--- title: "City of God · De civitate Dei" author: "Augustine" translator: "Marcus Dods" languages: [la, en] shelf: "Church Fathers" section: 70 of 116 url: https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/70/ cite: "Augustine, tr. Marcus Dods, City of God · De civitate Dei, section 70. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/70/" --- # 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. ## 70. Of the Two Lines of the Human Race Which from First to Last Divide It. Source: https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/70/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/70/#p-N [¶0] Chapter 1.—Of the Two Lines of the Human Race Which from First to Last Divide It. > Latin: Caput I. De duobus ordinibus generationis humanae in diuersos fines ab initio procurrentis. [¶1] Of the bliss of Paradise, of Paradise itself, and of the life of our first parents there, and of their sin and punishment, many have thought much, spoken much, written much. We ourselves, too, have spoken of these things in the foregoing books, and have written either what we read in the Holy Scriptures, or what we could reasonably deduce from them. And were we to enter into a more detailed investigation of these matters, an endless number of endless questions would arise, which would involve us in a larger work than the present occasion admits. We cannot be expected to find room for replying to every question that may be started by unoccupied and captious men, who are ever more ready to ask questions than capable of understanding the answer. Yet I trust we have already done justice to these great and difficult questions regarding the beginning of the world, or of the soul, or of the human race itself. This race we have distributed into two parts, the one consisting of those who live according to man, the other of those who live according to God. And these we also mystically call the two cities, or the two communities of men, of which the one is predestined to reign eternally with God, and the other to suffer eternal punishment with the devil. This, however, is their end, and of it we are to speak afterwards. At present, as we have said enough about their origin, whether among the angels, whose numbers we know not, or in the two first human beings, it seems suitable to attempt an account of their career, from the time when our two first parents began to propagate the race until all human generation shall cease. For this whole time or world-age, in which the dying give place and those who are born succeed, is the career of these two cities concerning which we treat. > Latin: De felicitate paradisi uel de ipso paradiso et de uita ibi primorum hominum eorumque peccato adque supplicio multi multa senserunt, multa dixerunt, multa litteris mandauerunt. Nos quoque secundum scripturas sanctas uel quod in eis legimus uel quod ex eis intellegere potuimus earum congruentes auctoritati de his rebus in superioribus libris diximus. Enucleatius autem si ista quaerantur, multiplices adque multimodas pariunt disputationes, quae pluribus intexendae sint uoluminibus, quam hoc opus tempusque deposcit, quod non ita largum habemus, ut in omnibus, quae possunt requirere otiosi et scrupulosi, paratiores ad interrogandum quam capaciores ad intellegendum, nos oporteat inmorari. Arbitror tamen satis nos iam fecisse magnis et difficillimis quaestionibus de initio uel mundi uel animae uel ipsius generis humani, quod in duo genera distribuimus, unum eorum, qui secundum hominem, alterum eorum, qui secundum Deum uiuunt; quas etiam mystice appellamus ciuitates duas, hoc est duas societates hominum, quarum est una quae praedestinata est in aeternum regnare cum Deo, altera aeternum supplicium subire cum diabolo. Sed iste finis est earum, de quo post loquendum est. Nunc autem quoniam de exortu earum siue in angelis, quorum numerus ignoratur a nobis, siue in duobus primis hominibus satis dictum est, iam mihi uidetur earum adgrediendus excursus, ex quo illi duo generare coeperunt, donec homines generare cessabunt. Hoc enim uniuerso tempus siue saeculum, in quo cedunt morientes succeduntque nascentes, istarum duarum ciuitatum, de quibus disputamus, excursus est. [¶2] Of these two first parents of the human race, then, Cain was the first-born, and he belonged to the city of men; after him was born Abel, who belonged to the city of God. For as in the individual the truth of the apostle’s statement is discerned, “that is not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural, and afterward that which is spiritual,” whence it comes to pass that each man, being derived from a condemned stock, is first of all born of Adam evil and carnal, and becomes good and spiritual only afterwards, when he is grafted into Christ by regeneration: so was it in the human race as a whole. When these two cities began to run their course by a series of deaths and births, the citizen of this world was the first-born, and after him the stranger in this world, the citizen of the city of God, predestinated by grace, elected by grace, by grace a stranger below, and by grace a citizen above. By grace,—for so far as regards himself he is sprung from the same mass, all of which is condemned in its origin; but God, like a potter (for this comparison is introduced by the apostle judiciously, and not without thought), of the same lump made one vessel to honor, another to dishonor. But first the vessel to dishonor was made, and after it another to honor. For in each individual, as I have already said, there is first of all that which is reprobate, that from which we must begin, but in which we need not necessarily remain; afterwards is that which is well-approved, to which we may by advancing attain, and in which, when we have reached it we may abide. Not, indeed, that every wicked man shall be good, but that no one will be good who was not first of all wicked; but the sooner any one becomes a good man, the more speedily does he receive this title, and abolish the old name in the new. Accordingly, it is recorded of Cain that he built a city, but Abel, being a sojourner, built none. For the city of the saints is above, although here below it begets citizens, in whom it sojourns till the time of its reign arrives, when