On the Gift of Perseverance

Now we must discuss perseverance more carefully; for in the former book too, when we were dealing with the beginning of faith, we said something about it as well. We assert, then, that the perseverance by which one perseveres in Christ to the end is the gift of God. And by “the end” I mean that by which this life is ended, in which alone there is danger of falling. Therefore, whether anyone has received this gift is uncertain as long as he is living this life. For if he falls before he dies, he is certainly said not to have persevered, and it is said most truly. How, then, is one who has not persevered to be said to have received or had perseverance? For if someone has continence and falls from it and becomes incontinent, or likewise righteousness, or patience, or faith itself, he is rightly said to have had it and not to have it; for he was continent, or righteous, or patient, or faithful, as long as he was; but when he ceased to be so, he is not what he was. But he who has not persevered, how was he persevering, since each one shows himself persevering by persevering, which this man did not do? But lest anyone object and say, “If someone, from the time he became a believer, lived, say, ten years, and in the middle of that time fell from the faith, did he not persevere for five years?” I do not contend about words, if that too is thought should be called perseverance, as of its own time; but this perseverance which we are now dealing with, by which one perseveres in Christ to the end, he must in no way be said to have had who has not persevered to the end; and a believer of one year, or as much less as can be imagined, has had it rather, if he lived faithfully until he died, than a believer of many years, if he fell from the stability of faith a short time before death.

This being established, let us see whether this perseverance, of which it is said, “He who perseveres to the end will be saved,” is the gift of God. If it is not, how is what the Apostle says true: “To you it has been given for Christ's sake not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him”? For of these one belongs to the beginning, the other to the end; yet both are the gift of God, because both are said to have been given, as we have also said above. For what is more truly the beginning for a Christian than to believe in Christ? What end is better than to suffer for Christ? But as regards believing in Christ, some kind of objection was found, so that not the beginning but the increase of faith was said to be the gift of God; to which opinion, by the Lord's gift, we have answered more than enough. But what can be said, why perseverance to the end should not be given in Christ to one to whom it is given to suffer for Christ, or, to speak more expressly, to whom it is given to die for Christ? For the apostle Peter too, showing that this is the gift of God, says, “It is better, if the will of God should will it, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil.” When he says, “if the will of God should will it,” he shows that this is given by God, and not to all the saints, that they suffer for Christ. For those whom the will of God does not will to come to the experience and glory of suffering do not fail to come to the kingdom of God, if they persevere in Christ to the end. But who would say that this perseverance is not given to those who die in Christ by bodily sickness or by any other mishap, when a far more difficult one is given to those by whom death itself is undergone for Christ? For it is much more difficult to persevere where the persecutor is acting to prevent perseverance, and therefore one endures even to death in order to persevere. That perseverance, then, is more difficult to have, and this one easier; but for him to whom nothing is difficult it is easy to give either. For God promised this, saying, “I will put my fear in their hearts, that they may not depart from me.” What else is this but, “Such and so great will be my fear, which I will put in their heart, that they will cleave to me perseveringly”? And why is this perseverance asked of God, if it is not given by God? Or is this too a mocking petition, when that is asked of him which it is known he does not give, but which, without his giving, is in man's power? Just as that thanksgiving too is a mockery, if thanks are given to God for what he himself did not give or do. But what I said there, I say here too: “Do not be deceived,” says the Apostle; “God is not mocked.” O man, God is witness not only of your words but also of your thoughts: if you ask anything truly and faithfully of one so rich, believe that you receive from him from whom you ask it what you ask. Do not honour him with your lips and exalt yourself above him in your heart, believing that you have from yourself what you pretend to ask of him. Or perhaps this perseverance is not asked of him? Whoever says this is not to be refuted by my arguments but overwhelmed by the prayers of the saints. Is there any of them who does not ask of God for himself that he may persevere in him, when in the very prayer which is called the Lord's, because the Lord taught it, when it is prayed by the saints, scarcely anything else is understood to be asked but perseverance? Read somewhat more attentively its exposition in the book of the blessed martyr Cyprian which he composed on this subject, whose title is On the Lord's Prayer; and see how many years beforehand an antidote was prepared against the poisons of the Pelagians that were to come. For there are three things, as you know, which the Catholic Church chiefly defends against them. One of them is that the grace of God is not given according to our merits; since even all the merits of the righteous are gifts of God and are conferred by the grace of God. The second is that no one lives in this corruptible body, in however great righteousness, without sins of some kind. The third is that man is born liable to the sin of the first man and bound by the chain of condemnation, unless the guilt which is contracted by generation is loosed by regeneration. Of these three, only the one I put last is not treated in the above-mentioned book of the glorious martyr; but of the other two it is argued there with such clarity that the above-mentioned heretics, new enemies of the grace of Christ, are found to have been refuted long before they were born. Among these merits of the saints, then, which are nothing but gifts of God, he speaks thus of perseverance too as the gift of God: “We say,” he says, “‘Hallowed be your name,’ not because we wish for God that he be hallowed by our prayers, but because we ask of him that his name be hallowed in us. Besides, by whom is God hallowed, who himself hallows? But because he himself said, ‘Be holy, for I am holy,’ we ask and beseech this, that we who have been hallowed in baptism may persevere in what we have begun to be.” And a little later, still discussing this very matter and teaching us to ask perseverance of the Lord, which he would in no way do rightly and truly unless this too were his gift: “We pray,” he says, “that this hallowing may remain in us; and since our Lord and judge warns the one healed and made alive by him to sin no more, lest something worse happen to him, we make this request in continual prayers, we ask this day and night, that the hallowing and quickening which is received from the grace of God may be preserved by his protection.” This teacher, then, understands that we ask of him perseverance in hallowing, that is, that we may persevere in hallowing, when, already hallowed, we say, “Hallowed be your name.” For what else is it to ask for what we have received but that this too may be granted us, that we may not cease to have it? Just as, then, a holy man, when he asks God that he may be holy, certainly asks that he may remain holy, so certainly the chaste man too, when he asks that he may be chaste; the continent, that he may be continent; the righteous, that he may be righteous; the godly, that he may be godly; and the rest, which we defend against the Pelagians as gifts of God: without doubt they ask this, that they may persevere in those goods which they know they have received. And if they receive this, they certainly receive perseverance itself too, the great gift of God by which his other gifts are preserved. What? When we say, “Your kingdom come,” do we ask anything else than that it may come to us too, which we do not doubt will come to all the saints? Here too, then, what do those who are already holy pray for, if not that they may persevere in that holiness which has been given them? For in no other way will the kingdom of God come to them, which it is certain will come not to others but to those who persevere to the end.

…or, as is read in most manuscripts and is more frequently used by those who pray, “as in heaven, so on earth”; which most understand as, “As the holy angels, so may we too do your will.” But that teacher and martyr wants heaven and earth to be understood as spirit and flesh, and that we pray this, that we may do the will of God with both in agreement. He saw in these words another sense too, in keeping with the soundest faith, of which we have already spoken above: namely, that the faithful, who, clothed with the heavenly man, are not undeservedly called by the name of heaven, are understood to pray for unbelievers, who are still earth, bearing only the earthly man from their first birth. Here he plainly shows that the beginning of faith too is the gift of God, when the holy church prays not only for the faithful, that faith may be increased in them or persevere, but also for unbelievers, that they may begin to have the faith which they did not have at all, and against which they even bore hostile hearts. But now we are discussing not the beginning of faith, of which we have already said much in the former book, but that perseverance which must be had to the end, which certainly even the saints who do the will of God ask for when they say in the Prayer, “Your will be done.” For since it has already been done in them, why do they still ask that it be done, unless that they may persevere in what they have begun to be? Although it could be said here that the saints do not ask that God's will be done in heaven, but that it be done on earth as in heaven: that is, that earth may imitate heaven, that is, man the angel, or the unbeliever the believer; and therefore that the holy man asks that what is not yet may be, not that what is may persevere. For however much men excel in holiness, they are not yet equal to the angels of God; the will of God is not yet done in them, then, as in heaven. If this is so, in the part in which we wish that men may become believers from unbelievers, it is not perseverance but the beginning that seems to be wished for; but in the part in which we wish that men may be made equal to the angels of God in doing the will of God, when the saints pray this they are shown to pray for perseverance; since no one reaches that highest blessedness which is in the kingdom unless he has persevered to the end in that holiness which he received on earth.

Here the blessed Cyprian shows how perseverance is understood to be asked for in this petition too. For he says among other things: “We ask that this bread be given us daily, lest we who are in Christ and receive the Eucharist daily as the food of salvation, through the intervention of some graver offence, while we are kept away and not communicating and are prevented from the heavenly bread, be separated from the body of Christ.” These words of the holy man of God show that the saints ask the Lord for nothing other than perseverance, when they say with this intention, “Give us this day our daily bread”: that they may not be separated from the body of Christ, but may remain in that holiness in which they commit no crime by which they would deserve to be separated from it.

In the fifth place of the prayer we say, “Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors.” In this petition alone perseverance is not found to be asked for. For the sins which we pray may be forgiven us are past; but perseverance, which saves for ever, is necessary for the time of this life, not, however, the time already spent, but that which remains until its end. Yet it is worth while to consider for a little how in this petition too the heretics, who would come long afterwards, were already then confounded by the tongue of Cyprian, as by a most invincible weapon of truth. For the Pelagians dare to say this too, that the righteous man in this life has no sin at all, and that in such men there is already in the present time the church that has no spot or wrinkle or any such thing, which is the one and only bride of Christ; as if she were not his bride who throughout the whole earth says what she has learned from him, “Forgive us our debts.” But see how the most glorious Cyprian slays them. For when he was expounding this place of the Lord's prayer, he says among other things: “How necessarily, how providently and wholesomely we are reminded that we are sinners, who are compelled to pray for our sins; so that while pardon is sought from God, the mind recalls its own conscience. Lest anyone please himself as if innocent, and perish the more by exalting himself, he is instructed and taught that he sins daily, since he is commanded to pray daily for his sins. So finally John too in his Epistle says, ‘If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us’”; and the rest, which it would take long to insert here. Now when the saints say, “Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil,” what do they pray for but that they may persevere in holiness? For certainly, this gift of God being granted them (which, when it is asked of him, is shown clearly and openly enough to be the gift of God), this gift of God, then, being granted them, that they are not led into temptation, no one of the saints fails to hold perseverance in holiness to the end. For no one ceases to persevere in the Christian purpose unless he is first led into temptation. If, then, what he prays for is granted him, that he be not led in, he certainly persists, by God's gift, in the sanctification which he received by God's gift.

