Traduction Masquer
Reply to Faustus the Manichaean

3.

The whole question is how Joseph had two fathers. Supposing this possible, both genealogies may be correct. With two fathers, why not two grandfathers, and two great-grandfathers, and so on, up to David, who was the father both of Solomon, who is mentioned in Matthew's list, and of Nathan, who occurs in Luke? This is the difficulty with many people who think it impossible that two men should have one and the same son, forgetting the very obvious fact that a man may be called the son of the person who adopted him as well as of the person who begot him.

Adoption, we know, was familiar to the ancients; for even women adopted the children of other women, as Sarah adopted Ishmael, and Leah her handmaid's son, and Pharaoh's daughter Moses. Jacob, too, adopted his grandsons, the children of Joseph. Moreover, the word adoption is of great importance in the system of our faith, as is seen from the apostolic writings. For the Apostle Paul, speaking of the advantages of the Jews, says: "Whose are the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law; whose are the fathers, and of whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever." ¹ And again: "We ourselves also groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption of the sons of God, even the redemption of the body." ² Again, elsewhere: "But in the fullness of time, God sent His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons." ³ These passages show clearly that adoption is a significant symbol. God has an only Son, whom He begot from His own substance, of whom it is said, "Being in the form of God, He thought it not robbery to be equal to God." ⁴ Us He begot not of His own substance, for we belong to the creation which is not begotten, but made; but that He might make us the brothers of Christ, He adopted us. That act, then, by which God, when we were not born of Him, but created and formed, begot us by His word and grace, is called adoption. So John says, "He gave them power to become the sons of God." ⁵

Since, therefore; the practice of adoption is common among our fathers, and in Scripture, is there not irrational profanity in the hasty condemnation of the evangelists as false because the genealogies are different, as if both could not be true, instead of considering calmly the simple fact that frequently in human life one man may have two fathers, one of whose flesh he is born, and another of whose will he is afterwards made a son by adoption? If the second is not rightly called father, neither are we right in saying, "Our Father which art in heaven," to Him of whose substance we were not born, but of whose grace and most merciful will we were adopted, according to apostolic doctrine, and truth most sure. For one is to us God, and Lord, and Father: God, for by Him we are created, though of human parents; Lord, for we are His subjects; Father, for by His adoption we are born again. Careful students of sacred Scripture easily saw, from a little consideration, how, in the different genealogies of the two evangelists, Joseph had two fathers, and consequently two lists of ancestors. You might have seen this too, if you had not been blinded by the love of contradiction. Other things far beyond your understanding have been discovered in the careful investigation of all parts of these narratives. The familiar occurrence of one man begetting a son and another adopting him, so that one man has two fathers, you might, in spite of Manichaean error, have thought of as an explanation, if you had not been reading in a hostile spirit.

Edition Masquer
Contra Faustum Manichaeum libri triginta tres

3.

Nempe tota in hoc quaestio est, quomodo potuerit duos patres habere Ioseph. Hoc enim si potuisse fieri demonstratur, nulla omnino causa est, cur quisquam istorum evangelistarum in diversis generationibus enumerandis falsum dixisse credatur. p. 263,18 A duobus enim patribus iam non erit mirum neque contrarium, quod et avi duo et atavi et proavi esse potuerunt et quicquid supra est usque ad David, cuius erant ambo filii, et Salomon, qui pertinet ad ordinem, quem Matthaeus secutus est, et Nathan, qui est in serie, quam Lucas exposuit.

Attendunt enim ista nonnulli et vident non posse a duobus uiris per commixtionem carnis hominem gigni et ideo putant istam quaestionem non posse dissolvi.

Nec intuentur, quod usitatissimum atque facillimum est, patrem cuiusquam non eum tantum dici, a quo genitus, sed etiam eum, a quo fuerit adoptatus.

Neque enim adoptionis vinculum apud antiquos alienum ab eorum moribus fuit, cum etiam feminas inveniamus adoptasse sibi filios non ex utero suo natos, sicut Sara ex Agar et Lia ex ancilla sua et filia Pharaonis Moysen adoptavit. p. 264,5 Ipse autem Iacob nepotes suos, filios Ioseph, adoptavit. Ipsum vero adoptionis nomen plurimum ualere in nostrae fidei sacramento apostolica doctrina testatur.

Unde apostolus Paulus cum de Iudaeorum meritis loqueretur, quorum est inquit adoptio et gloria et testamenta et legislatio; quorum patres, et ex quibus Christus secundum carnem, qui est super omnia deus benedictus in saecula;

item dicit: et ipsi in nobismet ipsis ingemescimus adoptionem exspectantes redemptionem corporis nostri; item alio loco: cum autem venit plenitudo temporis, misit deus filium suum factum ex muliere, factum sub lege, ut eos, qui sub lege erant, redimeret, ut adoptionem filiorum reciperemus.

Haec igitur adoptio quanti sacramenti sit, his atque huiusmodi testimoniis satis apparet.

Unicum enim filium deus habet, quem genuit de substantia sua, de quo dicitur: Cum in forma dei esset, non rapinam arbitratus est esse aequalis deo. p. 264,21 Nos autem non de substantia sua genuit; creatura enim sumus, quam non genuit, sed fecit; et ideo, ut fratres Christi secundum modum nostrum faceret, adoptavit.

Iste itaque modus, quo nos deus, cum iam essemus ab ipso non nati, sed conditi et instituti, verbo suo et gratia sua genuit, ut filii eius essemus, adoptio vocatur.

Unde Iohannes dicit: Dedit eis potestatem filios dei fieri. Cum igitur ius adoptionis filiorum apud patres nostros et in scripturis sanctis usitatum sit, quae impietatis dementia praecipitat prius evangelistas falsitatis arguere, quod diversas generationes commemoraverunt, tamquam utraque vera esse non possit, quam cogitare et attendere et videre, quod facillimum est, quam crebra consuetudine generis humani unus homo duos patres habere potuerit, unum, cuius carne homo sit genitus, alterum, cuius voluntate, cum iam homo esset, filius sit adoptatus? p. 265,8

Qui si non recte dicitur pater, nec nos recte dicimus: Pater noster, qui es in caelis, ei, de cuius substantia nati non sumus, sed cuius gratia et misericordissima voluntate adoptati secundum doctrinam apostolicam et fidelissimam veritatem.

Ipsum quippe habemus et deum et dominum et patrem: deum, quod ab ipso etiam ex hominibus parentibus conditi sumus; dominum, quod ei subditi sumus; patrem, quod eius adoptione renati sumus.

Facile fuit ergo religiosis perscrutatoribus divinarum litterarum aliquantulum considerare et videre in diversis Christi generationibus a duobus evangelistis commemoratis, quomodo duos patres potuit habere Ioseph, quorum progeneratores diversi enumerentur. Hoc et vos, si studium contentionis non excaecaret, facile videre possitis.

Sed ab illis viris alia etiam quaesita et inventa sunt, cum omnes harum narrationum partes pertractarent; haec autem a vestro intellectu longissime remota sunt. Itaque etiam in Manichaei errore constituti, id quod in rebus humanis fieri solet, ut alius carne generet filium, alius eum voluntate adoptet, ac sic unus duos patres habeat, si non adverso animo legeretis, cogitando videre possetis. p. 266,1