Edition Hide
Contra Faustum Manichaeum libri triginta tres

72.

Sed deus, inquit, verus et bonus nullo modo talia iussisse credendus est. Immo vero talia recte non iubet, nisi deus verus et bonus, qui et solus novit, quid cuique iubendum sit, et solus neminem quicquam incongruum perpeti sinit. Ceterum ista imperita et falsa bonitas cordis humani contradicat et Christo, ne deo bono iubente impii mali aliquid patiantur, cum dicturus est angelis: p. 669,17 Colligite primum zizania et alligate fasciculos ad comburendum, qui tamen hoc ipsum inoportune facere volentes servos prohibuit dicens: Ne forte cum vultis colligere zizania, eradicetis simul et triticum. Ita solus deus verus et bonus novit, quid, quando, quibus, per quos fieri aliquid vel iubeat vel permittat. Poterat etiam ista humana non bonitas, sed plane vanitas eidem domino contradicere, cum desiderio noxio daemonum in porcos ire volentium petentiumque permisit, praesertim quia Manichaei non solum porcos, verum etiam minutata et abiecta animalia hominum animas habere crediderunt. Qua vanitate improbata et abiecta illud tamen constat dominum nostrum Iesum Christum, dei unicum filium ac per hoc deum verum et bonum, mortem _ (morte?)_pecorum alienorum perniciem qualiumcumque animantium et grave damnum hominum desiderio daemonum concessisse. p. 670,3 Quis autem dementissimus dixerit, quod eos ab hominibus non potuisset excludere, etiamsi eorum noxiae voluntati nec porcorum exitium praestare voluisset? Porro si spirituum damnatorum et igni aeterno iam destinatorum quamvis saeva et iniqua cupiditas a creatore atque ordinatore omnium naturarum occulto quidem, sed ubique iusto moderamine in id, quo se inclinaverat, relaxata est, quid absurdum est, si Aegyptii ab Hebraeis, homines inique dominantes ab hominibus liberis, quorum etiam mercedis pro eorum tam duris et iniustis laboribus fuerant debitores, rebus terrenis, quibus etiam ritu sacrilego in iniuriam creatoris utebantur, privari meruerunt? p. 670,14 Quod tamen si Moyses sua sponte iussisset, aut hoc Hebraei sua sponte fecissent, profecto peccassent, quamquam illi non quidem hoc faciendo, quod vel iusserat vel permiserat deus, sed tamen talia fortasse cupiendo peccaverunt. Quod autem hoc facere divina dispensatione permissi sunt, illius iudicio iusto bonoque permissi sunt, qui novit et poenis vel coercere improbos vel erudire subiectos et praecepta validiora dare sanioribus et quosdam medicinales gradus infirmioribus ordinare. Moyses vero nec cupiditatis arguendus est in illis rebus desideratis nec contumaciae in divinis imperiis quibuscumque contemptis.

Translation Hide
Reply to Faustus the Manichaean

72.

But, says Faustus, it cannot be admitted that the true God, who is also good, ever gave such a command. I answer, such a command can be rightly given by no other than the true and good God, who alone knows the suitable command in every case, and who alone is incapable of inflicting unmerited suffering on any one. This ignorant and spurious goodness of the human heart may as well deny what Christ says, and object to the wicked being made to suffer by the good God, when He shall say to the angels, "Gather first the tares into bundles to burn them." The servants, however, were stopped when they wished to do this prematurely: "Lest by chance, when ye would gather the tares, ye root up the wheat also with them." ¹ Thus the true and good God alone knows when, to whom, and by whom to order anything, or to permit anything. In the same way, this human goodness, or folly rather, might object to the Lord's permitting the devils to enter the swine, which they asked to be allowed to do with a mischievous intent, ² especially as the Manichaeans believe that not only pigs, but the vilest insects, have human souls. But setting aside these absurd notions, this is undeniable, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the only son of God, and therefore the true and good God, permitted the destruction of swine belonging to strangers, implying loss of life and of a great amount of property, at the request of devils. No one can be so insane as to suppose that Christ could not have driven the devils out of the men without gratifying their malice by the destruction of the swine. If, then, the Creator and Governor of all natures, in His superintendence, which, though mysterious, is ever just, indulged the violent and unjust inclination of those lost spirits already doomed to eternal fire, why should not the Egyptians, who were unrighteous oppressors, be spoiled by the Hebrews, a free people, who would claim payment for their enforced and painful toil, especially as the earthly possessions which they thus lost were used by the Egyptians in their impious rites, to the dishonor of the Creator? Still, if Moses had originated this order, or if the people had done it spontaneously, undoubtedly it would have been sinful; and perhaps the people did sin, not in doing what God commanded or permitted, but in some desire of their own for what they took. The permission given to this action by divine authority was in accordance with the just and good counsel of Him who uses punishments both to restrain the wicked and to educate His own people; who knows also how to give more advanced precepts to those able to bear them, while He begins on a lower scale in the treatment of the feeble. As for Moses, he can be blamed neither for coveting the property, nor for disputing, in any instance, the divine authority.