“But these brothers,” as you write, “do not want this perseverance to be preached in such a way that it cannot either be merited by supplication or lost by obstinacy.” In this they pay too little attention to what they are saying. For we are speaking of that perseverance by which one perseveres to the end; which, if it has been given, one has persevered to the end; but if one has not persevered to the end, it has not been given; this we have already dealt with sufficiently above. So let men not say that perseverance to the end has been given to anyone, unless the end itself has come, and he to whom it was given has been found to have persevered to the end. For we call chaste one whom we know to be chaste, whether or not he will remain in that same chastity; and if he has any other divine gift that can be held and lost, we say he has it as long as he has it; and if he loses it, we say he had it. But perseverance to the end, since no one has it except one who perseveres to the end, many can have, but no one can lose. For there is no fear that, when a man has persevered to the end, some evil will may arise in him so that he does not persevere to the end. This gift of God, then, can be merited by supplication; but once it has been given, it cannot be lost by obstinacy. For when anyone has persevered to the end, he can neither lose this gift nor the others which he could lose before the end. How, then, can that be lost through which it comes about that even what could be lost is not lost? But lest perhaps it be said that perseverance to the end is indeed not lost once it has been given, that is, once one has persevered to the end, but that it is in a way lost when a man acts by obstinacy so that he cannot attain to it; just as we say that a man who has not persevered to the end has lost eternal life or the kingdom of God, not what he had already received and had, but what he would have received and had if he had persevered: let us set aside disputes about words, and say that some things too that are not had, but are hoped to be had, can be lost. Let anyone who dares tell me whether God cannot give what he has commanded to be asked of him. Whoever thinks this, I do not say is foolish, but mad. Now God has commanded that his saints say in prayer, “Lead us not into temptation.” Whoever, then, is heard asking this is not led into the temptation of obstinacy, by which he could or would deserve to lose perseverance in holiness. “But each one forsakes God by his own will, so that he is rightly forsaken by God.” Who would deny it? But we ask not to be led into temptation precisely so that this may not happen. And if we are heard, it certainly does not happen, because God does not permit it to happen. For nothing happens except what he either does himself or himself permits to happen. He is powerful, then, both to bend wills from evil to good, and to turn those prone to fall and direct them in a path pleasing to himself. To him it is not said in vain, “O God, you will turn and give us life”; it is not said in vain, “Do not give my foot to be moved”; it is not said in vain, “Do not hand me over, O Lord, from my desire to the sinner”; finally, not to mention many, since perhaps more occur to you, it is not said in vain, “Lead us not into temptation.” For whoever is not led into temptation is certainly not led into the temptation of his own evil will; and whoever is not led into the temptation of his own evil will is led into none at all. For “each one,” as it is written, “is tempted by his own desire, drawn away and enticed”; but “God tempts no one,” that is, with harmful temptation. For there is also a useful one, by which we are not deceived or overwhelmed, but proved, according to what is said, “Prove me, O Lord, and try me.” With that harmful temptation, then, which the Apostle signifies when he says, “lest perhaps the tempter has tempted you, and our labour be in vain,” God, as I said, tempts no one, that is, leads or brings no one into temptation. For to be tempted and not to be led into temptation is not evil, indeed it is even good; for this is to be proved. So when we say to God, “Lead us not into temptation,” what do we say but, “Do not let us be led in”? Hence some pray thus, and it is read in many manuscripts, and the most blessed Cyprian set it down thus: “Do not let us be led into temptation.” Yet in the Greek Gospel I have never found anything but, “Lead us not into temptation.” We live more safely, then, if we give all to God, and do not entrust ourselves partly to him and partly to ourselves; which this venerable martyr saw. For when he was expounding the same place of the Prayer, he says after other things: “But when we ask that we may not come into temptation, we are reminded of our infirmity and weakness, while we ask thus, lest anyone exalt himself insolently, lest anyone take anything to himself proudly and arrogantly, lest anyone count either the glory of confession or of suffering as his own; since the Lord himself, teaching humility, said, ‘Watch and pray, that you may not come into temptation; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak’; so that, while a humble and submissive confession goes before and all is given to God, whatever is asked humbly with the fear of God may be granted by his own kindness.”

If, then, there were no other proofs, this Lord's Prayer alone would suffice us for the cause of grace which we defend; because it has left us nothing in which we might glory as though in our own. For it shows that even not departing from God is to be given by none but God, when it shows that it is to be asked of God. For he who is not led into temptation does not depart from God. This is not at all within the powers of free choice such as they now are; it had been in man before he fell. Yet how much this freedom of the will availed in the excellence of that first condition appeared in the angels, who, when the devil fell with his followers, stood in the truth and deserved to come to that perpetual security of not falling in which we are most certain they now are. But after the fall of man, God willed that it should belong only to his grace that man approaches him, and willed that it should belong only to his grace that man does not withdraw from him. This grace he placed in him in whom we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things. And therefore, as he works that we approach, so he works that we do not depart. That is why it was said to him through the prophet, “Let your hand be upon the man of your right hand, and upon the son of man whom you have strengthened for yourself; and we will not depart from you.” This is certainly not the first Adam, in whom we departed from him, but the last Adam, upon whom his hand is, so that we do not depart from him. For Christ is whole with his members, on account of the church, which is his body, his fullness. When, then, the hand of God is upon him so that we do not depart from God, the work of God certainly reaches us (for this is the hand of God); by which work of God it comes about that we are in Christ, remaining with God, not, as in Adam, departing from God. For in Christ we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things. This, then, is God's hand, not ours, that we do not depart from God. It is his hand, I say, who said, “I will put my fear in their heart, that they may not withdraw from me.” For this reason too he willed that it be asked of him that we be not led into temptation; because if we are not led in, we in no way depart from him. This could have been given us even without our praying; but he willed that by our prayer we should be reminded from whom we receive these benefits. For from whom do we receive them but from him of whom we have been commanded to ask? In this matter, then, let the church not wait for laborious disputations, but attend to its own daily prayers. It prays that unbelievers may believe: God, then, converts them to faith. It prays that believers may persevere: God, then, gives perseverance to the end. That he would do these things God foreknew. This is the very predestination of the saints, whom he chose in Christ before the foundation of the world, that they might be holy and without blemish before him in love; predestining them to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, in which he has graced them in his beloved Son, in whom they have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins according to the riches of his grace, which has abounded toward them in all wisdom and prudence; so that he might make known to them the mystery of his will according to his good will, which he purposed in him, in the dispensation of the fullness of times, to restore all things in Christ, which are in heaven and which are on earth, in him; in whom also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things. Against so clear a trumpet of truth, what man of sober and watchful faith would admit any human voices?

“But why,” he says, “is the grace of God not given according to men's merits?” I answer: because God is merciful. “Why, then,” he says, “not to all?” And here I answer: because God is judge. And therefore grace is given by him freely; and by his just judgment on others it is shown what grace confers on those to whom it is given. Let us not, then, be ungrateful that, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, the merciful God sets free so many from so deserved a perdition that, if he set none free from it, he would not be unjust. For from one man all were judged to go into a condemnation not unjust but just. Let him, then, who is set free love grace; let him who is not set free acknowledge what is due. If in remitting a debt goodness is understood, and in exacting it equity, iniquity is nowhere found with God. “But why,” he says, “in the one and the same case, not only of little children but even of twins, so different a judgment?” Is it not a similar question, why in a different case the same judgment? Let us recall, then, those labourers in the vineyard who worked the whole day, and those who worked one hour: certainly the case of the labour spent is different, and yet the judgment in paying the wage is the same. Did the murmurers here hear anything from the householder but, “This is my will”? Such was his generosity toward some that there was no iniquity toward others. And these indeed are both among the good; yet, as far as justice and grace are concerned, to the guilty man who is condemned it can rightly be said concerning the guilty man who is set free, “Take what is yours and go; but I will to give this man what is not owed. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will? Is your eye evil because I am good?” Here, if he says, “Why not to me too?”, he will rightly hear, “O man, who are you to answer back to God?” Him you certainly see as a most kind giver in one of you, but in you as a most just exactor, yet in neither as unjust. For since he would be just even if he punished both, he who is set free has reason to give thanks; he who is condemned has nothing to find fault with. “But if,” he says, “it was fitting that by not condemning all he should show what was due to all, and so commend his grace more gratefully to the vessels of mercy, why in the same case will he punish me rather than him, or set him free rather than me?” I do not say. If you ask why: because I confess that I do not find what to say. If you ask why this too: because in this matter, as his wrath is just and his mercy great, so his judgments are inscrutable. Let him go on further and say, “Why did he not give to some who worshipped him in good faith to persevere to the end?” Why do you think, except that he does not lie who says, “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would certainly have remained with us”? Are there, then, two natures of men? Far from it! If there were two natures, there would be no grace; for free deliverance would be given to no one if what was due to nature were rendered. But it seems to men that all who appear good believers ought to have received perseverance to the end. But God has judged it better to mix some who will not persevere with the fixed number of his saints, so that those for whom security in the temptation of this life is not good may not be able to be secure. For what the Apostle says restrains many from deadly pride: “Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall.” He who falls, falls by his own will; and he who stands, stands by the will of God. “For God is able to make him stand”: not, then, he himself, but God. Yet it is good not to be high-minded, but to fear. And each one either falls or stands in his own thought. But, as the Apostle says, which I mentioned in the former book, “We are not sufficient to think anything as from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God.” Following him, blessed Ambrose too dares to say: “For our heart and our thoughts are not in our power.” Everyone who is humbly and truly godly feels that this is most true. Ambrose said this speaking in the book which he wrote On Flight from the World, teaching that this world is to be fled not with the body but with the heart, which he argued cannot be done except with God's help. For he says: “Our talk is frequently of fleeing this world; and would that the disposition were as cautious and careful as the talk is easy! But, what is worse, the allurement of earthly desires frequently creeps in, and the pouring in of vanities occupies the mind, so that what you strive to avoid, you think about and turn over in your mind. This is difficult for a man to guard against, but impossible to throw off. Finally, the prophet testifies that the thing is more a matter of prayer than of accomplishment, saying, ‘Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to covetousness.’ For our heart and our thoughts are not in our power, which, poured in unexpectedly, confuse the mind and soul and draw them elsewhere than you have proposed: they call back to worldly things, insert things of the world, thrust in things of pleasure, weave in allurements, and at the very time when we prepare to lift up the mind, we are filled with vain thoughts and mostly cast down to earthly things.” It is not, then, in the power of men but of God that men have the power to become sons of God. For they receive it from him who gives the human heart godly thoughts, through which it may have the faith that works through love; for taking up and holding this good, and advancing in it perseveringly to the end, we are not sufficient to think anything as from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, in whose power are our heart and our thoughts.

