The Catholic University of America
Studies in Sacred Theology

No. 91
ï

The Doctrine of St. Augustine
on Sanctity
BY

EDWARD J. CARNEY, O.S.F.S., S.T.L.

A DISSERTATION"

SUBMITTED TO THE. FACULTY OF THE SCHOOL OF SACRED '■THEOLOGY OF THE
,CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA, IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF SACRED THEOLOGY

The<Catholic University of America Press
Washington, D. C.

1945

z

The Catholic University

of

America

Studies in Sacred Theology

No. 91

The Doctrine of St. Augustine
on Sanctity
BY

EDWARD J. CARNEY, O.S.F.S., S.T.L.

A DISSERTATION

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE SCHOOL OF SACRED THEOLOGY OF THE
CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA, IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF SACRED THEOLOGY

The Catholic University of America Press

Washington, D. C.
1945

NIHIL OBSTAT :

Stanislaus Grabowski, S.T.D., S.T.M.

Censor Deputatus

IMPRIMI POTEST :

J. Franciscus Tucker, D.D.

Superior Provincialis

IMPRIMATUR :
®<Michael J. Curley, D.D.
Archiepiscopus Baltimorensis-JVashingtoniensis
Baliimorae, Md., die 5 Maii, 1944.

|i/3 lt>
Copyright 1945
The Catholic University of America Press, Inc.

Murray a Heister
Washington, d. c.
printed

BY

Times and news Publishing Co
Gettysburg, pa., U. S. a.

PREFACE
When the subject of the doctrine of St. Augustine on sanctity
was first proposed to the writer, the original purpose included a
consideration of both ontological and moral sanctity. However,
since it was soon realized that the scope was too broad in view
of the work required and the time allotted, it was decided to con­
fine the study to ontological sanctity, since this was really first in
time and the basis of moral sanctity. The only references to moral
sanctity were to be those needed to give a better understanding
of the particular phase of ontological sanctity under discussion.
The first chapter deals with the doctrine of Augustine as evi­
denced by his writings against the Manicheans, Donatists, and
Pelagians. Each heresy is treated separately and is followed by
Augustine’s answer. In the second and third chapters an attempt
is made to unite these separate refutations of Augustine into a
composite view prescinding from any polemical issues. For this
purpose use has been made of other writings of Augustine not
concerned with the three enumerated heresies.
One idea prominent throughout Augustine’s writings is that
in the union of many members in the Body of Christ each one not
only shares in the life of the Body but also contributes something
toward the sanctification of the whole. In making acknowledg­
ments for help received in this study the writer has such an idea
in πΰηφ The whole work is a unit springing from many sources—
from the major and local superiors, Dr. J. Francis Tucker and Dr.
Francis E. Fox, who presented the opportunity for this advanced
study; from the major professor, Dr. Stanley Grabowski, who
suggested the subject of the research and guided it to its comple­
tion; from Dr. Pascal Parente, who acted as reader; and finally
from the work of the writer himself. Just as all these elements
contributed toward the whole, so it is hoped that the doctrine of
Augustine on sanctity may in turn have an influence on them.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS
FAGE

List

Abbreviations

ix

I. The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

1

of

CHAPTER

II.

Augustine and Manichean Sanctity

1

Augustine and Donatist Sanctity

12

Augustine and Pelagian Sanctity

29

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the
Trinity_________________ :______________________ 46
God, Source of All Sanctification____________ -__ 47

Christ and Sanctification

50

The Holy Spirit in Sanctification

83

III. The Created Means of Sanctification : Baptism,
Charity, and Grace____________________________

89

.—...________________________________

89

Baptism

Charity 97

Grace________ ...._____________________________ 103

Bibliography 117

vii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Augustine’s Works

Brevic. collât, cum Donat., Breviculus Collationis Cum Donatistis.
Conf., Confessiones.
Contra Adimant., Contra Adimantum.
Contra Crescon., Contra Cresconium.
Contra duas epist. Pelag., Contra duas Epistolas Pelagianorum.
Contra epist. Man., Contra Epistolam Manichaei.
Contra epist. Parm., Contra Epistulam Parmeniani.
Contra Faust., Contra Faustum.
Contra Felic., Contra Felicem.
Contra Fortunat., Contra Fortunatum.
Contra Gaudent., Contra Guadentium.
κ
Contra Jul., Contra Julianum.
Contra litt. Petil., Contra Litteras Petilianî.
Contra Mendae., Contra Mendacium.
Contra part. Donati, Contra Partem Donati.
Contra part. Donati post gesta, Contra Partem Donati Post Gesta.
Contra Secund., Contra Secundinum.
Contra sernu arian., Contra Sermonem Arianorum.
De ag. chr., De Agone Christiano,
De anima et ejus origine, De Anima et Ejus Origine.
De bapt., De Baptismo.
De civ. Dei, De Civitate Dei.
De cons, evang., De Consensu Evangelistarum.
De continent., De Continentia.
De corrept. et gratia, De Correptione et Gratia.
De divers, quaest., De Diversis Quaestionibus ad Simplicianum.
De doct. christ., De Doctrina Christiana.
De duabus animabus, De Duabus Animabus.
De Gen. ad lîtt., De Genesi ad Litteram.
De Gen. contra Man., De Genesi Contra Manichaeos.
De gestis Pelagii, De Gestis Pelagii.
De grat. Christi, De Gratia Christi.
De grat. Christi (De pecc, orig.), De Peccato Originali.
De grat. et lib. arb., De Gratia et Libero Arbitrio.
De haer., De Haeresibus,
De lib. arb., De Libero Arbitrio.
De mor. eccl., De Moribus Ecclesiae.
De mor. Man., De Moribus Manichaeorum.

