Against Felix the Manichaean 2.6–2.17

“You also have this in the apocryphal scriptures, which the catholic canon does not admit, but which are all the more welcome to you the more they are excluded from the catholic canon. Let me cite something from there too, by whose authority I am not bound, but by which you are convicted. In the Acts written by Leucius, which he writes as acts of the apostles, you have it set down thus: ‘For the fair-seeming fictions, and the feigned display, and the compulsion of visible things do not proceed from one's own nature, but from that man who by himself became worse through seduction.’ See how he said here both ‘by himself’ and ‘through seduction.’ For the devil was man's seducer, not a sinner by nature, but first a sinner by will. But since it was in man's power not to consent to the seducer, therefore it is set down both ‘by himself’ and ‘through seduction,’ so that in what is set down as ‘by himself’ you may understand free choice, and in what is set down as ‘through seduction’ the devil — not the oppressor of one unwilling, but the tempter of one willing.”

“Accordingly, since I have answered and proved as far as I could that what is written in the holy books about sinners and the righteous concerns not a difference of natures but a distinction of deserts — and in these deserts it is not nature that creates necessity but the will that creates guilt — answer what I have already asked: if nothing could harm God, why did he mingle a part of himself, his own substance, what he himself is, with demons to be polluted and bound — something you could find in no canonical divine scripture? But if it could harm him, you do not worship an incorruptible God, of whom the apostle says: ‘Now to the King of the ages, immortal, invisible, incorruptible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever.’ Again he says: ‘God dwells in unapproachable light.’ Do the saints not approach that light, of whom it is written: ‘Approach him and be enlightened’? Do the saints not approach that light, of whom it is said: ‘Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God’? But because no one can approach it except one to whom God himself grants that he approach, it is therefore unapproachable in itself. For no one can approach it whom God does not wish to approach; but the one to whom he grants it will approach. How, then, could that race of darkness approach the dwelling of God, where the light is unapproachable, which no one approaches except one to whom God grants it? Or, if it had received from God the gift of approaching, he would not grant it for storming the kingdom of God, and would not fear. But if he had not given such a gift, so that it could approach, he was secure in his kingdom, dwelling in unapproachable light; what could he fear from the race of darkness, that he should mix with it a part of himself, his own substance, what he himself is, to be bound, oppressed, contaminated — where it would not only be held miserably but also be cleansed shamefully? For you say — it is wicked to hear, but to confound you and perhaps to save you we cannot keep silent — you say that the part of God is cleansed from there in the ship of light which you call the sun, doing injury to the creator of the sun and to the sun itself, which you say was made such that so great a shamefulness is enacted there. For you say that God, placed there, turns his powers into males to excite the lusts of female demons, and turns the same again into females to excite the lusts of male demons, so that, when they inflame lust in the demons, who are kindled toward the forms devised by God, their members are loosened, and so the part of God that was bound there escapes. Such a disgrace, such a sacrilege you have dared to believe and do not hesitate to preach. These are the middle of your doctrine. And what is the end? What, but that God could not cleanse the whole? And because he could not, you say he will make it as a covering for the race of darkness, so that what could not be cleansed, and committed nothing of its own accord, is condemned there for ever. So it comes about that your God — not true but invented, not established anywhere but imagined in your heart — mixes his part unhappily, cleanses it shamefully, condemns it cruelly. Answer these things, then, and begin with what I said: why did God mix this part of himself, which nothing could harm? Or, if something could, how is he incorruptible?”