it shall gather together all in the day of the resurrection; and then shall the promised kingdom be given to them, in which they shall reign with their Prince, the King of the ages, time without end. > Latin: Natus est igitur prior Cain ex illis duobus generis humani parentibus, pertinens ad hominum ciuitatem, posterior Abel, ad ciuitatem Dei. Sicut enim in uno homine, quod dixit apostolus, experimur, quia non primum quod spiritale est, sed quod animale, postea spiritale (unde unusquisque, quoniam ex damnata propagine exoritur, primo sit necesse est ex Adam malus adque carnalis; quod si in Christum renascendo profecerit, post erit bonus et spiritalis): sic in uniuerso genere humano, cum primum duae istae coeperunt nascendo adque moriendo procurrere ciuitates, prior est natus ciuis huius saeculi, posterius autem isto peregrinus in saeculo et pertinens ad ciuitatem Dei, gratia praedestinatus gratia electus, gratia peregrinus deorsum gratia cinis sursum. Nam quantum ad ipsum adtinet, ex eadem massa oritur, quae originaliter est tota damnata; sed tamquam figulus Deus (hanc enim similitudinem non inpudenter, sed prudenter introducit apostolus) ex eadem massa fecit aliud uas in honorem, aliud in contumeliam. Prius autem factum est uas in contumeliam, post uero alterum in honorem, quia et in ipso uno, sicut iam dixi, homine prius est reprobum, unde necesse est incipiamus et ubi non est necesse ut remaneamus, posterius uero probum, quo proficientes ueniamus et quo peruenientes maneamus. Proinde non quidem omnis homo malus erit bonus, nemo tamen erit bonus qui non erat malus; sed quanto quisque citius mutatur in melius, hoc in se facit nominari quod adprehendit celerius, et posteriore cooperit uocabulum prius. Scriptum est itaque de Cain, quod condiderit ciuitatem; Abel antem tamquam peregrinus non condidit. Superna est enim sanctorum ciuitas, quamuis hic pariat ciues, in quibus peregrinatur, donec regni eius tempus adueniat, cum congregatura est omnes in suis corporibus resurgentes, quando eis promis sum dabitur regnum, ubi cum suo principe rege saeculorum sine ullo temporis fine regnabunt. ### Of the Children of the Flesh and the Children of the Promise. [¶4] Chapter 2.—Of the Children of the Flesh and the Children of the Promise. > Latin: Caput II. De filiis carnis et filiis promissionis. [¶5] There was indeed on earth, so long as it was needed, a symbol and foreshadowing image of this city, which served the purpose of reminding men that such a city was to be rather than of making it present; and this image was itself called the holy city, as a symbol of the future city, though not itself the reality. Of this city which served as an image, and of that free city it typified, Paul writes to the Galatians in these terms: “Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bond maid, the other by a free woman. But he who was of the bond woman was born after the flesh, but he of the free woman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not, for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless, what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bond woman and her son: for the son of the bond woman shall not be heir with the son of the free woman. And we, brethren, are not children of the bond woman, but of the free, in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free.” This interpretation of the passage, handed down to us with apostolic authority, shows how we ought to understand the Scriptures of the two covenants—the old and the new. One portion of the earthly city became an image of the heavenly city, not having a significance of its own, but signifying another city, and therefore serving, or “being in bondage.” For it was founded not for its own sake, but to prefigure another city; and this shadow of a city was also itself foreshadowed by another preceding figure. For Sarah’s handmaid Agar, and her son, were an image of this image. And as the shadows were to pass away when the full light came, Sarah, the free woman, who prefigured the free city (which again was also prefigured in another way by that shadow of a city Jerusalem), therefore said, “Cast out the bond woman and her son; for the son of the bond woman shall not be heir with my son Isaac,” or, as the apostle says, “with the son of the free woman.” In the earthly city, then, we find two things—its own obvious presence, and its symbolic presentation of the heavenly city. Now citizens are begotten to the earthly city by nature vitiated by sin, but to the heavenly city by grace freeing nature from sin; whence the former are called “vessels of wrath,” the latter “vessels of mercy.” And this was typified in the two sons of Abraham,—Ishmael, the son of Agar the handmaid, being born according to the flesh, while Isaac was born of the free woman Sarah, according to the promise. Both, indeed, were of Abraham’s seed; but the one was begotten by natural law, the other was given by gracious promise. In the one birth, human action is revealed; in the other, a divine kindness comes to light. > Latin: Umbra sane quaedam ciuitatis huius et imago prophetica ei significandae potius quam praesentandae seruiuit in terris, quo eam tempore demonstrari oportebat, et dicta est etiam ipsa ciuitas sancta merito significantis imaginis, non expressae, sicut futura est, ueritatis. De hac imagine seruiente et de illa, quam significat, libera ciuitate sic apostolus ad Galatas loquitur: Dicite mihi, inquit, sub lege uolentes esse legem non audistis? Scriptum est enim, quod Abraham duos filios habuit, unum de ancilla et unum de libera. Sed ille quidem, qui de ancilla, secundum carnem natus est; qui autem de libera, per repromissionem; quae sunt in allegoria. Haec enim sunt duo testamenta, unum quidem a monte Sina in seruitutem generans, quod est Agar; Sina enim mons est in Arabia, quae coniuncta est huic quae nunc est Hierusalem; seruit enim cum filiis suis. Quae autem sursum est Hierusalem. libera est, quae est mater nostra. Scriptum est enim: Laetare sterilis, quae non paris, erumpeetexclama, quae non parturis; quoniam multi filii desertae, magis quam eius quae habet uirum. Nos autem, fratres, secundum Isaac promissionis filii sumus. Sed sicut tunc, qui secundum carnem natus fuerat, persequebatur