ix

x

List of Abbreviations

De nat. boni, De Natura Boni.
De nat. et gratia, De Natura et Gratia.
De nupt. et concup., De Nuptiis et Concupiscentia.
De pecc, meritis, De Peccatorum Meritis et Remissione.
De perf, iust. hominis, De Perfectione lusiitiae Hominis.
De praed. sanct., De Praedestinatione Sanctorum.
De praesent. Dei, De Praesentia Dei,
De spir. et litt., De Spiritu et Littera.
De symbolo, De Fide et Symbolo.
De Trin., De Trinitate.
De unico bapt., Liber de Unico Baptismo.
De util, credendi, De Utilitate Credendi.
Enchiridion, Enchiridion de Fide, Spe, et Charitate.
Epist., Epistula.
Epist. Secund., Epistula Secundini.
In epist. Jo. ad Parthos, In Epistolam Joannis ad Parthos.
In Jo. Ev., In Joannis Evangelium.
Op. imp. contra Jul., Contra Secundam Juliani Responsionem Imperfectum
Opus.
Ps., Ennarratio in Psalmum.
Ps. contra part. Donati, Psalmus Contra Partem Donati.
Retract., Retractationum Libri Duo.
Serm., Sermo.
Other Works

CSEL, Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum.
DTC, Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique.
Nouv. Rev. Théol., Nouvelle Revue Théologique.
PML, Mîgne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus.
Rech. Sc. Rel., Recherches de Science Religieuse.
Rech. Théol. Ane. et Méd., Recherches de Théologie Ancienne et Médiévale,
Rel. Y Cuit., Religion Y Cultura.
Rev, Hist. Eccl., Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique.
Rev. Hist, et Litt. Rel., Revue d’Histoire et de Littérature Religieuse.
Rev. Sc, Rel., Revue des Sciences Religieuses.

1

.

J
I
ί

CHAPTER I

The Doctrine

of

Augustine Against

the

Heresies

The chronological order of Augustine’s writings treated in this
chapter are represented by the following dates : against the Manicheans, 388-406; against the Donatists, 400-412; against the Pela­
gians, 412-430. No attempt has been made to trace a temporal
sequence either in the statement of the heretical doctrine or of
Augustine’s rebuttal. Instead an endeavor has been made to pre­
sent the position of the saint and his opponents as a logical whole.
Until the complete view of Augustine’s doctrine on sanctity is
presented in the later chapters, ontological sanctity will be treated
here as involving union with God through the destruction of
original sin and the infusion of sanctifying grace.
AUGUSTINE AND MANICHEAN SANCTITY

The Manichean Teaching
Fundamentally the Manichean system was based on two false
premises, the principal one being the arbitrary pronouncement on
two opposed principles as a double source of life? Intermingled
with this error was also an inability to understand the difference
between God’s generation of His divine Son from His own es­
sence and the creation of the world from nothing.1
2
1 De duab. anima bus, 16 (CSEL 25 I, 71 ; PML 42, 105) : "duo animarum
genera esse dicunt : unum bonum, quod ita ex deo sit, ut non ex aliqua
materia vel ex nihilo ab eo factum, sed de ipsa eius omnino substantia pars
quaedam processisse dicatur ; alterum autem malum, quod nulla prorsus ex
parte ad deum pertinere credunt credendumque commendant. Et ideo illud
summum bonum, hoc vero summum malum esse praedicant.”
•Contra Felic., 2, 19 (CSEL 25 II, 849; PML 42, 549): "omnipotens
deus et de se potuit generare et de nihilo facere et ex eo, quod iam fecerat,
aliquid formare: de se filium aequalem sibi; de nihilo mundum et universam
creaturam; ex aliquo de* terra hominem, quia omnipotens est. quod ergo de
se ipso est, pollui numquam potest quomodo ipse ; quod autem ab illo factum
est, non de illo, et pollui potest per liberum arbitrium et mundari per ipsius
misericordiam condemnando, quod peccavit, et agnoscendo, qui eum creavit.”