Of two little children, then, equally bound by original sin, why this one is taken up and that one left; and of two ungodly persons already advanced in age, why this one is called in such a way that he follows the one who calls, while that one is either not called or not called in such a way: the judgments of God are inscrutable. But of two godly persons, why to this one perseverance to the end is given and to that one not given: the judgments of God are more inscrutable still. Yet this ought to be most certain to believers, that the one is of the predestined and the other is not. “For if they had been of us,” says one of the predestined, who had drunk this secret from the Lord's breast, “they would certainly have remained with us.” What does it mean, I ask, “They were not of us; for if they had been, they would certainly have remained with us”? Were not both created by God, both born of Adam, both made from earth, and had they not received souls of one and the same nature from him who said, “I have made every breath”? Finally, had not both been called, and followed the one who called; were not both justified from ungodliness, and both renewed through the washing of regeneration? But if he heard these things, he who certainly knew what he was saying could answer and say: “These things are true; according to all these they were of us; yet according to some other distinction they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would certainly have remained with us.” What, after all, is this distinction? The books of God lie open; let us not turn away our gaze. Divine Scripture cries out; let us lend our hearing. They were not of them, because they were not called according to his purpose; they were not chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world; they had not obtained an inheritance in him; they were not predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things. For if they had been this, they would have been of them, and would without doubt have remained with them. For, not to say how possible it is for God to convert to his faith the wills of men that are turned away and opposed, and to work in their hearts so that they yield to no adversities and do not depart from him overcome by any temptation, since he can also do what the Apostle says, not permit them to be tempted beyond what they are able: not to say this, God, foreknowing that they would fall, could certainly have taken them from this life before it happened. Or are we to return to discussing still how absurdly it is said that dead men are judged even for those sins which God foreknew they would have committed if they had lived? This is so repugnant to Christian, indeed to any human, sense that one is ashamed even to refute it. For why should it not be said that the gospel itself has been preached, and is still preached, in vain, with so much labour and suffering of the saints, if men could be judged even without hearing the gospel according to the obstinacy or obedience which God foreknew they would have had if they had heard? Nor would Tyre and Sidon be condemned, though more leniently than those cities in which, though they did not believe, wonderful signs were done by the Lord Christ; since, if they had been done in them, they would have repented in ashes and sackcloth, as the words of truth have it; in which words of his the Lord Jesus shows us a deeper mystery of predestination. For if we are asked why such great miracles were done among those who, seeing them, would not believe, and were not done among those who would believe if they saw them, what shall we answer? Shall we say what I said in that book in which I answered certain six questions of the pagans, without prejudice, however, to other causes which the wise can trace out? For, as you know, when it was asked why Christ came after so long a time, I said that in those times and places in which his gospel was not preached, he foreknew that all would be such, at his preaching, as many were in his bodily presence, who would not believe in him even when the dead were raised by him. Again a little later in the same book and in the same question I said: “What wonder, if Christ knew that in former ages the world was so full of unbelievers that he rightly did not will to be preached to those whom he foreknew would believe neither his words nor his miracles?” This we certainly cannot say of Tyre and Sidon; and in them we recognize that these divine judgments belong to those causes of predestination without prejudice to which hidden causes I said that I then gave those answers. For it is easy to blame the unbelief of the Jews, arising from free will, who would not believe when such great miracles had been done among them. The Lord too reproves and convicts them, saying: “Woe to you, Chorazin and Bethsaida; for if the miracles had been done in Tyre and Sidon which have been done in you, they would long ago have repented in sackcloth and ashes.” But can we say that the Tyrians and Sidonians too would have refused to believe if such miracles had been done among them, or would not have believed if they were done, when the Lord himself testifies of them that they would have done penance of great humility if those signs of divine power had been done in them? And yet in the day of judgment they will be punished, though with a lesser punishment than those cities which would not believe when miracles were done among them. For the Lord goes on to say, “Nevertheless I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you.” These, then, will be punished more severely, those more leniently; but still they will be punished. Further, if the dead are judged even according to the deeds they would have done if they had lived, then certainly, since these would have been believers if the gospel had been preached to them with such great miracles, they are certainly not to be punished; yet they will be punished; it is false, therefore, that the dead are judged even according to what they would have done if the gospel had reached them while living. And if this is false, there is no reason to say of infants who perish dying without baptism that this happens to them by this merit, that God foreknew that, if they had lived and the gospel had been preached to them, they would have heard it unbelievingly. It remains, then, that they are held bound by original sin alone, and for this alone go into condemnation; since we see that others with the same case are given regeneration only by God's free grace; and that by his hidden but just judgment, since there is no iniquity with God, some who are going to perish by living very wickedly even after baptism are kept in this life until they perish, who would not perish if bodily death, coming before their fall, came to their help. For no dead man is judged on the good or evil he would have done if he had not died; otherwise the Tyrians and Sidonians would not pay penalties according to what they did, but rather, according to what they would have done if those gospel miracles had been done among them, they would obtain salvation through great repentance and faith in Christ.

A certain Catholic disputant of no mean repute expounded this place of the Gospel by saying that the Lord foreknew that the Tyrians and Sidonians would later have withdrawn from the faith after they had believed when miracles were done among them, and that rather out of mercy he did not do them there; since they would become liable to a heavier punishment if they abandoned the faith they had held than if they had never held it at all. In this opinion of a learned and very acute man, what points may still rightly be examined, what concern is it of mine to say now, since even it supports what we are dealing with? For if the Lord out of compassion did not do among them the miracles through which they could have become believers, lest they be punished more severely when they afterwards became unbelievers, as he foreknew they would, it is shown clearly and plainly enough that no one of the dead is judged for those sins which he was foreknown to be going to commit, if he is in some way helped not to commit them; just as Christ is said, if that opinion is true, to have helped the Tyrians and Sidonians, whom he preferred not to come to the faith rather than to depart from the faith by a much graver crime, which he had foreseen they would commit if they had come. Although if it is asked, “Why was it not brought about rather that they should believe, and that this should be granted them, that they should depart this life before they abandoned the faith?”, I do not know what can be answered. For he who says that it was granted as a benefit to those who would abandon the faith not to begin to have what they would forsake with graver ungodliness indicates clearly enough that a man is not judged by what he is foreknown to have been going to do evilly, if by some benefit it is provided that he does not do it. Provision was made, then, for him too who was snatched away lest wickedness should change his understanding. But why provision was not made for the Tyrians and Sidonians in such a way that they should believe and be snatched away lest wickedness should change their understanding, perhaps he would answer who chose to solve this question in this way; but I, as far as concerns what I am doing, see that it is enough that, according to that opinion too, it is shown that men are not judged for what they have not done, even if they were foreseen to be going to do it. Although, as I said, one is ashamed even to refute this opinion, by which it is thought that sins are punished in the dying or the dead which they were foreknown to be going to commit if they lived, lest we too should seem to have thought it of some weight; which we preferred to restrain by argument rather than pass over in silence.

Accordingly, as the Apostle says, “It is not of him who wills nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy”; who both helps the little children whom he will, even though they neither will nor run, whom he chose in Christ before the foundation of the world, intending to give them grace freely, that is, with no merits of theirs, either of faith or of works, going before; and does not help those older persons whom he foresaw would believe his miracles if they had been done among them, whom he does not will to help, concerning whom in his predestination he judged otherwise, hiddenly indeed, but justly. For there is no iniquity with God; but “his judgments are inscrutable and his ways unsearchable”; but “all the ways of the Lord are mercy and truth.” Unsearchable, then, is the mercy by which he has mercy on whom he will, with no merits of his going before; and unsearchable the truth by which he hardens whom he will, with merits of his indeed going before, but often merits held in common with him on whom he has mercy. As of two twins, of whom one is taken up and one left, the outcome is unequal, the merits common; in whom, however, one is set free by the great goodness of God in such a way that the other is condemned with no iniquity of God's. For is there iniquity with God? Far from it! But his ways are unsearchable. Let us, then, believe without doubting his mercy in those who are set free and his truth in those who are punished; and let us not try to search the inscrutable or trace the untraceable. For out of the mouth of infants and sucklings he perfects his praise; so that what we see in those whose deliverance is preceded by no good merits of theirs, and in those whose condemnation is preceded only by original merits common to both, we should by no means hesitate to believe takes place in adults too; that is, not thinking either that grace is given to anyone according to his merits, or that anyone is punished except for his merits, whether those who are set free and those who are punished have equal or unequal evil cases; so that he who thinks he stands may take heed lest he fall, and he who glories may glory not in himself but in the Lord. But why, as you write, do men “not allow the case of little children to be brought forward as an example for adults,” men who do not doubt, against the Pelagians, that there is original sin, which entered into the world through one man, and that from one all went into condemnation? The Manichaeans too do not accept this; they not only hold none of the scriptures of the Old Testament in any authority, but also accept those that belong to the New Testament in such a way that by a privilege of their own, or rather a sacrilege, they take what they will and reject what they will. Against them I was arguing in the books On Free Choice, from which these men think we should be held bound. For that reason I did not wish to solve fully the very laborious questions that came up, lest the work be too long, where the authority of the divine testimonies did not help me against such perverse men. And I could, as I did, whichever of these was true, which I set down without deciding, nevertheless conclude by sure reasoning that in all of them God is to be praised, with no necessity to believe that, as they would have it, two co-eternal substances of good and evil are mixed together. Then in the first book of the Retractations, a work of mine which you have not yet read, when I came to revising those same books, that is, On Free Choice, I spoke thus: “In these books,” I said, “so many things were discussed that some questions that came up, which I either could not unravel or which required a long discussion at the time, were deferred in such a way that, from either side, or from all sides of those questions, where it was not clear what better agreed with the truth, our reasoning nevertheless was brought to the conclusion that, whichever of them was true, God was believed, or even shown, to be praised. For that discussion was undertaken on account of those who deny that the origin of evil is derived from the free choice of the will, and who contend that, if this is so, God, the creator of all natures, is to be blamed; wishing in this way, according to the error of their ungodliness (for they are Manichaeans), to introduce a certain unchangeable nature of evil co-eternal with God.” Again some time later, in another place: “Then it was said,” I said, “from which misery, justly inflicted on sinners, the grace of God sets free; because man could fall of his own accord, that is, by free choice, but could not also rise; to which misery of just condemnation belong ignorance and difficulty, which every man suffers from the beginning of his birth; nor is anyone set free from this evil except by the grace of God. The Pelagians will not have this misery descend from just condemnation, denying original sin; although even if ignorance and difficulty were the natural beginnings of man, not even so would God be blamed, but praised, as we argued in the same third book. That discussion is to be held against the Manichaeans, who do not accept the holy scriptures of the Old Testament, in which original sin is narrated, and contend with detestable impudence that whatever is read of it in the apostolic letters was inserted by corrupters of the Scriptures, as though it had not been said by the apostles. But against the Pelagians what both Scriptures commend must be defended, which they profess to accept.” This I said in the first book of the Retractations when I revised the books On Free Choice. Nor indeed are these the only things said by me there about those books; but many others too, which I thought it long and unnecessary to insert in this work to you, as I think you too will judge when you have read them all. Although, then, in the third book On Free Choice I argued about little children in such a way that, even if what the Pelagians say were true, that ignorance and difficulty, without which no man is born, are the beginnings, not the punishments, of nature, the Manichaeans would nevertheless be defeated, who will have two co-eternal natures, of good and of evil: is the faith on that account to be called into doubt or abandoned which the Catholic Church defends against the Pelagians themselves, which asserts that there is original sin, whose guilt, contracted by generation, is to be loosed by regeneration? And if these men too confess this with us, so that together in this cause we may destroy the error of the Pelagians, why do they think it should be doubted that God, to the little children to whom he gives his grace through the sacrament of baptism, rescues them from the power of darkness and transfers them into the kingdom of the Son of his love? In that he gives it to some and does not give it to others, why will they not sing to the Lord of mercy and judgment? But why it is given to these rather than to those, “who has known the mind of the Lord?” Who can search the inscrutable? Who can trace the untraceable?

