Translation Hide
Reply to Faustus the Manichaean

9.

The elders who pleased God kept their own order by their obedience, in observing, according to God's arrangement, what was appointed as suitable to certain times. So, although all animals intended for food are by nature clean, they abstained from some which had then a symbolical uncleanness, in preparation for the future revelation of the things signified. And so with regard to unleavened bread and all such things, in which the apostle says there was a shadow of future things, neglect of their observance under the old dispensation, when this observance was enjoined, and was employed to prefigure what was afterwards to be revealed, would have been as criminal, as it would now be foolish in us, after the light of the New Testament has arisen, to think that these predictive observances could be of any use to us. On the other hand, since the Old Testament teaches us that the things now revealed were so long ago prefigured, that we may be firm and faithful in our adherence to them, it would be blasphemy and impiety to discard these books, simply because the Lord requires of us now not a literal, but a spiritual and intelligent regard to their contents. They were written, as the apostle says, for our admonition, on whom the end of the world is come. ¹ "For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning." ² Not to eat unleavened bread in the appointed seven days was a sin in the time of the Old Testament; in the time of the New Testament it is not a sin. But having the hope of a future world through Christ, who makes us altogether new by clothing our souls with righteousness and our bodies with immortality, to believe that the bondage and infirmity of our original corruption will prevail over us or over our actions, must continue to be a sin, till the seven days of the course of time are accomplished. In the time of the Old Testament, this, under the disguise of a type, was perceived by some saints. In the time of the New Testament it is fully declared and publicly preached. ³

What was then a precept of Scripture is now a testimony. Formerly, not to keep the feast of tabernacles was a sin, which is not the case now. But not to form part of the building of God's tabernacle, which is the Church, is always a sin. Formerly this was acted in a figure; now the record serves as testimony. The ancient tabernacle, indeed, would not have been called the tabernacle of the testimony, unless as an appropriate symbol it had borne testimony to some truth which was to be revealed in its own time. To patch linen garments with purple, or to wear a garment of woollen and linen together, is not a sin now. But to live intemperately, and to wish to combine opposite modes of life,--as when a woman devoted to religion wears the ornaments of married women, or when one who has not abstained from marriage dresses like a virgin,--is always sin. So it is sin whenever inconsistent things are combined in any man's life. This, which is now a moral truth, was then symbolized in dress. What was then a type is now revealed truth. So the same Scripture which then required symbolical actions, now testifies to the things signified. The prefigurative observance is now a record for the confirmation of our faith. Formerly it was unlawful to plough with an ox and an ass together; now it is lawful. The apostle explains this when he quotes the text about not muzzling the ox that is treading out the corn. He says, "Does God care for oxen?" What, then, have we to do with an obsolete prohibition? The apostle teaches us in the following words, "For our sakes it is written." ⁴ It must be impiety in us not to read what was written for our sakes; for it is more for our sakes, to whom the revelation belongs, than for theirs who had only the figure. There is no harm in joining an ox with an ass where it is required. But to put a wise man and a fool together, not that one should teach and the other obey, but that both with equal authority should declare the word of God, cannot be done without causing offence. So the same Scripture which was once a command enjoining the shadow in which future things were veiled, is now an authoritative witness to the unveiled truth.

In what he says of the uncleanness of a man that is bald or has red hair, Faustus is inaccurate, or the manuscript he has used is incorrect. ⁵ Would that Faustus were not ashamed to bear on his forehead the cross of Christ, the want of which is baldness, instead of maintaining that Christ, who says, "I am the truth," showed unreal marks, after His resurrection, of unreal wounds! Faustus says he has not learned the art of deceiving, and speaks what he thinks. He cannot therefore be a disciple of his Christ, whom he madly declares to have shown false marks of wounds to his disciples when they doubted. Are we to believe Faustus, not only in his other absurdities, but also when he tells us that he does not deceive us in calling Christ a deceiver? Is he better than Christ? Is he not a deceiver, while Christ is? Or does he prove himself to be a disciple not of the truthful Christ, but of the deceiver Manichaeus, by this very falsehood, when he boasts that he has not learned the art of deceiving?

Edition Hide
Contra Faustum Manichaeum libri triginta tres

9.