1

2

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

In attempting to explain the problems of evil the Manicheans
necessarily denied God as the source of all life. God’s nature was
that of light, and He was the Author only of good? The prince of
the nether-world was represented as having a nature of darkness
or of matter and was the source of all evil? Though these two
principles were originally separated and independent? yet through
a mythical warfare some of God’s light particles were conquered
and devoured by the satellites of the kingdom of darkness.8 Then
through a series of generations, births, and abortions the world in
all its manifold variety of plants, animals, and men was formed
from this mixture? Though immersed in matter the light particles
* Contra epist. Man., 13, 16 (PML 42, 182) ; “Et luminis quidem imperium
tenebat Deus Pater, in sua sancta stirpe perpetuus, in virtute magnificus,
natura ipsa verus, aeternitate propria semper exsultans, continens apud se
sapientiam et sensus vitales.”
* Ibid., 15, 19 (PML 42, 184) : “Juxta unam vero partem ac latus illustris
illius ac sanctae terrae erat tenebrarum terra profunda et immensa magni­
tudine, in qua habitabant ignea corpora, genera scilicet ncstifera. . . . Pari
more introrsum gens caliginis ac fumi plena, in qua morabatur immanis
princeps omnium et dux, habens circa se innumerabiles principes, quorum
omnium ipse erat mens atque origo.” Cf. G. Bardy, “Manichéisme,” DTC,
IX (1927), 1873. “Le prince des ténèbres n’est pas un second Dieu. Son
propre nom c’est la matière.”
s De duab. anîmabus, 16 (CSEL 25 I, 71; PML 42, 105-106) “atque
ista duo genera fuisse aliquando discreta, nunc esse commixta.”
'Contra Faust., 2, 4 (CSEL 25 I, 256-257; PML 42, 211) : “lamvero illa
sacrilega deliramenta quis audiat, quod primum hominem vestrum dicitis
secundum hostium voluntatem, quo eos caperet, elementa, quae portabat, mu­
tasse atque vertisse, ut regnum, quod dicitis falsitatis, in sua natura manens
non fallaciter dimicaret, et substantia veritatis mutabilis adpareret, ut fal­
leret?” Cf. F. Burkitt, The Religion of the Manichees (Donnellan Lectures
for 1924). Cambridge, 1925, p. 25. “However this may be, the Primal Man,
armed or clothed with his Five Bright Elements and preceded by an angel
called Nohashbat, bearing a crown of victory, went forth to repel the King
of the Dark. But the result was disaster. The Primal Man was left lying
unconscious on the field of battle, and the Five Bright Elements were swal­
lowed up by the Dark.”
7 De nat. boni, 46 (CSEL 25 II, 884-885-886; PML 42, 569-570): “ita
scripsit Manichaeus : iniquis igitur commentis ad eos, qui aderant, ait : quid
vobis videtur maximum hoc lumen, quod oritur? intuemini, quemadmodum
polum movet, concutit plurimas potestates, quapropter mihi vos potius aequum
est id, quod in vestris viribus habetis, luminis praerogare: sic quippe illius

’4

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

3

were not defiled by it.8 The misfortune of their condition con­
sisted merely in this unnatural mixture or imprisonment. Thus
Manichean sanctity was centered in the attempts to liberate these
light particles from the envelope of matter.8 Several imaginary
creations succeeded in freeing some of the particles enclosed in
plants and animals,10 but the most important means was that de-

magni, qui gloriosus adparuît, imaginem fingam, per quam regnare poteri­
mus, tenebrarum aliquando conversatione liberati, haec audientes ac diu
secum deliberantes iustissimum putaverunt id quod postulabantur praebere,
nec enim fidebant se idem lumen jugiter retenturos : unde melius rati sunt
principi suo offerre, nequaquam desperantes eodem se pacto regnaturos, quo
igitur modo lumen idem, quod habebant, praebuerint, considerandum est. . . .
quoniam eorum, qui convenerant, frequentia promiscua erat, feminarum scili­
cet ac masculorum, inpulit eos, ut inter se coirent, in quo coitu alii semi­
narunt, aliae gravidae effectae sunt, erant autem partus his, qui genuerant,
similes vires plurimas parentum uti primi obtinentes, haec sumens eorum
princeps uti praecipuum donum gavisus est. et sicuti etiam nunc fieri videmus
corporum formatricem naturam mali inde vires sumentem figurare, ita etiam
ante dictus princeps sodalium prolem accipiens habentem parentum sensus,
prudentiam, lucem simul secum in generatione procreatam comedit ; ac plerisque viribus sumptis ex istius modi esca, in qua non modo inerat fortitudo,
sed multo magis astutiae et pravi sensus ex fera genitorum mente, propriam
ad se coniugem evocavit ex ea, qua ipse erat, stirpe manantem; et facto
cum ea coitu seminavit ut caeteri abundantiam malorum, quae devoraverat,
nonnihil etiam ipse adiciens ex sua cogitatione ac virtute, ut esset sensus
eius omnium eorum, quae profuderat formator atque descriptor; cuius com­
par excipiebat haec, ut semen consuevit culta optime terra percipere, in
eadem enim construebantur et contexebantur omnium imagines coelestium
ac terrenarum virtutum, ut pleni videlicet orbis, id quod formabatur, simili­
tudinem obtineret.”
e De mor. Man., 2, 11, 22 (PML 32, 1355); “nec renovatur anima per
veram religionem, quia inveterata non est.”
° Burkitt, op. cit., pp. 39-40. "A Man was not a simple unit, much less an
elemental unit, but a particle of Light enclosed in an alien and irredeemable
envelope: there is no hope for a Man as such, for he is essentially a for­
tuitous conglomeration. The hope is that his Light-particles—roughly speak­
ing, very much what we mean by his ‘better self’—may escape at death
from the dark prison-house of the body.”
™De nat, boni, 44 (CSEL 25 II, 881; PML 42, 567-568) : “dicunt enim
virtutes lucis transfigurari in masculos pulchros et obponi feminis gentis

r»