It follows, then, that the grace of God is not given according to the merits of those who receive it, but according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise and glory of his grace, so that he who glories may in no way glory in himself but in the Lord; who gives to men to whom he will, because he is merciful, and if he does not give, he is just; and does not give to those to whom he will not, so that he may make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy. For by giving to some what they do not merit, he willed his grace to be free and therefore true; by not giving to all, he showed what all merit. Good in the benefit to some, just in the punishment of the rest; and good in all, because it is good when what is due is rendered; and just in all, because it is just when what is not due is given without wrong to anyone. Now the grace of God without merits, that is, true grace, is defended even if baptized little children, as the Pelagians hold, are not rescued from the power of darkness because, as the Pelagians think, they are liable to no sin, but are only transferred into the kingdom of the Lord: for even so the kingdom is given without any good merits to those to whom it is given, and without any evil merits is not given to those to whom it is not given. This we usually say against the same Pelagians when they object to us that we attribute the grace of God to fate by saying that it is not given according to our merits. For it is rather they who attribute God's grace in little children to fate, since they say that where there is no merit there is fate. For no merits, even according to the Pelagians themselves, can be found in little children for which some of them should be sent into the kingdom and others estranged from the kingdom. Just as now, to show that the grace of God is not given according to our merits, I have preferred to defend this according to both views, both our own, namely, which says that little children are bound by original sin, and that of the Pelagians, who deny that there is original sin, and yet I have no need on that account to doubt that little children have something for him to forgive who saves his people from their sins; so in the third book On Free Choice I resisted the Manichaeans according to both views, whether ignorance and difficulty, without which no man is born, are punishments or the beginnings of nature; and yet I hold one of these, which I expressed clearly enough there too: that this is not the nature of man as created, but the punishment of man as condemned. In vain, then, is the age of that book of mine urged against me, to prevent me from pleading the cause of little children as I ought to plead it, and from proving from it by the light of plain truth that the grace of God is not given according to the merits of men. For if, when I began the books On Free Choice as a layman and finished them as a presbyter, I still doubted about the condemnation of infants who are not reborn and the deliverance of those who are reborn, no one, I think, would be so unjust and envious as to forbid me to make progress, and to judge that I must remain in that doubt. But since it can more rightly be understood that I ought not to be believed to have doubted about this matter for the reason that those against whom my aim was directed seemed to me to be refuted in such a way that, whether the punishment of original sin was in little children, which the truth holds, or was not, as some in error think, in no way should that mixture of two natures, of good and evil, which the error of the Manichaeans brings in, be believed: far be it that we should so abandon the cause of little children as to say that it is uncertain to us whether those regenerated in Christ, if they die as little children, pass into eternal salvation, while those not regenerated pass into the second death; since what is written, “Through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin death, and so it passed to all men,” cannot rightly be understood otherwise; nor does anyone, small or great, deliver from the everlasting death which has most justly been rendered to sin, except him who died for the forgiveness of our sins, both original and personal, without any original or personal sin of his own. But why these rather than those? Again and again we say it, and we are not ashamed: “O man, who are you to answer back to God?” “His judgments are inscrutable and his ways unsearchable.” And let us add this: “Seek not things too high for you, and search not things too strong for you.” For you see, dearly beloved, how absurd it is, and foreign to the soundness of faith and the sincerity of truth, for us to say that dead little children are judged according to what they were foreknown to be going to do if they lived. Into this view, which certainly every human sense supported by however little reason, and especially Christian sense, abhors, those have been compelled to go who wished to be so far from the error of the Pelagians as still to think that it must be believed, and moreover put forward in argument, that the grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord, by which alone we are helped after the fall of the first man, in whom we all fell, is given according to our merits; which Pelagius himself condemned before the Eastern bishops as judges, for fear of his own condemnation. But if this is not said, namely about the works of the dead, good or evil, which they would have done if they had lived, and which are therefore none and not going to be even in God's foreknowledge; if this, then, is not said, which you see with how great error it is said, what will remain but that we confess, with the fog of contention removed, that the grace of God is not given according to our merits, which the Catholic Church defends against the Pelagian heresy, and that we see this with more evident truth especially in little children? For God is not compelled by fate to help these infants and not help those, since the case of both is common; nor shall we think that human affairs in little children are governed not by divine providence but by chance happenings, since they are rational souls to be either condemned or set free; since not even a sparrow falls to the ground without the will of our Father who is in heaven. Nor is it to be attributed to the negligence of parents that little children die without baptism, in such a way that heavenly judgments have nothing to do with it; as though those who die badly in this way had chosen by their own will negligent parents to be born of. What shall I say of the fact that a little child sometimes breathes its last before help can be given it through the ministry of the one baptizing? For often, though the parents hasten and the ministers are ready for baptism to be given to the little child, it is not given, God not willing it, who did not keep him a little longer in this life so that it might be given. What of the fact too that sometimes help could be given by baptism to the little children of unbelievers so that they should not go to perdition, and could not be given to the children of believers? There it is certainly shown that there is no respect of persons with God; otherwise he would rather set free the children of his worshippers than those of his enemies.

Now, since we are dealing with the gift of perseverance, what does it mean that help is given to one who is about to die unbaptized, so that he does not die without baptism, while help is not given to one baptized who is about to fall, so that he dies first? Unless perhaps we are still to listen to that absurdity which says that it profits no one to die before he falls, because he will be judged according to the acts which God foreknew he would have done if he had lived. Who would patiently hear, who would endure, this perversity so vehemently opposed to the soundness of the faith? And yet those who do not confess that the grace of God is not given according to our merits are driven to say it. But those who do not want to say that each of the dead is judged according to what God foreknew he would have done if he had lived, seeing with what plain falsity and how great absurdity it is said, have no ground left for saying what the church condemned in the Pelagians, and made Pelagius himself condemn, that the grace of God is given according to our merits; since they see some little children taken from this life unregenerated to eternal death, others regenerated to eternal life; and of the regenerated themselves, some departing hence persevering to the end, others kept here until they fall, who certainly would not have fallen if they had departed hence before they fell; and again some who have fallen not departing this life until they return, who certainly would perish if they departed before they returned. From this it is shown clearly enough that the grace of God both for beginning and for persevering to the end is not given according to our merits, but is given according to his own most secret, and at the same time most just, most wise, most beneficent will; since “those whom he predestined, he also called,” with that calling of which it is said, “The gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” No man is to be said by men with certain assertion to belong to this calling until he has departed from this world; but in this human life, which is a trial upon earth, “let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall.” For this reason, as we said above, those who will not persevere are mixed by God's most provident will with those who will persevere, so that we may learn not to be high-minded but to consent to the lowly, and to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling; “for it is God who works in us both to will and to work, for his good will.” We will, then; but God works in us even to will. We work, then; but God works in us even to work, for his good will. This it profits us both to believe and to say: this is godly, this is true, so that the confession may be humble and submissive, and all may be given to God. Thinking, we believe; thinking, we speak; thinking, we do whatever we do; but as regards the way of godliness and the true worship of God, we are not sufficient to think anything as from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God. “For our heart and our thoughts are not in our power”; hence the same Ambrose who says this says also: “But who is so blessed as always to ascend in his heart? But who can do this without divine help? In no way at all. Finally,” he says, “the same Scripture says above, ‘Blessed is the man whose help is from you, O Lord; ascents are in his heart.’” Ambrose certainly not only read this in the sacred writings in order to say it, but, as must be believed of that man without doubt, felt it in his heart too. What is said, then, in the sacraments of the faithful, that we should have our heart lifted up to the Lord, is the Lord's gift; for which gift those to whom this is said are admonished by the priest after these words to give thanks to the Lord our God himself, and they answer that it is “fitting and right.” For since our heart is not in our power, but is raised by divine help so that it ascends and minds the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God, not the things that are on earth, to whom must thanks be given for so great a thing but to the Lord our God who does this, who by such a benefit, delivering us from the depth of this world, chose and predestined us before the foundation of the world?