eum, qui secundum spiritum: ita et nunc. Sed quid dicit scriptura? Eice ancillam et filium eius; non enim heres erit filius ancillae cum filio liberae. Nos autem, fratres, non sumus ancillae filii, sed liberae, qua libertate Christus nos liberauit. Haec forma intellegendi de apostolica auctoritate descendens locum nobis aperit, quem ad modum scripturas duorum testamentorum, ueteris et noui, accipere debeamus. Pars enim quaedam terrenae ciuitatis imago caelestis ciuitatis effecta est, non se significando, sed alteram, et ideo seruiens. Non enim propter se ipsam, sed propter aliam significandam est instituta, et praecedente alia significatione et ipsa praefigurans praefigurata est. Namque Agar ancilla Sarrae eiusque filius imago quaedam huius imaginis fuit; et quoniam transiturae erant umbrae luce ueniente, ideo dixit libera Sarra, quae significabat liberam ciuitatem, cui rursus alio modo significandae etiam illa umbra seruiebat: Eice ancillam et filium eius; non enim heres erit filius ancillae cum filio meo Isaac, quod ait apostolus: Cum filio liberae. Inuenimus ergo in terrena ciuitate duas formas, unam suam praesentiam demonstrantem, alteram caelesti ciuitati significandae sua praesentia seruientem. Parit autem ciues terrenae ciuitatis peccato uitiata natura, caelestis uero ciuitatis ciues parit a peccato naturam liberans gratia unde illa uocantur uasa irae, ista uasa misericordiae. Significatum est hoc etiam in duobus filiis Abrahae, quod unus de ancilla, quae dicebatur Agar, secundum carnem natus est Ismael, alter est autem de Sarra libera secundum repromissionem natus Isaac. Uterque quidem de semine Abrahae; sed illum genuit demonstrans consuetudo naturam, illum uero dedit promissio significans gratiam; ibi humanus usus ostenditur, hic diuinum beneficium commendatur. ### That Sarah’s Barrenness was Made Productive by God’s Grace. [¶7] Chapter 3.—That Sarah’s Barrenness was Made Productive by God’s Grace. > Latin: Caput III. De sterilitate Sarrae, quam Dei gratia fecundauit. [¶8] Sarah, in fact, was barren; and, despairing of offspring, and being resolved that she would have at least through her handmaid that blessing she saw she could not in her own person procure, she gave her handmaid to her husband, to whom she herself had been unable to bear children. From him she required this conjugal duty, exercising her own right in another’s womb. And thus Ishmael was born according to the common law of human generation, by sexual intercourse. Therefore it is said that he was born “according to the flesh,”—not because such births are not the gifts of God, nor His handiwork, whose creative wisdom “reaches,” as it is written, “from one end to another mightily, and sweetly doth she order all things,” but because, in a case in which the gift of God, which was not due to men and was the gratuitous largess of grace, was to be conspicuous, it was requisite that a son be given in a way which no effort of nature could compass. Nature denies children to persons of the age which Abraham and Sarah had now reached; besides that, in Sarah’s case, she was barren even in her prime. This nature, so constituted that offspring could not be looked for, symbolized the nature of the human race vitiated by sin and by just consequence condemned, which deserves no future felicity. Fitly, therefore, does Isaac, the child of promise, typify the children of grace, the citizens of the free city, who dwell together in everlasting peace, in which self-love and self-will have no place, but a ministering love that rejoices in the common joy of all, of many hearts makes one, that is to say, secures a perfect concord. > Latin: Sarra quippe sterilis erat et desperatione prolis saltem de ancilla sua concupiscens habere, quod de se ipsa non se posse cernebat, dedit eam fetandam uiro, de quo parere uoluerat nec potuerat. Exegit itaque etiam sic debitum de marito utens iure suo in utero alieno. Natus est ergo Ismael, sicut nascuntur homines, permixtione sexus utriusque, usitata lege naturae. Ideo dictum est: Secundum carnem; non quod ista beneficia Dei non sint aut non illa operetur Deus, cuius opifex sapientia adtingit, sicut scriptum est, a fine usque in finem fortiter et disponit omnia suauiter; sed ubi significandum fuerat Dei donum, quod indebitum hominibus gratia largiretur, sic oportuit dari filium, quem ad modum naturae non debebatur excursibus. Negat enim natura iam filios tali commixtioni maris et feminae, qualis esse poterat Abrahae et Sarrae in illa iam aetate, etiam mulieris accedente sterilitate, quae nec tunc parere potuit, quando non aetas fecunditati, sed aetati fecunditas defuit. Quod ergo naturae sic adfectae fructus posteritatis non debebatur, significat quod natura generis humani peccato uitiata ac per hoc iure damnata nihil uerae felicitatis in posterum merebatur. Recte igitur significat Isaac, per repromissionem natus, filios gratiae, ciues ciuitatis liberae, socios pacis aeternae, ubi sit non amor propriae ac priuatae quodam modo uoluntatis, sed communi eodemque inimitabili bono gaudens adque ex multis unum cor faciens, id est perfecte concors oboedientia caritatis. ### Of the Conflict and Peace of the Earthly City. [¶10] Chapter 4.—Of the Conflict and Peace of the Earthly City. > Latin: Caput IV. De terrenae ciuitatis uel concertatione uel pace. [¶11] But the earthly city, which shall not be everlasting (for it will no longer be a city when it has been committed to the extreme penalty), has its good in this world, and rejoices in it with such joy as such things can afford. But as this is not a good which can discharge its devotees of all distresses, this city is often divided against itself by litigations, wars, quarrels, and such victories as are either life-destroying or short-lived. For each part of it that arms against another part of it seeks to triumph over the nations through itself in bondage to vice. If, when it has conquered, it is inflated with pride, its victory is life-destroying; but if it turns its thoughts upon the common casualties of our mortal condition, and is rather anxious concerning the disasters that may befall it than elated with the successes already achieved, this victory, though of a higher kind, is still only short-lived; for it