4

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

vised to aid the particles existing in man. This had knowledge as
a requisite, and as soon as the light particles were made cognizant
of their present state of misery in comparison to their former
happy state, salvation became possible.11
This knowledge was revealed to the ancient patriarchs by an
angel.12 Later on it was made known in India by Buddha, in Persia
by Zoroaster, in Palestine by Christ, and finally in all its purity
by Mani in Babylonia. From this latter country it spread to the
rest of the world.13 Though the other prophets in Mani’s system
stood on an equal level, Jesus was divine, and Mani regarded him­
self as His apostle. Through an application of the moral teachings
of Jesus as interpreted by Mani not only the light particles in man
tenebrarum, et easdem rursus virtutes lucis transfigurari in feminas pulchras
et obponi masculis gentis tenebrarum, ut per pulchritudinem suam inflamment
spurcissimam libidinem principum tenebrarum et eo modo vitalis substantia,
hoc est dei natura, quam dicunt in eorum corporibus ligatam teneri, ex eorum
membris per ipsam concupiscentiam relaxatis soluta fugiat et suscepta vel
purgata liberetur.”
u Bardy, op. cit., coi, 1877. “La renaissance s’opère lorsque l’esprit déchu
retrouve la mémoire de son premier état et se rend compte de son actuelle
misère. Le salut a la science pour condition essentielle.”
13 P. Alfarïc, Les Écritures Manichéennes (Paris, 1918) I, 123. “Ainsi
firent plus tard Seth, Henoch, Noé et les justes des âges suivants, à qui les
anges avaient aussi révélé la véritable science du salut.”
“Alfaric, op. cit., pp. 45-46. “Une histoire toute tissue de légendes racon­
tait comment la science du salut avait été révélée à diverses époques par le
Christ, le Fils du Premier Homme, qui avait pris les apparences de la chair
pour nous en dénoncer la malice. Elle montrait l’humanité divisée de l’origine
en deux partis rivaux, dont l’un, marchant sur les traces d’Adam et sur
celles de Seth, se conformait aux prescriptions divines, tandis que l’autre,
suivant les pernicieux exemples donnés par Eve et par Caïn, se laissait con­
duire par le Diable. Elle expliquait comment ce dernier avait tour à tour
imaginé trois fausses religions, celle des Païens, celle des Juifs et celle des
Chrétiens vulgaires ou Catholiques, qui s’accordaient à n’admettre qu’un
seul Principe, à confondre Dieu avec l’auteur du Mal. Et elle enseignait
comment la fois dualiste, la seule véritable, prêchée dans l'Inde par le
Bouddha, en Perse par Zoroastre, en Palestine par le Christ, avait été ex­
posée enfin dans toute sa pureté en Babylonie et de là dans l'univers entier
par Manî, ses douze Apôtres et leurs nombreux disciples.”

j

J

'

<

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

5

were freed14*but also whatever ones still existed in the vegetable
and animal world.16
The Manicheans had no conception of Jesus as a single divine
Person in whom two natures were hypostatically united. They
taught that Divine Wisdom accidentally assumed a human per­
son.1· As an emanation from the Light Jesus was divine, but due
14 Burkitt, op. cit., p. 38. “They imply a doctrine of a succession of
Prophets of the Truth at divers times and in many countries, men with
whose doctrine Mani believed himself to be in essential accord. He, of course,
was the last and final mouthpiece of Revelation. . . . But it is most im­
portant to notice that whereas Hermes and Plato and Buddha, and also
Zoroaster, stand more or less on a level with a more or less ethnic and
geographical significance, Jesus in Mani’s system occupies a peculiar posi­
tion. He was the last of the series before Mani, but he is more than that.
To Mani Jesus was a Divine Being, Who appeared on earth but was never
born of woman ; the Christians believed that Jesus had been really crucified,
but that was their carnal error. And further, Jesus was not merely the last
of the Prophets before Mani and Mani’s immediate predecessor; Mani re­
garded himself as the apostle of Jesus.” Cf. Alfaric, op. cit., pp. 124-125.
“Son discours inaugural ne fait que formuler la somme des préceptes divins
qui sont, pour nous, la condition indispensable du salut. Manîchée les a
exposés après hui, en termes plus précis, au cours d’une de ses Épitres, où
l’âme qui aspire à la perfection trouve une règle de vie tout à fait appropriée.
C’est à les connaître et à les mettre en acte que nous devons nous appliquer
surtout. Placés au milieu des temps, nous n’avons à étudier le passé de
l’humanité et à remonter aux premières origines du monde que pour nous
rendre un compte exact de nos devoirs présent et pour atteindre ainsi notre
dernière fin.”
v‘Contra Faust., 2, 5 (CSEL 25 I, 258; PML 42, 211-212): “unde et
ista sacrilega deliramenta vos cogunt non solum in caelo atque in omnibus
stellis, sed etiam in terra atque in omnibus, quae nascuntur in ea, confixum
et conligatum atque concretum Christum dicere, non iam salvatorem vestrum
sed a vobis salvandum, cuin ea manducatis atque ructatis.” De nat. boni, 45
(CSEL 25 II, 884; PML 42, 569) : “Per electos autem suos purgari dicunt
eandem ipsam commixtam partem ac naturam dei manducando scilicet et
bibendo, quia eam in alimentis omnibus dicunt ligatam teneri : quae cum ab
electis velut sanctis in refectionem corporis manducando et bibendo adsumuntur, per eorum sanctitatem solvi, signari, et liberari.”
M Contra Faust., 2, 4 (CSEL 25 I, 256-257; PML 42, 211): “lamvero
illa sacrilega deliramenta quis audiat, quod primum hominem vestrum dicitis
secundum hostium voluntatem, quo eos caperet, elementa, quae portabat,
mutasse atque vertisse, ut regnum, quod dicitis falsitatis, in sua natura
manens non fallaciter dimicaret, et substantia veritatis mutabilis adpareret,

6

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

to the assumed material element He had within Himself the prin­
ciple of the Dark, which would ultimately be punished with eternal
damnation.17 In denying the hypostatic union the Manicheans
denied Christ’s true sanctity, and consequently their system had
no place for the Catholic conception of the holiness of Christ as
the basis of the sanctification of all the faithful. But this position
was also due to their inability to distinguish between divine
generation and creation. They saw no essential difference between
Christ and man.18 Since each was a divine light particle enveloped
in matter, each was equally holy.
Nor did Mani ever attribute any sanctifying power to Christ’s
passion, death, and resurrection. By maintaining that the light
particles in matter were undefiled, and by considering evil as be­
ing caused by the powers of darkness, the Manicheans certainly
denied original sin and its transmission. Hence Christ’s mission as
a physician healing wounded nature never entered into their rea­
soning.19 As a matter of fact they even denied the reality of Christ’s
passion and death.20 Thus Manichean sanctity dealing only with
the liberation of the light particles from matter began from a state