Felix said: “You claim that Mani is cruel for saying these things; what do we say about Christ, who said, ‘Go into the eternal fire’?” Augustine said: “He said this to sinners.” Felix said: “Why were these sinners not cleansed?” Augustine said: “Because they were unwilling.” Felix said: “Because they were unwilling — did you say this?” Augustine said: “I said this: because they were unwilling.” Felix said: “Why were they unwilling? Is there anyone who does not want to be healed? Anyone who does not want to be cleansed? Anyone who does not want to be enlightened? Is there a sick man who does not want to come to health? If what Mani says is cruel, that some part of God which could not cleanse itself is bound in the globe, is this not cruel, that Christ, who said, ‘I came for sinners,’ now sends to eternal fire those who bore his name? But, I suppose, they could not fulfill the commandments. If this is cruel, that is crueler; if that is crueler, that God could not cleanse them and bound them in the globe, this too seems crueler, that Christ sends to eternal fire those he could not cleanse. Let your holiness explain this to me about this cruelty.” Augustine said: “If you had either understood what I have already said, or admitted that you understood it — for perhaps, having nothing to say, you pretended not to understand what is plain — you would not say these things. For we have already said and proved through the divine scriptures that there is free choice, and that God is the just judge of free choice, the rewarder of the faithful who submit to him and wish to be healed, but the condemner of the proud and ungodly. Since, then, he came to heal sinners, he certainly heals those who confess their sins, he heals the repentant. But no one repents when another has sinned, if the repentance is just and true; whence the Lord himself says: ‘I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.’ Repentance itself shows that if we do sin, it is not from a foreign nature but from our own will. For if one repents when another sins, that is not a prudent but an insane repentance. But according to you there are no sins at all. For the race of darkness does not sin, because it acts according to its nature; the nature of light does not sin, because what it does it is forced to do. So you find no sin for God to condemn, you find no sin that repentance can heal. But if there is repentance, there is also guilt; if there is guilt, there is also will; if there is will in sinning, there is no nature that compels. But if those who cannot fulfill what they will suffer some weakness — whence the apostle says: ‘I see another law in my members warring against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin which is in my members’ — it is plain that this has come from the transmission of Adam's first sin and from bad habit. For even today people form a habit by free will, and once they have formed it they cannot easily overcome it; so they themselves, from themselves, have brought it about that a law dwells in their members against them. But those who conceive the fear of God and through free choice submit themselves to be healed by the best physician — and as by a good healer so by a merciful creator — are healed through the humility of confession and repentance. But the proud, who say that they are righteous, or who say that it is not they who sin but something else in them that sins, and another nature that sins from them, through that very pride both become incurable and experience the just judgment of God, who resists the proud but gives grace to the humble. It is not unworthy, then, that God should say, ‘Go into the eternal fire,’ to those who by free choice rejected his mercy, and should say, ‘Come, blessed of my Father, receive the kingdom,’ to those who by free choice received his faith, confessed their sins, repented, were displeasing to themselves as they had been, and as they had been made by him were pleasing to him. So now answer what I asked — but let me obtain this from you, that we make no needless delays: if nothing could harm God, why did he send us here? If something could harm him, God is not incorruptible.”

Felix said: “If nothing could harm God, why did he send his Son here?” Augustine said: “See how you always ask and will not answer what you are asked. Hear what you asked; but remember that you do not answer what I say, while I do answer. Nothing can harm God; but he sent his Son to be clothed with flesh and to appear to men, to heal sinners, and in that very flesh, which he took from us, to suffer for us. For in his own nature he could suffer nothing, because ‘in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.’ In this nature, since the Word was God, he could suffer nothing. But so that he could suffer for us, ‘the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.’ The Word became flesh by taking flesh, not by being changed into flesh; for he took humanity, he did not lose divinity. So the same is God and the same is man: in the nature of God equal to the Father, in the nature of man made mortal, among us, for us, from us; remaining what he was, taking up what he was not, to set free what he had made, not what he was. So the passion of Christ is not from need but from mercy. For he gave us an example of patience from what is ours, that is, to man from man, to flesh from flesh; yet he himself did not become worse in that flesh, but flesh became better in him. But a part of your God, without taking any flesh — for there was nothing in the race of darkness for which it should suffer — came down to be held, bound, polluted, and cleansed more shamefully than it was bound; for I have already spoken of its cleansing. The more unworthy all these things are, the easier they are to understand, since they do not befall the nature of God. And far be it from a pious and faithful mind to believe such things about God — the good God, the true God — as you believe about one whom you did not find but invented. Answer now: if nothing could harm God, why, according to your empty talk, was that pure substance of his sent here, taking no flesh, to suffer in itself, if it was to suffer at all, and not in a flesh it had not taken up?”