cannot abidingly rule over those whom it has victoriously subjugated. But the things which this city desires cannot justly be said to be evil, for it is itself, in its own kind, better than all other human good. For it desires earthly peace for the sake of enjoying earthly goods, and it makes war in order to attain to this peace; since, if it has conquered, and there remains no one to resist it, it enjoys a peace which it had not while there were opposing parties who contested for the enjoyment of those things which were too small to satisfy both. This peace is purchased by toilsome wars; it is obtained by what they style a glorious victory. Now, when victory remains with the party which had the juster cause, who hesitates to congratulate the victor, and style it a desirable peace? These things, then, are good things, and without doubt the gifts of God. But if they neglect the better things of the heavenly city, which are secured by eternal victory and peace never-ending, and so inordinately covet these present good things that they believe them to be the only desirable things, or love them better than those things which are believed to be better,—if this be so, then it is necessary that misery follow and ever increase. > Latin: Terrena porro ciuitas, quae sempiterna non erit (neque enim, cum extremo supplicio damnata fuerit, iam ciuitas erit), hic habet bonum suum, cuius societate laetatur, qualis esse de talibus laetitia rebus potest. Et quoniam non est tale bonum, ut nullas angustias faciat amatoribus suis, ideo ciuitas ista aduersus se ipsam plerumque diuiditur litigando, bellando adque pugnando et aut mortiferas aut certe mortales uictorias requirendo. Nam ex quacumque sui parte aduersus alteram sui partem bellando surrexerit, quaerit esse uictrix gentium, cum sit captiua uitiorum; et si quidem, cum uicerit, superbius extollitur, etiam mortifera; si uero condicionem cogitans casusque communes magis quae accidere possunt aduersis angitur, quam eis quae prouenerunt secundis rebus inflatur, tantummodo mortalis est ista uictoria. Neque enim semper dominari poterit permanendo eis, quos potuerit subiugare uincendo. Non autem recte dicitur ea bona non esse, quae concupiscit haec ciuitas, quando est et ipsa in suo humano genere melior. Concupiscit enim terrenam quandam pro rebus infimis pacem; ad eam namque desiderat peruenire bellando; quoniam si uicerit et qui resistat non fuerit, pax erit, quam non habebant partes in uicem aduersantes et pro bis rebus, quas simul habere non poterant, infelici egestate certantes. Hanc pacem requirunt laboriosa bella, hanc adipiscitur quae putatur gloriosa uictoria. Quando autem uincunt qui causa iustiore pugnabant, quis dubitet gratulandam esse uictoriam et prouenisse optabilem pacem? Haec bona sunt et sine dubio Dei dona. sunt. Sed si neglectis melioribus, quae ad supernam pertinent ciuitatem, ubi erit uictoria in aeterna et summa pace secura, bona ista sic concupiscuntur, ut uel sola esse credantur uel his, quae meliora creduntur, amplius diligantur: necesse est miseria consequatur et quae inerat augeatur. ### Of the Fratricidal Act of the Founder of the Earthly City, and the Corresponding Crime of the Founder of Rome. [¶13] Chapter 5.—Of the Fratricidal Act of the Founder of the Earthly City, and the Corresponding Crime of the Founder of Rome. > Latin: Caput V. De primo terrenae ciuitatis auctore fratricida, cuius inpietati Romanae urbis conditor germani caede responderit. [¶14] Thus the founder of the earthly city was a fratricide. Overcome with envy, he slew his own brother, a citizen of the eternal city, and a sojourner on earth. So that we cannot be surprised that this first specimen, or, as the Greeks say, archetype of crime, should, long afterwards, find a corresponding crime at the foundation of that city which was destined to reign over so many nations, and be the head of this earthly city of which we speak. For of that city also, as one of their poets has mentioned, “the first walls were stained with a brother’s blood,” or, as Roman history records, Remus was slain by his brother Romulus. And thus there is no difference between the foundation of this city and of the earthly city, unless it be that Romulus and Remus were both citizens of the earthly city. Both desired to have the glory of founding the Roman republic, but both could not have as much glory as if one only claimed it; for he who wished to have the glory of ruling would certainly rule less if his power were shared by a living consort. In order, therefore, that the whole glory might be enjoyed by one, his consort was removed; and by this crime the empire was made larger indeed, but inferior, while otherwise it would have been less, but better. Now these brothers, Cain and Abel, were not both animated by the same earthly desires, nor did the murderer envy the other because he feared that, by both ruling, his own dominion would be curtailed,—for Abel was not solicitous to rule in that city which his brother built,—he was moved by that diabolical, envious hatred with which the evil regard the good, for no other reason than because they are good while themselves are evil. For the possession of goodness is by no means diminished by being shared with a partner either permanent or temporarily assumed; on the contrary, the possession of goodness is increased in proportion to the concord and charity of each of those who share it. In short, he who is unwilling to share this possession cannot have it; and he who is most willing to admit others to a share of it will have the greatest abundance to himself. The quarrel, then, between Romulus and Remus shows how the earthly city is divided against itself; that which fell out between Cain and Abel illustrated the hatred that subsists between the two cities, that of God and that of men. The wicked war with the wicked; the good also war with the wicked. But with the good, good men, or at least perfectly good men, cannot war; though, while only going on towards perfection, they war to this extent, that every good man resists others in those points in which he resists himself. And in each individual “the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh.” This spiritual lusting, therefore, can be at war with