I
i

ut falleret? huius primi hominis filium credi vultis dominum lesum Chris­
tum,” De ag. chr., 20, 22 (CSEL 41, 122; PML 40, 301) : “Nec eos audia­
mus, qui sic dicunt ab illa aeterna sapientia susceptum esse hominem, qui
de virgine natus est, quomodo et alii homines ab ea sapientes fiunt, qui
perfecte sapientes sunt.”
17 Contra Faust., 32, 22 (CSEL 25 I, 783; PML 42, 510) : “ille deum
ipsum per se ipsum in tenebrarum contaminatione submersum nec totum
emersurum, sed quod eius mundari non potuerit aeterna damnatione pu­
niendum.”
“Ibid., 2, 5 (CSEL 25 I, 258; PML 42, 211) ; “unde ista sacrilega deli­
ramenta vos cogunt non solum in caelo atque in omnibus stellis, sed etiam
in terra atque in omnibus, quae nascuntur in ea, confixum et conligatum
atque concretum Christum dicere."
19 De mor. Man., 2, 11, 22 (PML 32, 1355): “nec renovatur anima per
veram religionem, quia inveterata non est; nec signaculis vestris perficitur,
quia perfecta est ; nec ei Deus opem fert, quia non indiget ; nec medicus est
Christus, quia sana est.”
20 Contra Faust., 5, 5 (CSEL 25 I, 277; PML 42, 223) : “et istum Chris­
tum, qui dicit : ego sum veritas, speciem carnis, mortem crucis, vulnera
passionis, cicatrices resurrectionis mentitum esse suadetis?”

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies
I

7

of perfection.21 As such it limited Christ’s influence only to re­
vealing the knowledge whereby this freedom might be obtained,
and it rejected the Holy Spirit and His internal mission by deny­
ing His divinity and identifying Him with Mani.22
The Reply of Augustine

J

•

’
"
II
I

In answering the Manicheans Augustine undermined the two
principal errors. Once their falsity had been shown Mani’s system
would collapse in the face of the Catholic teaching on sanctity.
The source of all good was God, and everything that He made
was good.23 Evil was not a personal principle as God, but it was
caused by a morally bad will24 which rejected God, the Supreme
Good, for a lesser good.25 Then turning to the theory of emanationism St. Augustine pointed out that God could generate from
His own substance and also create something from nothing. From
His own substance He generated a Son equal to Himself ; from
nothing He created the world and every creature. That which was
generated from His divine substance was an inviolable as God
Himself ; that which was made from nothing could sin through
free will.26
sDe mor. eccl., 1, 35, 80 (PML 32, 1344) : “Apostolus de die in diem
interiorem hominem renovari dicit ut perficiatur, et vos a perfectione vultts
incipiat.”
“De mor. Man., 2, 11, 22 (PML 32, 1354-1355) : “nec Spiritus est neces­
sarius, qui animam in veritatem inducat, quia stulta non est.” Contra Faust.,
13, 17 (CSEL 25 I, 398-399; PML 42, 292) : “cum enim Christus promi­
serit suis missurum se paracletum . . . per hanc promissionis occasionem
hunc paracletum dicentes esse Manichaeum vel in Manichaeo subrepunt in
hominum mentes ignorantes, ille a Christo promissus quando sit missus.”
** Contra epist. Man., 34, 38 (PML 42, 200) : “Sed quid ego istud quaeram,
cum utrique fateamur, omnia quaecumque et quantacumque bona sunt, ab
uno Deo esse; qui summe bonus est?” Ibid., 25, 27 (PML 42, 191) : “omnes
naturas quas fecit Deus et condidit, excellentiae gradibus ordinatas, a sum­
mis usque ad infimas, omnes bonas, sed alias aliis esse potiores.”
21 De lib. arb., 3, 17, 48 (PML 32, 1295) : “Ergo improba voluntas, malo­
rum omnium causa est.”
MIbid., 2, 19, 53 (PML 32, 1269) : “sed malum sit aversio ejus ab incom­
mutabili bono, et conversio ad mutabilia bona.”
83 Contra Felic., 2, 19 (CSEL 25 II, 849; PML 42, 549): “omnipotens
deus et de se potuit generare et de nihilo facere et ex eo, quod iam fecerat,