Felix said: “If God could not be harmed at all by the opposing side, and Christ could not be harmed at all by the opposing nature, to whom did Christ come, to set it free? For, as you say, he came for our liberation. So we were in captivity. If we were held in captivity and Christ came to free us from captivity, the one who held us was either foreign to God or a power of God. If the one who held us was a power of God, why did he send Christ, he who held us? If it was in his choice when he wished to let us go, why is Christ crucified? It escapes no one that Christ was crucified. Why did they crucify him? If it is a power of God, it was doing us no harm. If it was a power of God, we were not captives with him, but as it were we were with our own prince, as a son with his parents, not as Romans among barbarians. It was not necessary, then, since we were placed with a power of God, for God to send his Son, so that it could be said that our deliverer came. If, then, it appears that we were placed with a power of God, the apostle said: ‘Christ freed us from the curse of the law, for it is written: Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.’ For the apostle says this. If he who curses all who hang on a tree is a power of God — for Christ hung on a tree, and all his apostles who were condemned for his commandment — who, then, is this one who curses everyone who hangs on a tree?”

Augustine said: “Those whom Christ redeemed from the devil were held by the devil through their own consent, and were placed under his terms by the just judgment of God, having consented through free choice to his seduction. And as it was in man's power to consent to the devil so as to be taken captive, so it was in the power of the devil himself, when he was an angel, to sin so as to be changed for the worse. So the sinning angel, through free choice, persuaded to sin a man who had free choice, so that the devil, had he not willed, would not have sinned, and man, had he not willed, would not have consented. But when he was now held by the one to whom he had consented — not because the devil could do anything, but because it was God's just judgment to give into the devil's power the man who despised God's power over him and refused to obey his law — since, then, Christ found sinners thus under sin, sin being in free choice, finding sinners under sin he redeemed those who confess from the one who is proud. As for what is set down in the law, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree,’ whence the apostle says, ‘Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us; for it is written: Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree’ — he does not censure the law but commends the mercy of the Lord. For since Adam had sinned, and that whole mass and offspring of sin was accursed, but the Lord willed to take flesh from that very mass, so that by taking up mortality, which had come from punishment, he might undo death — which came from grace — therefore the law says, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.’ For death itself hung on the tree, the death that came from the curse. So as by taking up death he slew death, so by taking up the curse he undid the curse. Whence the apostle too says: ‘Knowing that our old man was crucified together with him’; for from our old man, that is, from the lot of death which came by the desert of sin, he deigned to take mortal flesh from the virgin Mary, in which he might give us an example both of passion and of resurrection — of passion to strengthen patience, of resurrection to stir up hope — so as to show us two lives in the flesh which he took from our mortal life, one laborious, the other blessed: the laborious, which we must endure; the blessed, which we must hope for. We endure the laborious one by the desert of our sin; but he showed it in his flesh, not by the desert of his iniquity but by the office of his mercy. And that you may know that the law is good, which you wished to censure, the apostle Paul himself said in one place: ‘The law came in so that the offense might abound.’ He still seems to censure it; but hear what follows: ‘But where the offense abounded,’ he says, ‘grace superabounded.’ For the law was given to proud men who attributed everything to their own strength, so that when they could not fulfill the law given them, they might be found transgressors, and having become guilty under the law might seek mercy from the law's founder. Accordingly, a little later the same apostle says: ‘So the law indeed is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.’ But lest you say that he speaks of another commandment, to show that he speaks of the one of which he had said a little before, ‘The law came in so that the offense might abound,’ he at once posed the question to himself: ‘Did what is good, then, become death to me? By no means; but sin, that it might appear as sin, worked death for me through what is good.’ For sin was there, but sin did not appear; the law was given to the proud man, he acted against the law, and sin appeared, which was there but did not appear. And sin, appearing, humbled the proud man; the proud man, humbled, became repentant; from repentance mercy was obtained. You have heard, then, what you asked; answer what I ask: could the race of darkness do no harm to God? Why did he send a part of himself here to be mingled with and polluted by the nature of demons?”