the carnal lust of another man; or carnal lust may be at war with the spiritual desires of another, in some such way as good and wicked men are at war; or, still more certainly, the carnal lusts of two men, good but not yet perfect, contend together, just as the wicked contend with the wicked, until the health of those who are under the treatment of grace attains final victory. > Latin: Primus itaque fuit terrenae ciuitatis conditor fratricida; nam suum fratrem ciuem ciuitatis aeternae in hac terra peregrinantem inuidentia uictus occidit. Unde mirandum non est, quod tanto post in ea ciuitate condenda, quae fuerat huius terrenae ciuitatis, de qua loquimur, caput futura et tam multis gentibus regnatura, huic primo exemplo et, ut Graeci appellant, apxetoTttj) quaedam sui generis imago respondit. Nam et illic, sicut ipsum facinus quidam poeta commemorauit illorum, Fraterno primi maduerunt sanguine muri. Sic enim condita est Roma, quando occisum Remum a fratre Romulo Romana testatur historia; nisi quod isti terrenae ciuitatis ambo ciues erant. Ambo gloriam de Romanae rei publicae institutione quaerebant, sed ambo eam tantam, quantam, ni unus esset,- habere non poterant. Qui enim uolebat dominando gloriari, minus utique dominaretur, si eius potestas uiuo consorte minueretur. Ut ergo totam dominationem haberet unus, ablatus est socius, et scelere creuit in peius, quod innocentia minus esset et melius. Hi autem fratres Cain et Abel non habebant ambo inter se similem rerum terrenarum cupiditatem, nec in hoc alter alteri inuidit, quod eius dominatus fieret angustior, qui alterum occidit, si ambo dominarentur (Abel quippe non quaerebat dominationem in ea ciuitate, quae condebatur a fratre), sed inuidentia illa diabolica, qua inuident bonis mali, nulla alia causa, nisi quia illi boni sunt, illi mali. Nullo enim modo fit minor accedente seu permanente consorte possessio bonitatis, immo possessio bonitas, quam tanto latius, quanto concordius indiuidua sociorum possidet caritas. Non habebit denique istam possessionem, qui eam noluerit habere communem, et tanto eam reperiet ampliorem, quanto amplius ibi potuerit amare consortem. Illud igitur, quod inter Remum et Romulum exortum est, quem ad modum aduersus se ipsam terrena ciuitas diuidatur, ostendit; quod autem inter Cain et Abel, inter duas ipsas ciuitates, Dei -et hominum, inimicitias demonstrallit. Pugnant ergo inter se mali et mali; item pugnant inter se mali et boni: boni uero et boni, si perfecti sunt, inter se pugnare non possunt. Proficientes autem nondumque perfecti ita possunt, ut bonus quisque ex ea parte pugnet contra alterum, qua etiam contra semet ipsum; et in uno quippe homine caro concupiscit aduersus spiritum et spiritus aduersus carnem. Concupiscentia ergo spiritalis contra alterius potest pugnare carnalem uel concupiscentia carnalis contra alterius spiritalem, sicut inter se pugnant boni et mali; uel certe ipsae concupiscentiae carnales inter se duorum bonorum, nondum utique perfectorum, sicut inter se pugnant mali et mali, donec eorum, qui curantur, ad ultimam uictoriam sanitas perducatur. ### Of the Weaknesses Which Even the Citizens of the City of God Suffer During This Earthly Pilgrimage in Punishment of Sin, and of Which They are Healed by God’s Care. [¶16] Chapter 6.—Of the Weaknesses Which Even the Citizens of the City of God Suffer During This Earthly Pilgrimage in Punishment of Sin, and of Which They are Healed by God’s Care. > Latin: Caput VI. De languoribus, quos ex poena peccati etiam ciues ciuitatis Dei in huius uitae peregrinatione patiuntur et a quibus Deo medente sanantur. [¶17] This sickliness—that is to say, that disobedience of which we spoke in the fourteenth book—is the punishment of the first disobedience. It is therefore not nature, but vice; and therefore it is said to the good who are growing in grace, and living in this pilgrimage by faith, “Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.” In like manner it is said elsewhere, “Warn them that are unruly, comfort the feeble-minded, support the weak, be patient toward all men. See that none render evil for evil unto any man.” And in another place, “If a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.” And elsewhere, “Let not the sun go down upon your wrath.” And in the Gospel, “If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone.” So too of sins which may create scandal the apostle says, “Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.” For this purpose, and that we may keep that peace without which no man can see the Lord, many precepts are given which carefully inculcate mutual forgiveness; among which we may number that terrible word in which the servant is ordered to pay his formerly remitted debt of ten thousand talents, because he did not remit to his fellow-servant his debt of two hundred pence. To which parable the Lord Jesus added the words, “So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother.” It is thus the citizens of the city of God are healed while still they sojourn in this earth and sigh for the peace of their heavenly country. The Holy Spirit, too, works within, that the medicine externally applied may have some good result. Otherwise, even though God Himself make use of the creatures that are subject to Him, and in some human form address our human senses, whether we receive those impressions in sleep or in some external appearance, still, if He does not by His own inward grace sway and act upon the mind, no preaching of the truth is of any avail. But this God does, distinguishing between the vessels of wrath and the vessels of mercy, by His own very secret but very just providence. When He Himself aids the soul in His own hidden and wonderful ways, and the sin which dwells in our members, and is, as the apostle teaches, rather the punishment of sin, does not reign in our mortal body to obey the lusts of it, and when we no longer yield our members as instruments of unrighteousness, then the soul is converted from its own evil and selfish desires, and, God possessing it, it possesses itself in peace even in this life, and afterwards, with perfected health and endowed with im mortality, will reign without sin in peace everlasting. > Latin: Languor est quippe iste, id est