8

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

With these two principles firmly established Augustine then
delineated the true nature of God, of Christ, and of man. His
frequent insistence on God’s inviolability and incorruptibility27
was his reaction against the Manichean myth of the defilement of
the Elements of Light by the Dark. This inviolability, however,
was not the only aspect of God’s nature. He was the highest good,
the summum bonum, to which every other good had to be re­
ferred,28 and just as He was sufficient for His own happiness, so
He could make others happy.28
In the beginning man was made to the image of God,30 and
endowed with free will he could either serve God and merit eternal
life, or he could rebel and be subject to eternal punishment.31
aliquid formare: de se filium aequalem sibi, de nihilo mundum et universam
creaturam, ex aliquo de terra hominem, quia omnipotens est. quod ergo de se
ipso est, pollui numquam potest quomodo ipse ; quod autem ab illo factum
est, non de illo, et pollui potest per liberum arbitrium et mundari per ipsius
misericordiam condemnando, quod peccavit, et agnoscendo, qui eum creavit.’’
** Contra Fortunat., 11 (CSEL 25 I, 89; PML 42, 116) : “deum esse in­
violabilem, incorruptibilem et inpenetrabîlem et incoinquinabilem, et qui nulla
ex parte corrumpi potest, et cui nulla ex parte noceri possit.” Cf. J, Tixeront,
Histoire des Dogmes (4th ed. Paris: 1912), II, 370. “Il montra quelle con­
tradiction c’était d’admettre un être positif mauvais par essence, et tel sur­
tout que le concevaient les manichéens ; quelles absurdités supposait aussi
la prétendue lutte des deux principes telle que la secte la racontait.”
De mor, eccl., 1, 14, 24 (PML 32, 1321) : “quod sit hominis summum
bonum, quo referenda sunt omnia. . . . nihil aliud quam ipsum Deum.” Cf.
Tixeront, op. cit., p. 372. “Ainsi donc, en somme, la présence du mal dans
le monde s’explique par l’infirmité même inhérente à toute créature, et par
le jeu de la liberté des êtres supérieurs qui, pouvant éviter le péché, ne le
font pas. Il est vrai qu’alors le mal moral est puni par un mal physique;
mais ainsi l’exigent l’ordre et la justice auxquels la volonté de Dieu ne
saurait que se conformer : ‘Peccantes igitur in suppliciis ordinantur : quae
ordinatio, quia eorum naturae non competit, ideo poena est; sed quia culpae
competit, ideo iustitia est.’ ”
29 Contra Faust., 22, 9 (CSEL 25 I, 597; PML 42, 404-405): “Sicut
enim sibi sufficit ad aeternam beatitudînem et ex hac abundat ad faciendos
beatos.”
30 Contra Adimant., 5 (CSEL 25 I, 125; PML 42, 136): “Ad imaginem
autem dei factum hominem non tantum genesis sed etiam apostolus clamat.”
Ά Contra Felic., 2, 3 (CSEL 25 II, 831; PML 42, 537): “in quibus ra­
tionalem creaturam etiam ipsam factam sive in angelis sive in hominibus
accepisse liberum arbitrium: quo libero arbitrio si deo servire vellet, secun-

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

Through disobedience man sinned and deserted God. Thus the
original cause of evil was man’s will.32 This evil, voluntary in
Adam, passed on to all those who participated in Adam’s nature.83
With this teaching on man Augustine countered that aspect of
Manichean sanctity which held that since the light particles enclosed in matter still retained their pristine perfection, sanctifica­
tion began with absolute perfection and consisted only in freeing
the particles from matter. While admitting that the original state
of man was one of perfection, Augustine insisted upon the Fall
due to free will. Consequently his conception of sanctity began
with man’s attempt to rid himself of sin and return to his first state.
For the Manicheans the light particles were separated from matter
by a system based upon the revelations of Jesus and Mani. Rely­
ing on Catholic tradition Augustine saw man’s return to sanctity
as the work of Christ the Redeemer?4
Because the Manicheans had seen fit to destroy Christ’s true
nature and sanctity, Augustine necessarily dwelt on the relation
between Christ’s nature and holiness. Christ was both true God
and true Man?® His divine nature in which He was equal to the
Father remained unchanged; his human nature was taken from
the virginal flesh of Mary?8 This was no accidental assumption
of human nature, but the two natures were hypostatically united in

j-

j

,
"

j
'V

I

9

'

dutn voluntatem ac legem dei haberet apud eum aeternam felicitatem ; si
autem - legi eius subdi noluisset, sed potestate sua usa contra eius fecisset
imperium, secundum eius iustitiam poenae debitae subiaceret.”
™ Contra Secund., 19 (CSEL 25 II, 935; PML 42, 595) : “cum vero eum
contumaci inobedientia deserit, per suum liberum arbitrium peccatis se
involvit, per illius autem justum judicium subplicio misera afficitur; et hoc
est totum malum, partîm quod injuste facit, partira quod juste patitur.”
Contra Adimant., 21 (CSEL 25 I, 180; PML 42, 166) : “tali enim cruce
vetus homo, id est vetus vita perimitur, quam de Adam traximus, ut quod
in illo fuit voluntarium, in nobis fieret naturale,”
Contra Fortunat., 11 (CSEL 25 I, 89; PML 42, 116): “animam vero
videmus et peccatricem esse et in aerumna versari et veritatem quaerere et
liberatore indigere.”
æ Contra Faust., 2, 4 (CSEL 25 I, 257; PML 42, 211): “quapropter
dominus et salvator noster lesus Christus, verus et verax dei filius, verus et
verax hominis filius,”
" Ibid., 3, 6 (CSEL 25 I, 267; PML 42, 218) ; "illa enim natura, qua in
forma dei aequalis est patri, incommutabiliter permanente suscepit muta­
bilem nostram, per quam de virgine nasceretur.”

