hominibus, cum illos diuina gratia deseruisset, exorta est; unde in suam nuditatem oculos aperuerunt, id est eam curiosius aduerterunt, et quia inpudens motus uoluntatis arbitrio resistebat, pudenda texerunt: quo modo essent filios propagaturi. si, ut creati fuerant, sine praeuaricatione mansissent. Sed quia et liber iste claudendus est nec tanta quaestio in sermonis angustias coartanda, in eum qui sequitur commodiore dispositione differtur.

Book XIV.

Liber XIV

Argument—Augustin again treats of the sin of the first man, and teaches that it is the cause of the carnal life and vicious affections of man. Especially he proves that the shame which accompanies lust is the just punishment of that disobedience, and inquires how man, if he had not sinned, would have been able without lust to propagate his kind.

Chapter 1.—That the Disobedience of the First Man Would Have Plunged All Men into the Endless Misery of the Second Death, Had Not the Grace of God Rescued Many.

Caput I. Per inoboedientiam primi hominis omnes in secundae mortis perpetuitatem ruituros fuisse, nisi multos Dei gratia liberaret.

We have already stated in the preceding books that God, desiring not only that the human race might be able by their similarity of nature to associate with one another, but also that they might be bound together in harmony and peace by the ties of relationship, was pleased to derive all men from one individual, and created man with such a nature that the members of the race should not have died, had not the two first (of whom the one was created out of nothing, and the other out of him) merited this by their disobedience; for by them so great a sin was committed, that by it the human nature was altered for the worse, and was transmitted also to their posterity, liable to sin and subject to death. And the kingdom of death so reigned over men, that the deserved penalty of sin would have hurled all headlong even into the second death, of which there is no end, had not the undeserved grace of God saved some therefrom. And thus it has come to pass, that though there are very many and great nations all over the earth, whose rites and customs, speech, arms, and dress, are distinguished by marked differences, yet there are no more than two kinds of human society, which we may justly call two cities, according to the language of our Scriptures. The one consists of those who wish to live after the flesh, the other of those who wish to live after the spirit; and when they severally achieve what they wish, they live in peace, each after their kind.

Diximus iam superioribus libris ad humanum genus non solum naturae similitudine sociandum, uerum etiam quadam cognationis necessitudine in unitatem concordem pacis uinculo conligandum ex homine uno Deum uoluisse homines instituere, neque hoc genus fuisse in singulis quibusque moriturum, nisi duo primi, quorum creatus est unus ex nullo, altera ex illo, id inoboedientia meruissent, a quibus admissum est tam grande peccatum, ut in deterius eo natura mutaretur humana, etiam in posteros obligatione peccati et mortis necessitate transmissa. Mortis autem regnum in homines usque adeo dominatum est, ut omnes in secundam quoque mortem, cuius nullus est finis, poena debita praecipites ageret, nisi inde quosdam indebita Dei gratia liberaret. Ac per hoc factum est, ut, cum tot tantaeque gentes per terrarum orbem diuersis ritibus moribusque uiuentes multiplici linguarum armorum uestium sint uarietate distinctae, non tamen amplius quam duo quaedam genera humanae societatis existerent, quas ciuitates duas secundum scripturas nostras merito appellare possemus. Una quippe est hominum secundum carnem, altera secundum spiritum uiuere in - sui cuiusque generis pace uolentium et, cum id quod expetunt adsequuntur, in sui cuiusque generis pace uiuentium.