illa inoboedientia, de qua in libro quarto decimo disseruimus, primae inoboedientiae supplicium, et ideo non natura, sed uitium; propter quod dicitur proficientibus bonis et ex fide in hac peregrinatione uiuentibus: In uicem onera uestra portate, et sic adinplebitis legem Christi; item alibi dicitur: Corripite inquietos, consolamini pusillanimes, suscipite infirmos, patientes estote ad omnes; uidete ne quis malum pro malo alicui reddat; item alio loco: Si praeoccupatus fuerit homo in aliquo delicto, nos, qui spiritales estis, instruite huius modi in spiritu mansuetudinis, intendens te ipsum, ne et tu tenteris; et alibi: Sol non occidat super iracundiam uestram; et in euangelio: Si peccauerit in te frater tuus, corripe eum inter te et ipsum; item de peccatis, in quibus multorum cauetur offensio, apostolus dicit: Peccantes coram omnibus argue, ut ceteri timorem habeant. Propter hoc et de uenia in uicem danda multa praecipiuntur et magna cura propter tenendam pacem, sine qua nemo poterit uidere Deum; ubi ille terror, quando iubetur seruus decem milium talentorum reddere debita, quae illi fuerant relaxata, quoniam debitum denariorum centum conseruo suo non relaxauit; qua similitudine proposita Dominus Iesus adiecit adque ait: Sic et uobis faciet Pater uester caelestis. si non dimiseritis unusquisque fratri suo de cordibus uestris. Hoc modo curantur ciues ciuitatis Dei in hac terra peregrinantes et paci supernae patriae suspirantes. Spiritus autem sanctus operatur intrinsecus, ut ualeat aliquid medicina, quae adhibetur extrinsecus. Alioquin etiamsi Deus ipse utens creatura sibi subdita in aliqua specie humana sensus adloquatur humanos, siue istos corporis siue illos, quos istis simillimos habemus in somnis, nec interiore gratia mentem regat adque agat, nihil prodest homini omnis praedicatio ueritatis. Facit autem hoc Deus a uasis misericordiae irae uasa discernens, dispensatione qua ipse nouit multum occulta, sed tamen iusta. Ipso quippe adiuuante mirabilibus et latentibus modis, cum peccatum quod habitat in membris nostris, quae potius iam poena peccati est, sicut apostolus praecipit, non regnat in nostro mortali corpore ad oboediendum desideriis eius nec ei membra nostra uelut iniquitatis arma exhibemus, conuertitur ad mentem non sibi ad mala, Deo regente, consentientem et eam regentem tranquillius nunc habebit, postea sanitate perfecta adque inmortalitate percepta homo sine ullo peccato in aeterna pace regnabit. ### Of the Cause of Cain’s Crime and His Obstinacy, Which Not Even the Word of God Could Subdue. [¶19] Chapter 7.—Of the Cause of Cain’s Crime and His Obstinacy, Which Not Even the Word of God Could Subdue. > Latin: Caput VII. De causa et pertinacia sceleris Cain, quem a facinore concepto nec Dei sermo reuocauit. [¶20] But though God made use of this very mode of address which we have been endeavoring to explain, and spoke to Cain in that form by which He was wont to accommodate Himself to our first parents and converse with them as a companion, what good influence had it on Cain? Did he not fulfill his wicked intention of killing his brother even after he was warned by God’s voice? For when God had made a distinction between their sacrifices, neglecting Cain’s, regarding Abel’s, which was doubtless intimated by some visible sign to that effect; and when God had done so because the works of the one were evil but those of his brother good, Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. For thus it is written: “And the Lord said unto Cain, Why are thou wroth, and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou offerest rightly, but dost not rightly distinguish, hast thou not sinned? Fret not thyself, for unto thee shall be his turning, and thou shalt rule over him.” In this admonition administered by God to Cain, that clause indeed, “If thou offerest rightly, but dost not rightly distinguish, hast thou not sinned?” is obscure, inasmuch as it is not apparent for what reason or purpose it was spoken, and many meanings have been put upon it, as each one who discusses it attempts to interpret it according to the rule of faith. The truth is, that a sacrifice is “rightly offered” when it is offered to the true God, to whom alone we must sacrifice. And it is “not rightly distinguished” when we do not rightly distinguish the places or seasons or materials of the offering, or the person offering, or the person to whom it is presented, or those to whom it is distributed for food after the oblation. Distinguishing is here used for discriminating,—whether when an offering is made in a place where it ought not or of a material which ought to be offered not there but elsewhere; or when an offering is made at a wrong time, or of a material suitable not then but at some other time; or when that is offered which in no place nor any time ought to be offered; or when a man keeps to himself choicer specimens of the same kind than he offers to God; or when he or any other who may not lawfully partake profanely eats of the oblation. In which of these particulars Cain displeased God, it is difficult to determine. But the Apostle John, speaking of these brothers, says, “Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous.” He thus gives us to understand that God did not respect his offering because it was not rightly “distinguished” in this, that he gave to God something of his own but kept himself to himself. For this all do who follow not God’s will but their own, who live not with an upright but a crooked heart, and yet offer to God such gifts as they suppose will procure from Him that He aid them not by healing but by gratifying their evil passions. And this is the characteristic of the earthly city, that it worships God or gods who may aid it in reigning victoriously and peacefully on earth not through love of doing good, but through lust of rule. The good use the world that they may enjoy God: the wicked, on the contrary, that they may enjoy the world would fain use God,—those of them, at least, who have attained to the belief that He is and takes an interest in human affairs. For they who have not yet attained even to this belief are still at a much lower level. Cain, then, when he saw that God had respect to his brother’s sacrifice, but