Patres autem nostri, qui deo placuerunt, tenuerunt ordinem suum in ipsa oboedientia, ut quicquid deus temporibus congruis iubendo distribuit, sic observarent, quemadmodum ille distribuit. Itaque non solum carnes ad cibos datas, cum omnes natura mundae essent, quasdam tamen nonnulla significatione immundas illo tempore non ederunt, quo eas non edi praeceptum erat, ut talibus significationibus futura rerum manifestatio praefiguraretur, sed et azymum panem et cetera huiusmodi, in quibus fuisse umbram futurorum dicit apostolus, tam rei essent illius temporis et illius populi homines, si observare contemnerent, quando illa sic fieri, ista quae nunc revelata sunt, tunc sic praenuntiari oportebat, quam nos desipientes essemus, si nunc iam manifesto novo testamento illas praenuntiatiuas observationes aliquid nobis prodesse putaremus, p. 300,8 sicut sacrilegi et impii, si eosdem libros, qui propter nos scripti sunt, ut ea quae iam nobis revelata et in manifestatione adnuntiata sunt, tanto ante illis figuris praenuntiata cognoscentes fideliter et firmiter teneremus, ideo putaremus abiciendos, quia ea quae ibi scripta sunt, non iam observare corporaliter, sed intellegere et facere spiritaliter nos dominus iubet; p. 300,14 scripta sunt enim propter nos, in quos finis saeculorum obvenit, sicut item dicit idem apostolus. Omnia enim, quae ante scripta sunt, ut nos doceremur, scripta sunt. Quapropter non manducare azymum per statutos septem dies tempore veteris testamenti peccatum fuit, tempore autem novi testamenti non est peccatum. Sed in spe futuri saeculi, quam habemus in Christo, qui et animam nostram induens iustitia et corpus nostrum induens immortalitate totos nos innovat, credere aliquid ex veteris corruptionis necessitate atque indigentia nos passuros vel acturos semper peccatum est, quamdiu volvuntur isti septem dies, quibus peragitur tempus. p. 300,25 Sed hoc veteris testamenti temporibus in figura occultatum a quibusdam sanctis intellegebatur, tempore autem novi testamenti in manifestatione revelatum populis praedicatur. Unde scriptura ipsa tunc erat praeceptum, nunc testimonium. Scenopegia non celebrare aliquando peccatum fuit, nunc non est peccatum, tabernaculo autem dei, quod est ecclesia, non conpaginari semper peccatum est. Sed tunc agebatur sub praecepto figuratio, nunc legitur in testimonio revelatio. Nam illud, quod tunc factum est, non diceretur tabernaculum testimonii, nisi alicui veritati, quae suo tempore declaranda erat, quadam congruentia significationis attestaretur. Lineis vestibus miscere purpuram et linostima veste indui aliquando peccatum fuit, nunc non est peccatum; sed inordinate vivere et diversi generis professiones velle miscere, ut vel sanctimonialis habeat ornamenta nuptarum vel ea quae se non continens nupsit, speciem virgnis gerat, omni modo peccatum est; p. 301,14 et si quid inconvenienter ex diverso genere in vita cuiusque contexitur. Verum illud tunc figurabatur in vestibus, quod nunc declaratur in moribus; illud enim erat tempus significandi, hoc manifestandi. Ergo ipsa scriptura, quae tunc fuit exactrix operum significantium, nun testis est rerum significatarum; et quae tunc observabatur ad praenuntiationem, nunc recitatur ad confirmationem. Bovem et asinum ad operandum iungere tunc non licebat, nunc licet. Declaratum est enim per apostolum, cum de bove triturante non infrenando scripturam recoleret, dicentem: Numquid de bubus cura est deo? p. 301,24 Quare ergo nunc legitur, quando id quod prohibuit iam licet? Quia idem ipse ibi secutus apostolus ait: Propter nos scriptura dicit. Et utique impium est, ut non legamus nos, quod scriptum est propter nos; magis enim propter nos, quibus manifestatur, quam propter illos, in quibus figurabatur. Bovem quippe et asinum, si necesse sit, unusquisque sine detrimento operis iungit; sapientem vero et stultum, non ut unus praecipiat et alter obtemperet, sed pariter ex aequali potestate, ut adnuntient verbum dei, non sine scandalo quisque comites facit. Itaque eandem scripturam tenemus et tunc potestate praecipientem umbris tegendum, quod nunc aperiretur, et nunc auctoritate attestantem luce apertum, quod tunc tegebatur. p. 302,9 De calvo autem et reburro, quod eos immundos lex dixerit, parum Faustus attenderat aut in mendosum codicem inciderat. Sed utinam ipse calvam frontem habere voluisset atque in ea crucem Christi figere non erubuisset! Profecto Christum clamantem: Ego sum veritas, nec cum falsis vulneribus occubuisse nec cum falsis cicatricibus resurrexisse credidisset. Quin etiam dicit: Ego fallere non didici; quod sentio loquor. Non est ergo discipulus Christi sui, quem falsas cicatrices dubitantibus discipulis demonstrasse insanus opinatur et non solum de ceteris vanitatibus suis, sed etiam de ipsa Christi fallacia sibi tamquam non fallenti vult credi. Utrum Christo melior, quo fallente ipse non fallit, an eo ipso non veracis Christi, sed fallacis Manichaei discipulus, cum et in hoc fallit, in quo se non didicisse fallere gloriatur.