But they say that “the definition of predestination is opposed to the usefulness of preaching.” As though it were opposed to the Apostle's preaching! Did not that teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth both commend predestination so often and not cease to preach the word of God? Because he said, “It is God who works in you both to will and to work, for his good will,” did he therefore not himself exhort us both to will what pleases God and to work it? Or because he said, “He who began a good work in you will complete it until the day of Christ Jesus,” did he therefore not himself urge men to begin and to persevere to the end? Surely the Lord himself commanded men to believe, and said, “Believe in God, believe also in me”; yet his statement is not therefore false, nor his definition vain, where he says, “No one comes to me,” that is, no one believes in me, “unless it has been given him by my Father.” Nor, again, because this definition is true, is that command vain. Why, then, do we think the definition of predestination, which the same divine Scripture commends, useless to preaching, commanding, exhorting, and rebuking, all of which divine Scripture frequently uses? Will anyone dare to say that God did not foreknow to whom he would give that they should believe, or whom he would give to his Son, so that of them he would lose none? If he foreknew these things, he certainly foreknew his own benefits, by which he deigns to set us free. This is the predestination of the saints, and nothing else: namely, the foreknowledge and preparation of the benefits of God, by which whoever are set free are most certainly set free. And where are the rest left by the just divine judgment but in the mass of perdition, where the Tyrians and Sidonians were left, who could even have believed if they had seen those wonderful signs of Christ? But since it was not given them to believe, even that by which they would have believed was denied them. From this it appears that some have in their very nature a divine gift of understanding by which they would be moved to faith if they heard words or saw signs suited to their minds; and yet if, by the higher judgment of God, they have not been separated from the mass of perdition by the predestination of grace, those very divine words or deeds are not brought to them through which they could believe if they heard or saw such things. In the same mass of perdition the Jews too were left, who could not believe such great and clear miracles done before their eyes. For why they could not believe the Gospel did not keep silent, saying: “But though he had done so many signs before them, they did not believe in him, that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled which he spoke: ‘Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?’ And therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again: ‘He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, that they should not see with their eyes nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.’” The eyes of the Tyrians and Sidonians, then, were not so blinded, nor their heart so hardened; for they would have believed if they had seen such signs as these saw. But neither did it profit those that they could believe, because they were not predestined by him whose judgments are inscrutable and ways unsearchable; nor would it have harmed these that they could not believe, if they had been so predestined that God would enlighten them when blind and would will to take away the heart of stone from the hardened. What the Lord said of the Tyrians and Sidonians can perhaps be understood in some other way; yet that no one comes to Christ except one to whom it has been given, and that it is given to those who were chosen in him before the foundation of the world, he without doubt confesses who hears the divine word not with ears of the heart that are deaf, but with the ears of the flesh. And yet this predestination, which is set out clearly enough even in the words of the Gospel, did not prevent the Lord from saying, for the sake of beginning, what I mentioned a little before, “Believe in God, believe also in me,” and, for the sake of persevering, “Men ought always to pray and not lose heart.” For those to whom it has been given hear these things and do them; but those to whom it has not been given do not do them, whether they hear or do not hear. “Because to you,” he says, “it has been given to know the mystery of the kingdom of heaven; but to them it has not been given.” Of these, the one belongs to the mercy, the other to the judgment, of him to whom our soul says, “Of mercy and judgment I will sing to you, O Lord.” The preaching of predestination, then, is not to hinder the preaching of persevering and advancing faith, so that those to whom it has been given to obey may hear what they ought; for how will they hear without a preacher? Nor, again, is the preaching of faith advancing and remaining to the last to hinder the preaching of predestination, so that he who lives faithfully and obediently may not be lifted up about that obedience as though about a good of his own not received, but that he who glories may glory in the Lord. For “we must glory in nothing, since nothing is ours.” Cyprian saw this most faithfully and defined it most confidently, and by this he certainly proclaimed a most certain predestination. For if “we must glory in nothing, since nothing is ours,” then certainly we must not glory even about the most persevering obedience, nor call it ours as though it were not given us from above. It too, then, is the gift of God, which God foreknew, as every Christian confesses, that he would give to his called with that calling of which it is said, “The gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” This, then, is the predestination which we preach faithfully and humbly. Yet that same teacher and doer, who both believed in Christ and lived most perseveringly in holy obedience even to suffering for Christ, did not on that account cease to preach the gospel and to exhort to faith and godly ways and to perseverance itself to the end, because he said, “We must glory in nothing, since nothing is ours”; where he declared without any ambiguity the true grace of God, that is, the grace not given according to our merits; and since God foreknew that he would give it, predestination was without doubt preached in these words of Cyprian; and if it did not keep Cyprian from preaching obedience, it certainly ought not to keep us either. Although, then, we say that obedience is the gift of God, we nevertheless exhort men to it. But to those who obediently hear the exhortation of truth, that very gift of God has been given, namely to hear obediently; but to those who do not so hear, it has not been given. For it was not just anyone, but Christ, who said, “No one comes to me unless it has been given him by my Father,” and, “To you it has been given to know the mystery of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.” And of continence: “Not all receive this word,” he says, “but those to whom it has been given.” And when the Apostle was exhorting married people to marital chastity, he says, “I would that all men were as I myself am; but each has his own gift from God, one in this way, another in that”; where he shows clearly enough that not only continence but also the chastity of married people is the gift of God. Since these things are true, we nevertheless exhort to them, as far as it has been given to each of us to be able to exhort; because this too is his gift, in whose hand are both we and our words. Hence the Apostle too says, “According to the grace that was given to me, as a wise master builder I laid the foundation.” And in another place: “To each,” he says, “as the Lord gave: I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. So neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase.” And therefore, just as he exhorts and preaches rightly who has received this gift, so he certainly hears obediently one who exhorts and preaches rightly who has received this gift. Hence it is that the Lord, when he was speaking to those who had the ears of the flesh open, nevertheless said, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear”; which he certainly knew not all had. And from whom whoever has them has them, the Lord himself shows where he says, “I will give them a heart to know me and ears that hear.” Ears to hear, then, are the very gift of obeying, so that those who had it might come to him, to whom no one comes unless it has been given him by his Father. We exhort, then, and preach; but those who have ears to hear hear us obediently, while in those who do not have them what is written comes about, “that hearing they may not hear”: hearing, that is, with the sense of the body, they do not hear with the assent of the heart. But why these have ears to hear and those do not, that is, why it has been given to these by the Father to come to the Son and not given to those, “who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counsellor?” or “who are you, O man, to answer back to God?” Must what is plain be denied because what is hidden cannot be grasped? Shall we say, I ask, that what we see to be so is not so, because we cannot find why it is so?

But they say, as you write, “that no one can be roused by the goads of rebuke if it is said in the assembly of the church, in the hearing of many: ‘The fixed sentence of God's will concerning predestination stands thus: that some of you, having received the will to obey, have come from unbelief to faith, or, having received perseverance, remain in the faith; but the rest of you, who linger in the delight of sins, have not yet risen because the help of pitying grace has not yet raised you up. Yet if any of you are not yet called whom he has predestined by his grace to be chosen, you will receive that same grace by which you may will and be chosen; and if any of you obey, if you are predestined to be rejected, the strength to obey will be withdrawn, so that you cease to obey.’” When these things are said, they ought not to deter us from confessing the true grace of God, that is, the grace not given according to our merits, and from confessing the predestination of the saints in accordance with it; just as we are not deterred from confessing the foreknowledge of God if someone speaks of it to the people in such a way as to say: “Whether you are now living rightly or not, you will afterwards be such as God foreknew you would be, good if he foreknew you good, evil if evil.” For if, on hearing this, some turn to torpor and sloth and, sliding from labour into lust, go after their desires, is what was said about the foreknowledge of God therefore to be thought false? If God foreknew that they would be good, will they not be good, in however great wickedness they are now engaged; and if evil, will they not be evil, in however great goodness they are now seen? There was a man in our monastery who, when the brothers rebuked him for why he did certain things that should not be done and did not do things that should be done, answered: “Whatever I am now, I will be such as God foreknew I would be.” He certainly spoke the truth, and he did not profit by this truth for good; but he went so far for evil that, abandoning the fellowship of the monastery, he became a dog returned to its vomit; and yet what he will yet be is uncertain. Must the true things that are said of God's foreknowledge, then, be denied or kept silent because of such souls, at a time, that is, when, if they are not said, people go into other errors?

There are also some who either do not pray or pray coldly, because they have learned from the Lord's own words that God knows what is necessary for us before we ask him. Is the truth of this statement to be abandoned because of such people, or thought fit to be deleted from the Gospel? On the contrary, since it is established that God has prepared some things to be given even to those who do not pray, such as the beginning of faith, and others only to those who pray, such as perseverance to the end, certainly he who thinks he has this from himself does not pray to have it. We must beware, then, lest while we fear that exhortation may grow cold, prayer be extinguished and pride kindled. Let the truth be spoken, then, especially where some question compels it to be spoken; and let those take it who can; lest perhaps, when it is kept silent because of those who cannot take it, those who can take the truth, by which falsehood may be guarded against, be not only defrauded of the truth but even taken by falsehood. For it is easy, indeed even useful, to keep silent some truth because of those incapable of it. For whence is that saying of the Lord, “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now”? And that of the Apostle, “I could not speak to you as spiritual, but as carnal: as to little ones in Christ I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able, nor are you able even now”? Although by a certain way of speaking it can come about that what is said is both milk to little ones and food to the great. As, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”: what Christian can keep silent about it? Who can grasp it? Or what greater thing can be found in sound doctrine? Yet it is not kept silent to the little ones and to the great, nor hidden from the little ones by the great. But the reason for keeping silent a truth is one thing, the necessity of speaking a truth is another. It would take long to seek out or set down all the causes for keeping silent a truth; yet this is one of them, that we may not make those worse who do not understand, while we wish to make those who understand more learned; who, if we keep silent something of this kind, do not indeed become more learned, but do not become worse either. But when a true thing is such that the one who cannot grasp it becomes worse if we speak it, and the one who can grasp it becomes worse if we keep silent, what do we think should be done? Is it not rather that the truth should be spoken, so that he who can grasp it may grasp it, than kept silent, so that not only do both not grasp it, but the more intelligent himself becomes worse? Who, if he heard and grasped it, would cause many others to learn through him. For the more capable he is of learning, the more fit he is to teach others. The enemy of grace presses on and urges in every way that it be believed that grace is given according to our merits, and so grace is no longer grace; and are we unwilling to say what, with Scripture as witness, we can say? For we fear, it seems, lest by our speaking he be offended who cannot grasp the truth; and we do not fear lest by our silence he who can grasp the truth be taken by falsehood? For either predestination must be preached as holy Scripture plainly declares it, that in the predestined the gifts and calling of God are without repentance; or it must be confessed that the grace of God is given according to our merits, which is what the Pelagians think, although that opinion, as we have often said, is read in the proceedings of the Eastern bishops to have been condemned even by the mouth of Pelagius himself. Now these brothers, for whose sake we are doing this, are so far removed from the heretical perversity of the Pelagians that, though they are not yet willing to confess that those are predestined who by God's grace become obedient and remain so, they already confess that this grace anticipates the will of those to whom it is given; certainly for this reason, that grace may not be believed to be given otherwise than freely, as the truth says, but rather according to the merits of a preceding will, as the Pelagian error says against the truth. Grace, then, also anticipates faith; otherwise, if faith anticipates it, without doubt the will too anticipates it, since faith cannot exist without the will. But if grace anticipates faith because it anticipates the will, it certainly anticipates all obedience; it anticipates also love, by which alone God is obeyed truly and sweetly; and grace works all these things in the one to whom it is given, and all of which it anticipates.