10

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

the one, divine Person of the Word.37 Having thus established the
real constitution of Christ, Augustine assigned to Him a supereminent sanctification.88 And whereas the Manicheans admitted
that Christ’s flesh could be soiled and ultimately would be con­
signed to eternal damnation, Augustine insisted that Christ sanc­
tified His flesh,39 that He neither inherited original sin,40 nor
committed any other sin.41 This brings out another point of dif­
ference between the Manicheans and Augustine. The Manicheans
taught that there was no such thing as sin ; everyone was guilt­
less.43 Augustine held that Christ alone was free from sin.
Christ communicated this sanctity to men through His death,
which was not fictional but real.48 Just as all men received life
” De ag. chr., 20, 22 (CSEL 41, 123; PML 40, 302) : “sapientia dei et
verbum in principio, per quod facta sunt omnia, non sic adsumpsit illum
hominem ut ceteros sanctos, sed multo excellentius multoque sublimius. . . .
homo Christus lesus, qui sapientiae ipsius, per quam sapientes fiunt quicum­
que homines, non solum beneficium habet, sed etiam personam gerit, de
ceteris enim sapientibus et spiritalibus animis recte dici potest, quod habeant
in se verbum dei, per quod facta sunt omnia ; sed in nullo eorum recte dici
potest, quod verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis, quod in solo
domino nostro lesu Christo rectissime dicitur.”
“CoWra Faust., 13, 7 (CSEL 25 I, 386; PML 42, 286); “illum itidem
psalmum, ubi deus unctus a deo dicitur et utique Christus ipsa unctione
declaratur idemque Christus deus apertissime ostenditur.” Ibid,, 22, 85 (CSEL
25 I, 689 ; PML 42, 457) : “tunc venit cui repositum erat, expectatio gen­
tium, et unctus est sanctus sanctorum oleo exultationis prae participibus
suis.” Ibid., 16, 15 (CSEL 25 I, 457; PML 42, 325) : “in quantum et ipse
ex femina natus est, cui dictum est: quod nascetur ex te sanctum, vocabitur
filius dei.”
* Serm. 12, 12, 12 (PML 38, 106) : “Et Dominus noster Jesus Christus
Verbum Patris. . . . sanctificaret carnem, nec inde pollueretur.”
40 Contra Faust., 14, 3 (CSEL 25 I, 405; PML 42, 296) : “illud itaque
peccatum, quo reus esset mortis, non commisit Christus.”
41 De Gen. contra Man., 2, 8, 10 (PML 34, 201) : “Dominum Jesum Chris­
tum, qui peccatum non fecit.”
“ Contra Felic., 2, 8 (CSEL 25 II, 836; PML 42, 541) ; “secundum vos
autem' nulla peccata sunt, gens enim tenebrarum non peccat, quia suam natu­
ram facit ; natura lucis non peccat, quia quod facit, facere cogitur, nullum ergo
invenis peccatum, quod damnet deus, nullum invenis peccatum, quod paenitentia possit sanari.”
43 Contra Faust., 14, 2 (CSEL 25 I, 404; PML 42, 296) : “si enim Chris­
tus pependit in ligno, clavis utique adfixus est: unde etiam ipsas cicatrices
post resurrectionem discipulo minus credulo demonstravit, quod si ita est,
utique vulnerabile atque mortale corpus habuit, quod isti nolunt fateri.”

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies
»
1

1

|

K

J

i

i

1

i

11

through descent from Adam, a common father, so a second Adam
became the source of a new life.44 The Church was formed from
Christ ; Christ was the Head, the Church His Body.45 Due to this
position as Head of the Body Christ communicated His holiness
to the members of His Body.48 Augustine compared the relation
of Christ to His Church as that of husband to wife, and from this
subjection he derived the Church’s inviolability.47
Though potential membership in Christ was granted to all men
through His redemptive death, yet each man obtained actual mem­
bership by receiving baptism,48 the sacrament of Christ’s passion
and resurrection.49 So contrary to Manichean teaching Christian
sanctity began with the renewal of fallen man in baptism.60
** Contra Adimant,, 21 (CSEL 25 I, 180 ; PML 42, 166) : “tali enim cruce
vetus homo, id est vetus vita perimitur, quam de Adam traximus, ut quod
ΐη illo fuit voluntarium, in nobis fieret naturale. ... et quoniam a mortiferis
cupiditatibus per fidem sanamur crucis domini qua cruce mors ligno suspensa
est."
43De Gen. contra Man., 2, 24, 37 (PML 34, 215-216) : "et adhaesit uxori
suae, id est Ecclesiae, ut sint duo in carne una. Dicit enim Apostolus ipsum
esse caput Ecclesiae, et Ecclesiam corpus ejus (Coloss. I, 18). . . . For­
mata est ergo ei conjux Ecclesia de latere ejus, id est de fide passionis et
Baptismi.”
" Contra Faust., 12, 16 (CSEL 25 I, 346; PML 42, 263) : “quia omnia
et in omnibus Christus est tamquam nos uno cubito desuper caelesti unitate
consummans.”
*T Ibid,, 22, 38 (CSEL 25 I, 632; PML 42, 424) : "est enim et sancta ec­
clesia domino lesu Christo in occulto uxor, occulte quippe atque intus in
abscondito secreto spiritali anima humana inhaeret verbo dei, ut sint duo in
carne una: quod magnum coniugfi sacramentum in Christo et in ecclesia
commendat apostolus, proinde regnum terrenum saeculi huius, cuius figuram
gerebant reges, qui Saram polluere permissi non sunt, non expertum est
nec invenit ecclesiam coniugem Christi, id est, quam fideliter illi tamquam
principio viro suo subdita cohaereret, nisi cum violare temptavit et divino
testimonio per fidem martyrum cessit correptumque in posterioribus regibus
honoravit munere, quam correptioni suae subdere in prioribus non evaluit.”
w Ibid., 22, 93 (CSEL 25 I, 700; PML 42, 463) : “et comminutum in
aquam mittitur, ut eos Israhelitae, id est evangelii praedicatores, ex baptismo
in sua membra, hoc est in corpus dominicum, transferant.”
“ Ibid., 19, 10 (CSEL 25 I, 509; PML 42, 354) : “venft enim consepelire
nos sibi per baptismum in mortem, ut, quemadmodum Christus resurrexit
a mortuis, sic et nos in novitate vitae ambulemus.”
™De tnor. eccl., 1, 35, 80 (PML 32, 1344) : “Et illo sacrosancto lavacro
inchoatur innovatio novi hominis.”