Felix said: “If we are in our own choice, let no one force anyone; when I wish, I will be a Christian. The will lies with us, either to be a Christian or not to be.” Augustine said: “That the will lies with us is plain, and I have taught this from the divine scriptures; even the one who led you into this error was compelled to say it, though unwilling. As for your saying, ‘Let no one be forced; when I wish, I will be a Christian’ — plainly no one forces you; be one when you wish, since you came here of your own will and have argued these things of your own will. And woe to the will if it is evil; peace to the good will if it is good. For whether it is evil or good, it is will. A crown follows the good will, punishment follows the evil will. God is the judge of wills, but the creator of natures. If, then, you think you are being forced to be a Christian, hear from us that you are not forced at all. Rather consider what you hear, weigh it; you are in your own will. Examine as a prudent man — if there is in you any prudence, even human — whether what has been said is supported by truth, and whether you yourself have failed in the defense of your Mani, as appears; and when you wish, be what you are not yet, and cease to be what you are.”

Felix said: “See, now briefly, as your holiness said, so that we do not pile up papers: if it pleases you, come to what I asked some days ago; show me the truth, so that it may appear that what I hold is not the truth, and you have me ready to believe.” Augustine said: “It is already quite plain that what you hold is not the truth. For far be it from the hearts of those who seek or hold the truth to believe that God, forced by necessity, plunged his substance into the nature of demons to be bound and polluted; far be it from the faithful to believe that God, to free his substance, turns himself into males against females and into females against males to excite their lust; far be it from the faithful to believe that God afterward condemns for ever his own substance, which he himself plunged into the demons. That this is not the truth, then, is plain. But since you wish the truth to be laid open to you, now that this falsehood has been driven out and refuted, if anything still moves you toward learning the catholic faith, you can be instructed from the beginning of faith. For devout faith makes one fit to receive the unchangeable truth; whoever refuses to begin from this faith will remain outside in his pride and cannot be led to what he strives for or wishes to reach. But since that falsehood is now manifest, anathematize the falsehood, so that you can begin to be fit to know the truth.”

Felix said: “When it has appeared to me. Since it does not appear to me, since another has not been shown to me, I cannot anathematize.” Augustine said: “Is the error that says God is corruptible to be anathematized, or not?” Felix said: “Say it again.” Augustine said: “Is the error that says God is corruptible to be anathematized, or not?” Felix said: “Let it be inquired whether he says so.” Augustine said: “I asked this: is one who says God is corruptible to be anathematized, or not?” Felix said: “One who says God is corruptible is to be anathematized. Is this what you charge against me?” Augustine said: “This is what I ask.” Felix said: “You speak of a corruptible God, and not of what you said at first, that he gave a part of himself to his adversaries?” Augustine said: “Meanwhile answer what I ask: is one who says that God is corruptible to be anathematized, or not?” Felix said: “Very much so.” Augustine said: “Is one who says that the nature and substance of God is corruptible to be anathematized, or not?” Felix said: “I did not understand what you said.” Augustine said: “I say what every person understands who does not pretend not to understand: is one who says that the nature and substance of God — that is, whatever God himself is — is corruptible to be anathematized, or not?” Felix said: “Yes, he is to be anathematized, if it is proved to be true.” Augustine said: “I have not yet said to you that Mani says the nature of God is corruptible; but I said to you that whoever says this is to be anathematized.” Felix said: “And I answered: yes.”