Among these goods there remains perseverance to the end, which is asked of the Lord daily in vain if the Lord does not work it by his grace in him whose prayers he hears. See now how foreign to the truth it is to deny that perseverance to the end of this life is the gift of God, since he himself gives an end to this life when he wills; and if he gives it before an impending fall, he makes the man persevere to the end. But more wonderful, and more evident to believers, is the bounty of God's goodness, that this grace is given even to little children, though there is no obedience at that age to which it might be given. To whomever, then, God gives these gifts of his, he certainly foreknew that he would give them, and in his foreknowledge prepared them. “Those whom he predestined, then, he also called,” with that calling which I am not ashamed to mention often, of which it is said, “The gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” For to arrange his future works in his foreknowledge, which cannot be deceived or changed, is altogether this and nothing else: to predestine. And just as he whom God foreknew would be chaste, though he regards it as uncertain, acts so as to be chaste, so he whom God predestined to be chaste, though he regards it as uncertain, does not on that account fail to act so as to be chaste because he hears that he will be what he will be by God's gift; rather his love rejoices, and is not puffed up as though it had not received it. Not only, then, is he not hindered from this work by the preaching of predestination, but he is even helped toward it, so that when he glories he may glory in the Lord. What I have said of chastity can most truly be said of faith, of godliness, of love, of perseverance, and, not to go through them one by one, of all the obedience by which God is obeyed. But those who place only the beginning of faith and perseverance to the end in our power in such a way as not to think them gifts of God, nor that God works our thoughts and wills for having and keeping them, while granting that he gives the rest when they are obtained from him by the faith of the believer: why do they not fear that exhortation to those other things, and the preaching of them, is hindered by the definition of predestination? Or perhaps they say those too are not predestined? Then neither are they given by God, or he did not know that he would give them. But if they are both given and he foreknew that he would give them, he certainly predestined them. Just as they too, then, exhort to chastity, love, godliness, and the other things which they confess to be gifts of God and cannot deny to be foreknown by him and therefore predestined, and do not say that their exhortations are hindered by the preaching of God's predestination, that is, by the preaching of God's foreknowledge of these future gifts of his; so let them see that their exhortations either to faith or to perseverance are not hindered either, if these too are said, as is true, to be gifts of God, and to be foreknown, that is, predestined to be given; but that what is rather hindered and overthrown by this preaching of predestination is only that most deadly error by which it is said that the grace of God is given according to our merits, so that he who glories may glory not in the Lord but in himself. To explain this more plainly for the slower ones, let those bear with my delay to whom it has been given to fly ahead in understanding. The apostle James says, “If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and does not reproach, and it will be given him.” It is written also in the Proverbs of Solomon, “For the Lord gives wisdom.” And of continence we read in the book of Wisdom, whose authority has been used by great and learned men who expounded the divine oracles long before us; there, then, we read, “When I knew that no one can be continent unless God gives it; and this very thing was a part of wisdom, to know whose gift it was.” These, then, are gifts of God, namely, to say nothing of others, wisdom and continence. These men too agree; for they are not Pelagians, to contend against this plain truth with hard and heretical perversity. “But,” they say, “that these may be given us by God, faith obtains, which begins from us”; and they contend that both beginning to have this faith and remaining in it to the end are ours, as though we did not receive it from the Lord. Here without doubt the Apostle is contradicted, who says, “For what do you have that you did not receive?” The martyr Cyprian too is contradicted, who says, “We must glory in nothing, since nothing is ours.” When we have said these and many other things which it is tiresome to repeat, and have shown that both the beginning of faith and perseverance to the end are gifts of God, and that God could not fail to foreknow any of his future gifts, both what would be given and to whom, and therefore that those whom he sets free and crowns have been predestined by him, they think they should answer that “the definition of predestination is opposed to the usefulness of preaching, because when it is heard no one can be roused by the goads of rebuke.” Saying this, they do not want it “preached to men that coming to faith and remaining in faith are gifts of God, lest despair rather than exhortation seem to be brought, while the hearers think that it is uncertain to human ignorance to whom God grants these gifts and to whom he does not.” Why, then, do they too preach with us that wisdom and continence are gifts of God? And if, when these are preached as gifts of God, the exhortation by which we exhort men to be wise and continent is not hindered, what reason is there, after all, for them to think that the exhortation is hindered by which we exhort men to come to faith and remain in it to the end, if these too are said to be gifts of God, which is proved by his Scriptures as witnesses? See: to say nothing of continence, and to discuss in this place wisdom alone, the apostle James mentioned above says, “The wisdom that is from above is first chaste, then peaceable, modest, easily persuaded, full of mercy and good fruits, beyond price, without pretence.” Do you see, I beg you, with how many and great goods the wisdom that comes down from the Father of lights is filled? For “every best gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights,” as the same apostle says. Why, then, to pass over the rest, do we rebuke the unchaste and the quarrelsome, to whom we nevertheless preach that chaste and peaceable wisdom is the gift of God; and we do not fear that, troubled by the uncertainty of the divine will, they will find in this preaching more despair than exhortation, and be roused by the goads of rebuke not against themselves but rather against us, because we rebuke them for not having these things which we ourselves say are not produced by human will but given by divine bounty? Why, finally, did the preaching of this grace not deter the apostle James himself from rebuking the unruly and saying, “If you have bitter zeal, and there are quarrels in your hearts, do not glory and be liars against the truth; this is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but earthly, unspiritual, devilish; for where there is zeal and contention, there is instability and every evil work”? Just as, then, the unruly are to be rebuked, both with the divine oracles as witnesses and by our own actions, which these men have in common with us, and this rebuke is not hindered because we preach that the peaceable wisdom by which the quarrelsome are corrected and healed is the gift of God; so unbelievers, or those not remaining in the faith, are to be rebuked, this rebuke not being hindered by the preaching of the grace of God, which teaches that faith itself and remaining in it are gifts of God. For even though wisdom is obtained from faith, as James himself, when he had said, “If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and does not reproach, and it will be given him,” at once added, “But let him ask in faith, nothing doubting,” yet, because faith is given before it is asked for by him to whom it is given, it is not therefore to be said that it is not the gift of God but is from us, because it was given us without our asking. For the Apostle says most plainly: “Peace to the brothers, and love with faith, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” From whom, then, peace and love come, from him faith comes too; and for that reason we ask of him not only that it be increased in those who have it, but also that it be given to those who do not have it. Nor do these men, on whose account we say these things, and who cry out that exhortation is hindered by the preaching of predestination and grace, exhort only to those gifts which they contend are not given by God but are from us, such as the beginning of faith and perseverance in it to the end; which they certainly ought to do, exhorting only unbelievers to believe and believers to continue believing. But those things which they do not deny with us to be gifts of God, so that with us they may demolish the Pelagian error, such as chastity, continence, patience, and the other things by which one lives rightly and which are obtained from the Lord by faith, they ought only to have shown must be prayed for and only to have prayed for, either for themselves or for others, and not to have exhorted anyone to take them up and keep them. But since they exhort to these too, as they can, and confess that men must be exhorted, they certainly show clearly enough that exhortations, whether to faith or to perseverance to the end, are not hindered by that preaching either, since we preach that these too are gifts of God, and are bestowed on anyone not by himself but by him. “But,” they say, “each one forsakes the faith by his own fault, when he yields to and consents to the temptation by which he is being moved to forsake the faith.” Who denies it? But perseverance in the faith is not on that account to be said not to be the gift of God. For he asks for it daily who says, “Lead us not into temptation”; and if he is heard, he receives it; and therefore, asking daily that he may persevere, he certainly places the hope of his perseverance not in himself but in God. But I do not wish to exaggerate with my own words, but rather leave it to them to consider and see what sort of thing it is of which they have persuaded themselves, that by the preaching of predestination more despair than exhortation is brought to the hearers. For this is to say that a man despairs of his salvation at the time when he has learned to place his hope not in himself but in God; when the prophet cries out, “Cursed is everyone who has his hope in man.” These gifts of God, then, which are given to the elect called according to God's purpose, among which gifts are both to begin to believe and to persevere in faith to the end of this life, as we have proved by so great a witness of reasons and authorities: these gifts of God, I say, if there is no predestination such as we defend, are not foreknown by God; but they are foreknown; this, therefore, is the predestination we defend.

Hence this predestination is sometimes signified also by the name of foreknowledge, as the Apostle says, “God has not rejected his people, whom he foreknew.” Here what he says, “foreknew,” is not rightly understood except as “predestined,” as the context of the passage itself shows. For he was speaking of the remnant of the Jews which was saved, while the rest perished. For he had said above that the prophet had said to Israel, “All day long I have stretched out my hands to a people unbelieving and contradicting”; and as though it were answered, “Where, then, are the promises of God made to Israel?”, he at once added, “I say, then, has God rejected his people? Far from it! For I too am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin”; as if to say, “For I too am of that very people.” Then he added what we are now dealing with, “God has not rejected his people, whom he foreknew.” And to show that the remnant had been left by the grace of God, not by the merits of their works, he went on to add, “Or do you not know what the Scripture says in Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel?” and the rest. “But what,” he says, “does the divine answer say to him? ‘I have left for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.’” For he does not say, “Seven thousand have been left to me,” or, “They have left themselves to me,” but, “I have left for myself.” “So, then,” he says, “at this present time also a remnant has come about by the election of grace. But if by grace, then no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace.” And connecting what I have already put above, “What then?”, and answering this question: “What Israel sought,” he says, “it has not obtained; but the election has obtained it, and the rest were blinded.” In this election, then, and in this remnant which came about by the election of grace, he wished the people to be understood which God did not reject because he foreknew it. This is that election by which he chose in Christ those whom he willed before the foundation of the world, that they should be holy and without blemish before him in love, predestining them to adoption as sons. No one, then, who understands these things is permitted to deny or doubt that, where the Apostle says, “God has not rejected his people, whom he foreknew,” he meant to signify predestination. For he foreknew the remnant which he himself was going to make according to the election of grace. This, then, is “he predestined”; for without doubt he foreknew if he predestined; but to have predestined is to have foreknown what he himself was going to do.

What, then, prevents us, when we read in some expositors of the word of God of the foreknowledge of God, and the calling of the elect is in question, from understanding the same predestination? For perhaps they preferred to use this word in that matter because it is both more easily understood and does not conflict with, indeed even agrees with, the truth which is preached about the predestination of grace. This I know, that no one has been able to argue against this predestination, which we defend according to the holy Scriptures, except by erring. Yet I think that for those who seek the opinions of expositors on this matter, Cyprian and Ambrose, holy men praiseworthily renowned everywhere for Christian faith and doctrine, whose testimonies so clear we have set out, ought to suffice; and ought to suffice for both purposes: that they believe in every respect and preach in every respect the free grace of God, as it is to be believed and preached, and do not think this preaching opposed to the preaching by which we exhort the slothful or rebuke the wicked. For these men too, when they so preached the grace of God that one of them said, “We must glory in nothing, since nothing is ours,” and the other, “Our heart and our thoughts are not in our power,” did not on that account cease to exhort and rebuke, so that the divine commands might be done. Nor did they fear that it might be said to them, “Why do you exhort us? Why do you rebuke us too, if no good that we have is ours, and if our heart is not in our power?” Those holy men could by no means fear that this would be said to them, with the mind by which they understood that it has been given to very few to receive the teaching of salvation from God himself or from the angels of heaven with no man preaching to them, but to many it has been given to believe God through men. Yet in whatever way the word of God is spoken to a man, it is without doubt the gift of God that he so hears it as to obey it. Hence the most excellent expositors of the divine oracles mentioned above both preached the true grace of God as it is to be preached, that is, the grace which no human merits precede, and urgently exhorted to the doing of the divine commands, so that those who had the gift of obedience might hear what commands were to be obeyed. For if any merits of ours precede grace, it is certainly the merit of some deed, or word, or thought, where the good will itself too is understood; but he who says, “We must glory in nothing, since nothing is ours,” has most briefly embraced all kinds of merits. And he who says, “Our heart and our thoughts are not in our power,” did not pass over deeds and words either; for there is no deed or word of man that does not proceed from the heart and thought. And what more could Cyprian, most glorious martyr and most luminous teacher, do in this matter than where he reminded us that in the Lord's Prayer we ought to pray even for the enemies of the Christian faith? There he showed what he thought about the beginning of faith, that this too is God's gift; and he showed that the church of Christ prays daily for perseverance to the end, because God gives this too only to those who will have persevered. Blessed Ambrose too, when he was expounding what Luke the evangelist says, “It seemed good to me also,” says: “What he declares seemed good to him can have seemed good not to him alone. For it did not seem good by human will only, but as it pleased him who speaks in me, Christ, who works that what is good may seem good to us too: for whom he pities he also calls. And therefore he who follows Christ, if asked why he willed to be a Christian, can answer, ‘It seemed good to me also.’ When he says this, he does not deny that it seemed good to God; for the will of men is prepared by God. For that God is honoured by a saint is the grace of God.” Likewise in the same work, that is, in the Exposition of the same Gospel, when he came to that place where the Samaritans would not receive the Lord as he was going to Jerusalem, he says: “Learn at the same time that he would not be received by those not converted with a simple mind. For if he had willed, he would have made devout men out of undevout. But why they did not receive him the Evangelist himself recorded, saying, ‘Because his face was set toward Jerusalem.’ But the disciples longed for him to be received within Samaria. But God calls whom he deigns, and makes religious whom he wills.” What plainer, what clearer do we seek from expositors of the word of God, if we are pleased to hear from them too what is clear in the Scriptures? But to these two, who ought to have sufficed, let us add a third too, holy Gregory, who testifies that both to believe in God and to confess what we believe is the gift of God, saying: “Confess, I beseech you, the Trinity of one Godhead; but if you will otherwise, say that it is of one nature, and God will be besought that a voice be given you by the Holy Spirit”: that is, God will be asked to permit a voice to be given you by which you may confess what you believe. “For he will give it, I am certain; he who gave what is first will give what is second also”: he who gave believing will give confessing too. These teachers, such and so great, saying that there is nothing of which we may glory as our own which God has not given us; that our heart itself and our thoughts are not in our power; and giving all to God, and confessing that we receive from him that we are turned to him so as to remain; that what is good may seem good to us too, and we may will it; that we may honour God and receive Christ; that from undevout we may be made devout and religious; that we may believe in the Trinity itself and confess with our voice too what we believe: these men certainly attribute these things to the grace of God, acknowledge them as God's gifts, and testify that they are ours from him, not from ourselves. Will anyone say that they so confessed this grace of God as to dare to deny his foreknowledge, which not only the learned but even the unlearned confess? Further, if they knew that God so gives these things that they were not ignorant that he foreknew he would give them, and could not fail to know to whom he would give them, they certainly knew the predestination which, preached by the apostles, we defend more laboriously and carefully against the new heretics; and yet, as they preached obedience and fervently exhorted to it as each could, it would in no way rightly be said to them, “If you do not want the obedience to which you kindle us to grow cold in our heart, do not preach to us this grace of God, by which you confess that God gives what you exhort us to do.”