not to his own, should have humbly chosen his good brother as his example, and not proudly counted him his rival. But he was wroth, and his countenance fell. This angry regret for another person’s goodness, even his brother’s, was charged upon him by God as a great sin. And He accused him of it in the interrogation, “Why are thou wroth, and why is thy countenance fallen?” For God saw that he envied his brother, and of this He accused him. For to men, from whom the heart of their fellow is hid, it might be doubtful and quite uncertain whether that sadness bewailed his own wickedness by which, as he had learned, he had displeased God, or his brother’s goodness, which had pleased God, and won His favorable regard to his sacrifice. But God, in giving the reason why He refused to accept Cain’s offering and why Cain should rather have been displeased at himself than at his brother, shows him that though he was unjust in “not rightly distinguishing,” that is, not rightly living and being unworthy to have his offering received, he was more unjust by far in hating his just brother without a cause. > Latin: M Sed hoc ipsum, quod sicut potuimus exposuimus, cum Deus locutus esset ad Cain eo more, quo cum primis hominibus per creaturam subiectam uelut eorum socius forma congrua loquebatur, quid ei profuit? Nonne conceptum scelus in necando fratre etiam post uerbum diuinae admonitionis ao inpleuit? Nam cum sacrificia discreuisset amborum, in illius respiciens, huius despiciens, quod non dubitandum est potuisse cognosci signo aliquo adtestante uisibili, et hoc ideo fecisset Deus, quia mala erant opera huius, fratris uero eius bona: contristatus est Cain ualde et concidit facies eius. Sic enim scriptum est: Et dixit Dominus ad Cain: Quare tristis factus es et quare concidit facies tua? Nonne si recte offeras, recte autem non diuidas, peccasti? Quiesce; ad te enim conuersio eius, et tu dominaberis illius. In hac admonitione uel monitu, quem Deus protulit ad Cain, illud quidem quod dictum est: Nonne si recte offeras, recte autem non diuidas, peccasti? quia non elucet quur uel unde sit dictum, multos sensus peperit eius obscuritas, cum diuinarum scripturarum quisque tractator secundum fidei regulam id conatur exponere. Recte quippe offertur sacrificium, cum offertur Deo uero, cui uni tantummodo sacrificandum est. Non autem recte diuiditur, dum non discernuntur recte uel loca uel tempora uel res ipsae quae offeruntur uel qui offert et cui offertur uel hi, quibus ad uescendum distribuitur quod oblatum est, ut diuisionem hic discretionem intellegamus; siue cum offertur ubi non oportet, aut quod non ibi sed alibi oportet, siue cum offertur quando non oportet, aut quod non tunc sed alias oportet, siue cum id offertur, quod nusquam et numquam penitus debuit, siue cum electiora sibi eiusdem generis rerum tenet homo, quam sunt ea, quae offert Deo, siue eius rei. quae oblata est, fit particeps profanus aut quilibet quem fas non est fieri. In quo autem horum Deo displicuerit Cain, facile non potest inueniri. Sed quoniam Iohannes apostolus, cum de his fratribus loqueretur: Non sicut Cain, inquit, ex maligno erat et occidit fratrem suum; et cuius rei gratia occidit? Quia opera illius maligna fuerunt, fratris autem eius iusta: datur intellegi propterea Deum non respexisse in munus eius, quia hoc ipso male diuidebat, dans Deo aliquid suum, sibi autem se ipsum. Quod omnes faciunt, qui non Dei, sed suam sectantes uoluntatem, id est non recto, sed peruerso corde uiuentes, offerunt tamen Deo munus, quo putant eum redimi, ut eorum non opituletur sanandis prauis cupiditatibus, sed explendis. Et hoc est terrenae proprium ciuitatis, Deum uel deos colere, quibus adiuuantibus regnet in uictoriis et pace terrena, non caritate consulendi, sed dominandi cupiditate. Boni quippe ad hoc utuntur mundo, ut fruantur Deo; mali autem contra, ut fruantur mundo, uti uolunt Deo; qui tamen eum uel esse uel res humanas curare iam credunt. Sunt enim multo deteriores, qui ne hoc quidem credunt. Cognito itaque Cain quod super eius germani sacrificium, nec super suum respexerat Deus, utique fratrem bonum mutatus imitari, non elatus debuit aemulari. Sed contristatus est et concidit facies eius. Hoc peccatum maxime arguit Deus, tristitiam de alterius bonitate, et hoc fratris. Hoc quippe arguendo interrogauit dicens: Quare contristatus es, et quare concidit facies tua? Quia enim fratri inuidebat, Deus uidebat et hoc arguebat. Nam hominibus, quibus absconditum est cor alterius, esse posset ambiguum et prorsus incertum, utrum illa tristitia malignitatem suam, in qua se Deo displicuisse didicerat, an fratris doluerit bonitatem, quae Deo placuit, cum in sacrificium eius adspexit. Sed rationem reddens Deus, quur eius oblationem accipere noluerit, ut sibi ipse potius merito quam ei frater inmerito displiceret, cum esset iniustus non recte diuidendo, hoc est non recte uiuendo, et indignus cuius adprobaretur oblatio, quam esset iniustior, quod fratrem iustum gratis odisset, ostendit. [¶21] Yet He does not dismiss him without counsel, holy, just, and good. “Fret not thyself,” He says, “for unto thee shall be his turning, and thou shall rule over him.” Over his brother, does He mean? Most certainly not. Over what, then, but sin? For He had said, “Thou hast sinned,” and then He added, “Fret not thyself, for to thee shall be its turning, and thou shall rule over it.” And the “turning” of sin to the man can be understood of his conviction that the guilt of sin can be laid at no other man’s door but his own. For this is the health-giving medicine of penitence, and the fit plea for pardon; so that, when it is said, “To thee its turning,” we must not supply “shall be,” but we must read, “To thee let its turning be,” understanding it as a command, not as a prediction. For then shall a man rule over his sin when he does not prefer it to himself and defend it, but subjects it by repentance; otherwise he that becomes protector of it shall surely become its prisoner. But if we understand this sin to be that carnal concupiscence of which the apostle says, “The flesh lusteth against the spirit,” among the fruits of which lust he names envy, by which assuredly Cain was stung and excited to destroy his brother, then we may properly supply