Augustine said: “Is that part which was mixed with the race of darkness of the nature of God, or of some other nature?” Felix said: “Of God's.” Augustine said: “Is what is of the nature of God what God is, or something else, which is not God?” Felix said: “It is so: what is of God is God, as it is also written: ‘The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it’; for God is light, and in him there is no darkness.” Augustine said: “You answered well, that whatever is of the nature of God is God, and God is light and in him there is no darkness, and such a light shone in the darkness and the darkness did not comprehend it. Let us see, then, whether Mani does not say that a part of God was comprehended by the darkness — and not only that, but held bound, and not only that, but stained and polluted, so that it needs the mercy of a deliverer and cleanser. But if he says these things, then by your account too, and by your true confessions, he is to be anathematized, because he says that a part of God and the nature of God, which is God himself, was comprehended by the darkness and bound and polluted — which you yourself, speaking according to the gospel, could not say; but you said truly, ‘The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.’ Mani, then, is to be anathematized, who said that the light was darkened in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it.” Felix said: “But what is polluted and what is held is set free; and we, if we are polluted, are cleansed.” Augustine said: “But this is not rightly said of the nature of God. Of a nature that can be polluted it is rightly said that it is polluted and cleansed; but of the nature that cannot be polluted, you see with how great a sacrilege it is said that it is polluted and cleansed — especially since you say that a certain part of God is so polluted that for this reason it is bound for ever in the globe of darkness, because it could not be cleansed. One who does not anathematize this answered falsely a little earlier that everyone who says God is corruptible is to be anathematized.”

Felix said: “As to what your holiness said about the part that did not cleanse itself from the defilement of the race of darkness — Mani says this too, that they were not sent into the kingdom of God. You assert that they are condemned; but Mani says that they are not condemned, but placed as a guard over that race of darkness.” Augustine said: “I am dealing with you about the part which you say is cleansed after being polluted; afterward, if need be, about the part that is fixed in its globe. Meanwhile, what is cleansed was polluted.” Felix said: “What is polluted is also cleansed.” Augustine said: “Is not one who says that the nature of God and the substance of God and what God is can be polluted, bound, and defiled by the race of darkness to be anathematized, then?” Felix said: “From what did Christ cleanse us? From what did he free us?” Augustine said: “Christ did not free a part of God, nor the nature of God, but in his mercy freed the creature he had made, which had fallen into sin through free choice. He cleansed a thing that could be polluted, he freed a thing that could be taken captive, he healed a thing that could become sick. But now we are speaking of God, of the nature of God, of the substance of God, of what God is. Could it be polluted, or could it not?”

Felix said: “Our soul is from God. Is it not polluted? If it is not from God, why was Christ crucified for it? If, then, it appears that Christ was crucified for our soul, it appears that it is from God and was polluted and he cleansed it.” Augustine said: “I say that not only the soul, but also our body and every creature, both spiritual and bodily, is from God, because the catholic faith holds this. But what God begot of himself, which is what he himself is, is one thing; what God made is another. What God begot is equal to the Father; what God made is not equal, the thing founded to its founder. We say that one thing is from God which is better said to be of God, because it is what he himself is, as the only-begotten Son, as his Word, through whom all things were made; but other things we call from God in this sense, that he spoke and they were made, he commanded and they were established. The soul belongs here, among the things God made, not that which God begot of himself. Therefore the Word, whom he begot of himself, could not, cannot, and will not be able to be polluted. But the soul, which he made to govern the body, so that it should serve the higher and rule the lower — that is, serve God and rule the body — was polluted through sin when it despised God's law; but God, showing mercy to the things he made, sent the Son through whom he made them, and through him remade them. When what was not had to be founded, it was founded through the Word; when what had been made and then depraved had to be remade, a creature was taken up from it, from the virgin Mary, so that through what was man it might be shown to man both what must be endured and what must be hoped for. And so the nature of the Word, the substance of the only-begotten Son of God, suffered nothing, either from the Jewish persecutors or from the devil, the evil angel, persecuting him. But because he clothed himself with flesh, he clothed himself with a mortal thing, a passible thing, a changeable thing; in what he put on he suffered whatever he willed, as an example of patience, and restored it, as an example of righteousness. Now tell me about the part of God, which is God, whether it can be polluted or not. If it can, God is not unchangeable, and whoever says this is to be anathematized. But if it cannot, you see that Mani is to be anathematized, who says that a part of God, the nature of God, what God is, came here pure to the race of darkness and was bound and polluted, so that it needs to be loosed and cleansed.”