Therefore, if both the apostles and the teachers of the church who succeeded and imitated them did both, that is, both preached truly the grace of God, which is not given according to our merits, and instructed godly obedience by wholesome precepts, what is it that these brothers of ours, hemmed in by the unconquered force of truth, think they rightly say: “Even if what is said about the predestination of God's benefits is true, it is nevertheless not to be preached to the people”? It must certainly be preached, so that “he who has ears to hear, let him hear.” But who has them, if he has not received them from him who says, “I will give them a heart to know me and ears that hear”? Certainly let him who has not received reject it, provided that he who takes it in takes and drinks, drinks and lives. For just as godliness is to be preached, so that God may be rightly worshipped by him who has ears to hear; chastity is to be preached, so that nothing unlawful may be done with the genital members by him who has ears to hear; love is to be preached, so that God and neighbour may be loved by him who has ears to hear: so this predestination of God's benefits too is to be preached, so that he who has ears to hear may glory not in himself but in the Lord. But as for what they say, “that there was no need for the hearts of so many less intelligent people to be troubled by the uncertainty of a discussion of this kind, since the Catholic faith has been defended no less usefully for so many years without this definition of predestination, both against others and especially against the Pelagians, in so many books of Catholics, both of others and our own earlier ones”: I greatly wonder that they say this, and do not notice, to say nothing here of others, these very books of ours, written and published even before the Pelagians had begun to appear, and see in how many places of them, not knowing the future Pelagian heresy, we were striking it down by preaching the grace by which God sets us free from our evil errors and ways, with no good merits of ours going before, doing this according to his free mercy. This I began to understand more fully in that discussion which I wrote to Simplician of blessed memory, bishop of the church of Milan, at the beginning of my episcopate, when I both came to know and asserted that the beginning of faith too is the gift of God. And which of my works could become more widely and more pleasingly known than the books of my Confessions? Though I published them before the Pelagian heresy had arisen, in them I certainly said to our God, and said often, “Give what you command, and command what you will.” When these words of mine were mentioned at Rome by a certain brother and fellow bishop of mine in the presence of Pelagius, he could not bear them, and, contradicting rather heatedly, almost quarrelled with the one who had mentioned them. But what does God first and chiefly command but that we believe in him? This too, then, he gives, if it is well said to him, “Give what you command.” And in those same books, what I narrated about my conversion, God turning me to that faith which I was ravaging with most wretched and furious talkativeness: do you not remember that it was narrated in such a way as to show that I was granted not to perish to the faithful and daily tears of my mother? There I certainly preached that God by his grace turns to the right faith the wills of men which are not only turned away from it but even opposed to it. And how I asked God for advancing perseverance you both know and can review when you will. All the gifts of God, then, which in that same work I either wished for or praised, who would dare, I do not say to deny, but even to doubt that God foreknew he would give, and could never have failed to know to whom he would give them? This is the manifest and certain predestination of the saints, which necessity afterwards compelled us to defend more carefully and laboriously, when we were already arguing against the Pelagians. For we have learned that each heresy has brought into the church its own questions, against which divine Scripture was defended more carefully than if no such necessity compelled it. And what compelled the passages of Scripture in which predestination is commended to be defended more fully and more minutely by this labour of ours, but that the Pelagians say that the grace of God is given according to our merits? And what else is this but the complete denial of grace?

So that this opinion, then, displeasing to God and hostile to the free benefits of God by which we are set free, may be destroyed, we maintain that both the beginning of faith and perseverance in it to the end are, according to the Scriptures, from which we have already said much, gifts of God. For if we say that the beginning of faith is from us, so that by it we may merit to receive the other gifts of God, the Pelagians conclude that the grace of God is given according to our merits. The Catholic faith so abhorred this that Pelagius himself, fearing to be condemned, condemned it. Likewise, if we say that our perseverance is from us, not from the Lord, they answer that we have the beginning of faith from ourselves as we have the end, arguing thus: that we have that beginning from ourselves much more if we have from ourselves remaining to the end, since to complete is greater than to begin; and so again and again they conclude that the grace of God is given according to our merits. But if both are the gift of God, and God foreknew that he would give these gifts of his (who can deny it?), predestination must be preached, so that the true grace of God, that is, the grace not given according to our merits, may be defended with an unconquerable fortification. And I indeed in that book whose title is On Rebuke and Grace, which could not satisfy all who love us, think I have so set down that it is the gift of God even to persevere to the end that I had never, or almost never, written it before so expressly and plainly, unless my memory deceives me. But I have not now said this in such a way that no one said it before me. For blessed Cyprian, as we have already shown, so expounded our petitions in the Lord's Prayer as to say that in the very first petition we ask for perseverance, asserting that we pray for it by saying, “Hallowed be your name,” when we have already been hallowed in baptism, so that we may persevere in what we have begun to be. Yet let those, to whom, since they love me, I ought not to be ungrateful, who profess, as you write, that they embrace all my views except what has come into question: let them see, I say, whether in the later parts of the first of those two books which I wrote at the beginning of my episcopate, before the Pelagian heresy appeared, to Simplician, bishop of Milan, anything remained by which it could be called in doubt that the grace of God is not given according to our merits; and whether I did not there show sufficiently that even the beginning of faith is the gift of God; and whether from what is said there it does not follow clearly, even if it is not expressed, that perseverance to the end too is given only by him who has predestined us to his kingdom and glory. Then, did I not publish many years ago that very letter which I wrote, already against the Pelagians, to the holy Paulinus, bishop of Nola, which letter they have now begun to contradict? Let them look also at the one I gave to Sixtus, presbyter of the Roman church, when we were striving against the Pelagians in a most bitter conflict; they will find it such as the one to Paulinus is. From this let them recall that these things were already said and written against the Pelagian heresy some years ago, and that it is a wonder they now displease them. Although I would wish no one so to embrace all my views as to follow me, except in those things in which he sees that I have not erred. For this is why I am now writing books in which I have undertaken to revise my works, to show that I have not followed even myself in all things; but I think that by God's mercy I have written by making progress, not that I began from perfection; since I speak more arrogantly than truly if even now I say that I have at last come, at this age, to writing without any error. But it matters how much and in what matters one errs, and how easily anyone corrects it, or with how much obstinacy he tries to defend his error. For a man is of good hope if the last day of this life finds him so progressing that what was lacking to his progress is added to him, and he is judged to need perfecting rather than punishment. Therefore, if I do not wish to be ungrateful to men who have loved me because some usefulness of my labour reached them before they loved me, how much more to God, whom we would not love unless he had first loved us and made us lovers of him? For love is from him, as those said whom he made not only great lovers but also great preachers of himself. And what is more ungrateful than to deny the very grace of God by saying that it is given according to our merits? This the Catholic faith abhorred in the Pelagians; this it charged against Pelagius himself as a capital crime; this Pelagius himself condemned, not indeed out of love for God's truth, but yet out of fear of his own condemnation. But whoever, as a faithful Catholic, abhors saying that the grace of God is given according to our merits, let him not withdraw faith itself from the grace of God, by which he obtained mercy to be faithful; and therefore let him attribute to the grace of God perseverance too to the end, by which he obtains the mercy which he asks daily, not to be led into temptation. Between the beginning of faith and the completion of perseverance are those things in between by which we live rightly, which they themselves also agree are given us by God, faith obtaining them. All these things, then, the beginning of faith, namely, and his other gifts to the end, God foreknew that he would bestow on his called. It belongs, therefore, to excessive contentiousness to contradict predestination or to doubt about predestination.