the words “shall be,” and read, “To thee shall be its turning, and thou shalt rule over it.” For when the carnal part which the apostle calls sin, in that place where he says, “It is not I who do it, but sin that dwelleth in me,” that part which the philosophers also call vicious, and which ought not to lead the mind, but which the mind ought to rule and restrain by reason from illicit motions,—when, then, this part has been moved to perpetrate any wickedness, if it be curbed and if it obey the word of the apostle, “Yield not your members instruments of unrighteousness unto sin,” it is turned towards the mind and subdued and conquered by it, so that reason rules over it as a subject. It was this which God enjoined on him who was kindled with the fire of envy against his brother, so that he sought to put out of the way him whom he should have set as an example. “Fret not thyself,” or compose thyself, He says: withhold thy hand from crime; let not sin reign in your mortal body to fulfill it in the lusts thereof, nor yield your members instruments of unrighteousness unto sin. “For to thee shall be its turning,” so long as you do not encourage it by giving it the rein, but bridle it by quenching its fire. “And thou shalt rule over it;” for when it is not allowed any external actings, it yields itself to the rule of the governing mind and righteous will, and ceases from even internal motions. There is something similar said in the same divine book of the woman, when God questioned and judged them after their sin, and pronounced sentence on them all,—the devil in the form of the serpent, the woman and her husband in their own persons. For when He had said to her, “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow shall thou bring forth children,” then He added, “and thy turning shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” What is said to Cain about his sin, or about the vicious concupiscence of his flesh, is here said of the woman who had sinned; and we are to understand that the husband is to rule his wife as the soul rules the flesh. And therefore, says the apostle, “He that loveth his wife, loveth himself; for no man ever yet hated his own flesh.” This flesh, then, is to be healed, because it belongs to ourselves: is not to be abandoned to destruction as if it were alien to our nature. But Cain received that counsel of God in the spirit of one who did not wish to amend. In fact, the vice of envy grew stronger in him; and, having entrapped his brother, he slew him. Such was the founder of the earthly city. He was also a figure of the Jews who slew Christ the Shepherd of the flock of men, prefigured by Abel the shepherd of sheep: but as this is an allegorical and prophetical matter, I forbear to explain it now; besides, I remember that I have made some remarks upon it in writing against Faustus the Manichæan. > Latin: Non tamen eum dimittens sine mandato sancto, iusto et bono: Quiesce, inquit; ad te enim conuersio eius, et tu dominaberis illius. Numquid fratris? Absit. Cuius igitur, nisi peccati? Dixerat enim: Peccasti, tum deinde addidit: Quiesce; ad te enim conuersio eius, et tu dominaberis illius. Potest quidem ita intellegi ad ipsum hominem conuersionem esse debere peccati, ut nulli alii quam sibi sciat tribuere debere quod peccat. Haec est enim salubris paenitentiae medicina et ueniae petitio non incongrua, ut, ubi ait: Ad te enim conuersio eius, non subaudiatur […] sed (sit); praecipientis uidelicet, non praedicentis modo. Tunc enim dominabitur quisque peccato, si id sibi non defendendo praeposuerit, sed paenitendo subiecerit; alioquin et illi seruiet dominanti, si patrocinium adhibuerit accidenti. Sed ut peccatum intellegatur concupiscentia ipsa carnalis, de qua dicit apostolus: Caro concupiscit aduersus spiritum, in cuius carnis fructibus et inuidiam commemorat, qua utique Cain stimulabatur et accendebatur in fratris exitium: bene subauditur […] id est: Ad te enim conuersio eius erit, et tu dominaberis illius. Cum enim commota fuerit pars ipsa carnalis, quam peccatum appellat apostolus, ubi dicit: Non ego operor illud, sed quod habitat in me peccatum (quam partem animi etiam philosophi dicunt esse uitiosam, non quae mentem debeat trahere, sed cui mens debeat imperare eamque ab inlicitis operibus ratione cohibere); — cum ergo commota fuerit ad aliquid perperam committendum, si quiescatur et obtemperetur dicenti apostolo: Nec exhibueritis membra uestra arma iniquitatis peccato, ad mentem domita et uicta conuertitur, ut subditae ratio dominetur. Hoc praecepit Deus huic, qui facibus inuidiae inflammabatur in fratrem et, quem debuerat imitari, cupiebat auferri. Quiesce, inquit; manus ab scelere contine, non regnet peccatum in tuo mortali corpore ad oboediendum desideriis eius, nec exhibeas membra tua iniquitatis arma peccato. Ad te enim conuersio eius, dum non adiuuatur relaxando, sed quiescendo frenatur; et tu dominaberis illius, ut, cum forinsecus non permittitur operari, sub potestate mentis regentis et beneuolentis adsuescat etiam intrinsecus non moueri. Dictum est tale aliquid in eodem diuino libro et de muliere, quando post peccatum Deo interrogante adque iudicante damnationis sententias acceperunt, in serpente diabolus et in se ipsis illa et maritus. Cum enim dixisset ei: Multiplicans multiplicabo tristitias tuas et gemitum tuum, et in tristitiis paries filios, deinde addidit: Et ad uirum tuum conuersio tua, et ipse tui dominabitur. Quod dictum est ad Cain de peccato uel de uitiosa carnis concupiscentia, hoc isto loco de peccatrice femina; ubi intellegendum est uirum ad regendam uxorem animo carnem regenti similem esse oportere. Propter quod dicit apostolus: Qui diligit uxorem suam, se ipsum diligit; nemo enim umquam carnem suam odio habuit. Sananda sunt enim haec sicut nostra, non sicut aliena damnanda. Sed illud Dei praeceptum Cain sicut praeuaricator accepit. Inualescente quippe inuidentiae uitio fratrem insidiatus occidit. Talis erat terrenae conditor ciuitatis. Quo modo autem significauerit etiam Iudaeos, a quibus Christus occisus est pastor ouium hominum, quem pastor ouium pecorum praefigurabat Abel, quia in allegoria prophetica res est, parco nunc dicere, et quaedam hinc aduersus Faustum Manichaeum dixisse me recolo.