Yet it must not be preached to the people in such a way that it seems in some way to be refuted by its very preaching in the eyes of an unskilled multitude or one of slower understanding; just as the foreknowledge of God (which certainly they cannot deny) seems to be refuted if it is said to men, “Whether you run or sleep, you will be what he who cannot be deceived has foreknown.” It is the part of a deceitful or unskilled physician to bind on even a useful medicine in such a way that it either does no good or does harm. But it must be said, “So run that you may obtain,” and that by your very running you may know that you were foreknown as such that you would run lawfully; and in whatever other way the foreknowledge of God can be preached so that man's sloth may be repelled. Although, then, the fixed sentence of God's will concerning predestination stands thus, that some, having received the will to obey, are converted from unbelief to faith or persevere in the faith, while the rest, who linger in the delight of damnable sins, if they too are predestined, have not yet risen because the help of pitying grace has not yet raised them up (for if any are not yet called whom he has predestined by his grace to be chosen, they will receive that same grace by which they may will and be chosen; but if any obey, but are not predestined to his kingdom and glory, they are temporary and will not remain to the end in that same obedience): although, then, these things are true, they are not to be said in such a way to a large audience that the discourse is turned upon the hearers themselves, and those words of these men which you inserted in your letter and which I set down above are said to them: “The fixed sentence of God's will concerning predestination stands thus, that some of you have come from unbelief to faith, having received the will to obey.” What need is there to say “some of you”? For if we speak to the church of God, if we speak to believers, why, by saying that some of them have come to faith, should we seem to do wrong to the rest, when we can more fittingly say: “The fixed sentence of God's will concerning predestination stands thus, that you have come from unbelief to faith, having received the will to obey, and, having received perseverance, remain in the faith”? Nor should what follows be said at all, namely: “But the rest of you, who linger in the delight of sins, have not yet risen because the help of pitying grace has not yet raised you up.” For it can and should be said well and fittingly: “But if any of you still linger in the delight of damnable sins, lay hold of most wholesome discipline; yet when you have done so, do not be lifted up as though about your own works, or glory as though you had not received this; for it is God who works in you both to will and to work, for his good will, and your steps are directed by the Lord so that you may will his way; but from your good and right running itself learn that you belong to the predestination of divine grace.” Likewise what follows and is said, “But if any of you are not yet called whom he has predestined by his grace to be chosen, you will receive that same grace by which you may will and be chosen,” is said more harshly than it can be said, if we consider that we are speaking not to any men whatever, but to the church of Christ. For why is it not rather said thus: “And if there are any not yet called, let us pray for them that they may be called”? For perhaps they have been so predestined that they are granted to our prayers and receive that same grace by which they may will and become elect. For God, who has fulfilled all that he predestined, therefore willed that we pray even for the enemies of the faith, so that we might understand from this that he himself gives even to unbelievers that they believe, and makes them willing from unwilling. Now as to what is joined to those words, I wonder whether anyone weak among the Christian people can in any way hear it patiently, when it is said to them: “And if any of you obey, if you are predestined to be rejected, the strength to obey will be withdrawn, so that you cease to obey.” For to say this, what does it seem but to curse, or in a way to prophesy evil? But if it pleases, or is necessary, to say something about those who do not persevere, why is it not at least said rather as I said a little earlier: first, that this be said not of those themselves who hear among the people, but of others to them; that is, that it be said not, “If any of you obey, if you are predestined to be rejected,” but, “If any obey,” and the rest, in the third person of the verb, not the second? For a thing not desirable but abominable is said, and dashed most harshly and hatefully, as it were, against the hearers' faces by addressing them, when he who speaks to them says, “And if there are any of you who obey, if you are predestined to be rejected, the strength to obey will be withdrawn, so that you cease to obey.” For what does the meaning lose if it is said thus: “But if any obey, but are not predestined to his kingdom and glory, they are temporary and will not remain to the end in that same obedience”? Is not the same thing said both more truly and more fittingly, so that we do not seem to wish such an evil on them, but to report of others what they may hate and think does not concern them, by hoping and praying for better things? But in that way in which they think it should be said, the same sentence, in almost the same words, can be pronounced also of the foreknowledge of God, which they certainly cannot deny, so as to say: “And if any of you obey, if you are foreknown to be rejected, you will cease to obey.” This is certainly most true; quite so, but most unseemly, most untimely, most unfitting; not by false speech, but speech not wholesomely applied to the health of human weakness. Even that manner which we have said should be used in preaching predestination I do not think ought to suffice one speaking before the people, unless he adds this or something like it, saying: “You, then, ought to hope for perseverance in obedience itself too from the Father of lights, from whom comes down every best gift and every perfect gift, and to ask for it in daily prayers, and by doing this to trust that you are not strangers to the predestination of his people; since he himself grants that you do this too. But far be it from you to despair of yourselves because you are commanded to have your hope in him, not in yourselves. For cursed is everyone who has his hope in man; and it is good to trust in the Lord rather than to trust in man, since blessed are all who trust in him. Holding this hope, serve the Lord in fear and rejoice to him with trembling; since of the eternal life which the God who does not lie promised to the sons of the promise before eternal times no one can be secure until this life, which is a trial upon earth, is completed; but he will make us persevere in him to the end of this life, he to whom we say daily, ‘Lead us not into temptation.’” When these and similar things are said, whether to a few Christians or to the multitude of the church, why do we fear to preach the predestination of the saints and the true grace of God, that is, the grace not given according to our merits, as holy Scripture preaches it? Or is it to be feared that a man will despair of himself when his hope is shown to be placed in God, but would not despair if, most proud and most unhappy, he placed it in himself?

And would that the slow of heart and the weak, who cannot, or cannot yet, understand the Scriptures or their expositions, would so hear or not hear our disputations on this question as rather to look at their own prayers, which the church has always had and will have from its beginnings until this age is ended! For of this matter, which we are now compelled against the new heretics not merely to mention but plainly to protect and defend, the church has never been silent in its prayers, even if sometimes, with no adversary pressing, it did not think it should be set forth in sermons. For when has prayer not been made in the church for unbelievers and its enemies, that they might believe? When has any believer had a friend, neighbour, or spouse who was an unbeliever, and not asked of the Lord for him a mind obedient to the Christian faith? And who has ever not prayed for himself that he might remain in the Lord? Or who, if a priest invoking the Lord over the faithful ever said, “Grant them, O Lord, to persevere in you to the end,” has dared to find fault, not only with his voice but even in thought, and not rather answered “Amen” over such a blessing of his, with believing heart and confessing mouth? Since in the Lord's Prayer itself the faithful pray for nothing else, especially when they say, “Lead us not into temptation,” than that they may persevere in holy obedience. As in these prayers, then, so in this faith the church was born, grows, and has grown: the faith by which it is believed that the grace of God is not given according to the merits of those who receive it. For the church would not pray that faith be given to unbelievers unless it believed that God turns to himself the wills of men both turned away and opposed; nor would the church pray that it might persevere in the faith of Christ, not deceived or overcome by the temptations of the world, unless it believed that the Lord so has our heart in his power that the good which we hold only by our own will we nevertheless do not hold unless he himself works in us even to will. For if the church asks these things of him but thinks that they are given to it by itself, it has not true but perfunctory prayers; far be it from us! For who truly groans, desiring to receive what he prays for from the Lord, if he thinks that he takes it from himself and not from him? Especially since “we do not know what to pray for as we ought; but the Spirit himself,” says the Apostle, “intercedes for us with groanings that cannot be uttered. And he who searches the hearts knows what the Spirit minds, because he intercedes for the saints according to God.” What does “the Spirit himself intercedes” mean but “makes us intercede,” with groanings that cannot be uttered, but true, since the Spirit is truth? For it is he of whom he says in another place, “God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father.” And what does “crying” mean here but “making us cry,” by that figure by which we call a day joyful which makes people joyful? He makes this plain elsewhere, where he says, “For you have not received the spirit of slavery again in fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, in whom we cry, Abba, Father.” There he said “crying”; here “in whom we cry,” disclosing how he said “crying,” that is, as I have already explained, “making us cry.” Here we understand that this very thing too is the gift of God, that with a true heart and spiritually we cry to God. Let them notice, then, how those are deceived who think that it is from us, not given to us, that we ask, seek, and knock; and say that this is so, that grace is preceded by our merit, so that it follows when we receive asking, and find seeking, and it is opened to us knocking; and do not want to understand that this too is of the divine gift, that we pray, that is, ask, seek, and knock. For “we have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, in whom we cry, Abba, Father.” Blessed Ambrose too saw this. For he says: “To pray to God too belongs to spiritual grace, as it is written, No one says Lord Jesus except in the Holy Spirit.” These things, then, which the church asks of the Lord, and has always asked since it began to be, God so foreknew that he would give to his called that he has already given them in predestination itself; which the Apostle declares without ambiguity. For writing to Timothy he says: “Labour with the gospel according to the power of God, who saved us and called us with his holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before eternal times, but has now been manifested through the coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ.” Let him, then, say that the church at some time did not have in its faith the truth of this predestination and grace, which is now defended with more careful attention against the new heretics; let him, I say, say this who dares to say that at some time it did not pray, or did not truly pray, either that unbelievers might believe or that believers might persevere. But if it has always prayed for these goods, it has certainly always believed them to be gifts of God; nor was it ever lawful for it to deny that they were foreknown by him. And therefore the church of Christ has never been without the faith of this predestination, which is now defended with new care against the new heretics.

But why say more? I think I have taught sufficiently, or rather more than sufficiently, that both to begin to believe in the Lord and to remain in the Lord to the end are gifts of God. The other goods that belong to the godly life by which God is rightly worshipped, even those for whose sake we are doing this grant to be gifts of God. Further, they cannot deny that God foreknew all his gifts and those on whom he was going to bestow them. Just as, then, the other things are to be preached, so that he who preaches them may be heard obediently, so predestination is to be preached, so that he who hears these things obediently may glory not in man, and therefore not in himself, but in the Lord; for this too is a command of God, and to hear this command obediently, that is, that he who glories should glory in the Lord, is, like the rest, the gift of God. Whoever does not have this gift, I do not hesitate to say, has in vain whatever else he has. This we wish the Pelagians to have; and these brothers of ours to have more fully. Let us not, then, be quick in disputations and slow in prayers. Let us pray, dearly beloved, let us pray that the God of grace may grant even to our enemies, and most of all to our brothers and those who love us, to understand and confess that after the huge and unspeakable ruin in which we all fell in one man, no one is set free except by the grace of God; and that it is not rendered as due according to the merits of those who receive it, but given freely as true grace, with no merits going before. Now there is no more illustrious example of predestination than Jesus himself; on which I have already argued in the first book, and have chosen to commend it at the end of this one: there is, I say, no more illustrious example of predestination than the Mediator himself. Whatever believer wants to understand it well, let him look at him, and in him find himself too: a believer, I say, who believes and confesses in him a true human nature, that is, ours, though raised up, by God the Word's singularly taking it up, into the only Son of God, so that he who took up and what he took up were one person in the Trinity. For by the assumption of man no quaternity was made, but the Trinity remained, that assumption ineffably bringing about the truth of one person in God and man. For we do not say that Christ is God only, as the Manichaean heretics do; nor man only, as the Photinian heretics do; nor man in such a way that he lacks something that certainly belongs to human nature, whether the soul, or within the soul the rational mind, or flesh not taken from a woman but made from the Word turned and changed into flesh; all three of which, false and empty, have made three various and different parties of the Apollinarian heretics. But we say that Christ is true God, born of God the Father without any beginning of time; and the same true man, born of a human mother in the appointed fullness of time; and that his humanity, by which he is less than the Father, takes nothing away from his divinity, by which he is equal to the Father. And both of these are one Christ, who according to God said most truly, “I and the Father are one,” and according to man said most truly, “The Father is greater than I.” He, then, who made this man of the seed of David a righteous man, who would never be unrighteous, without any merit of his preceding will, himself makes righteous men from unrighteous without any merit of their preceding will, so that he may be the head and they his members. He, then, who made that man, without any preceding merits of his, to draw by origin or commit by will no sin that would need forgiving, himself, without any preceding merits of theirs, makes believers in him, to whom he forgives every sin. He who made him such that he never has had or will have an evil will, himself makes in his members a good will from an evil one. Both him, then, and us he predestined; because both in him, that he should be our head, and in us, that we should be his body, he foreknew not our merits that would go before but his own works that would come. Let those who read these things, if they understand, give thanks to God; but let those who do not understand pray that he may be their inward teacher, from whose face come knowledge and understanding. But let those who think that I err consider again and again carefully what has been said, lest perhaps they themselves err. As for me, when through those who read my labours I become not only more learned but also more corrected, I acknowledge God to be gracious to me; and this I especially expect through the teachers of the church, if it also comes into their hands and they deign to know what I write.