12

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

Against the heresies of Donatism and Pelagianism Augustine
develops the position of the Holy Spirit, charity, and grace in
sanctification. These elements are not prominently brought forth
in his teaching against the Manicheans. There are, however, cer­
tain salient points. The Manicheans denied the divinity of the
Holy Spirit and identified Him with Mani, Augustine replied that
the Holy Spirit sanctified men because He was a divine Person,
whose nature was inviolable.61 Moreover, He was Charity or
Sanctity, whereby the Father and Son were joined in the Trinity.62
Through this Spirit charity was communicated to men.69 Here
Augustine inserted a telling blow against the moral precepts of
the Manicheans. He could not deny that some of these were good,
but he pointed out that with all their maze of ritualistic observance
the Manicheans neither possessed nor admitted charity, and con­
sequently their sanctity not only could not equal Catholic sanctity
but was not the same as it.64
AUGUSTINE AND D0NATIST SANCTITY

The Donatist Teaching

'
■
Î
f
?
,
[

i

The point at issue between Augustine and the Donatists was
the Church as the Body of Christ. To Augustine’s view of the
catholicity of this Body, the Donatists opposed a particularism,1
“ Ibid., 1, 13, 23 (PML 32, 1321): “Nullo modo autem redintegrari possemus per Spiritum sanctum, nisi et ipse semper et integer et incommutabilis permaneret. Quod profecto non posset, nisi Dei naturae esset ac ipsius
substantiae, cui soli incommutabilitas atque ut ita dicam, invertibilitas
semper est.”
"De ag. chr., 16, 18 (CSEL 41, 119; PML 40, 300) : “et ipsam caritatem
et sanctitatem, qua generator et generatus ineffabiliter sibi copulantur.”
** Contra Faust., 17, 6 (CSEL 25 I, 489; PML 42, 344): “caritas dei
diffusa est in cordibus nostris per spiritum sanctum, qui datus est nobis.”
M Ibid., 20, 23 (CSEL 25 I, 566; PML 42, 386-387) : “maneantque ad for­
mandam vitam fidelium tria haec : fides, spes, caritas ; unde fieri potest, ut
pares cum aliquo mores habeat, qui haec tria cum illo paria non habet? qui
enim aliud credit, aliud sperat, aliud amat, necesse est, ut aliter vivat.”
1 Contra litt. Petii., 2, 78, 174 (CSEL 52, 108; PML 43, 312) : “et cum
dominus dixerit : ager est hic mundus, messis autem est finis saeculi, cum de
frumentis et zizaniis dixisset: sinite utraque crescere usque ad messem, tu
laboras verbis tuis, ut frumenta iam per totum agrum defecisse et ad exiguam
’particulam vestram remansisse credantur.”

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

13

which had its historical beginning in the consecration of Cecilian
as bishop of Carthage in the year 311. Cecilian had been conse­
crated by Felix of Aptonga, who according to an unfounded charge
of the Donatists had delivered the Holy Scriptures to the pagans
during Diocletian’s persecution. Through this consecration re­
ceived from Felix not only Cecilian but also his successors, the
Church of Carthage, and every other Church maintaining com­
munion with this Church and its rulers was contaminated and
consequently could no longer be the Body of Christ. Since this
included all Churches except the Donati st sect, then this Church
alone was unspotted and holy.2 Everywhere -else the true Church
had perished,3 and only the Donatists remained as the undefiled
Body of Christ.4 Consequently to protect this sanctity they with­
drew from communion with the other Churches.
1 É. Mersch, Le Corps Mystique Du Christ (2nd ed. ; Bruxelles, 1936), II,
45-46. "Le mal venait d’une consécration d’évêque, irrégulière, assuraient-ils :
en 311, l’évêque de Carthage, Cécilîen, avait été consacré par un évêque,
Félix d’Aptonge, qui, selon eux aurait été traditeur, c’est-à-dire que, pendant
la persécution de Dioclétien, il aurait livré aux païens les saintes Écritures.
Les Catholiques affirmaient le contraire, le prouvaient même par des pièces
officielles. Mais rien n’y faisait. L'Église de Carthage était souillée par ce
mauvais pasteur et par ceux qui avaient ensuite accepté sa place; et toutes
les Églises du monde, en demeurant en communion avec les coupables,
s’étaient déshonorées à leur tour. Tout-ce clergé séparé de Dieu et
dépourvu de sainteté était incapable de conférer de vrais sacrements. Seule
L’Afrique, et en Afrique eux seuls, étaient le pur et glorieux corps du
Christ.” Cf. J. Tixeront, Histoire des Dogmes' (4th ed. ; Paris, 1912) II, 223.
"Ce parti, qui avait à la tête l’évêque de Casa Nigra, Donat, et celui de
Tigisis, Secundus, se trouva assez fort pour provoquer, à Carthage même,
en 312, une réunion de 70 évêques de Numidie dans l’intention de juger
Cécilien. On lui reprochait, entre autres choses, de s’être laissé ordonner
par Félix d’Aptonge, lequel, ayant été iraditeur pendant la persécution—
c’est-a-dire ayant livré aux païens les livres saints—était déchu par là même
de l’épiscopat et n’avait pu validement ordonner Cécilien. La fait imputé à
Felix était faux, comme la suite le démontra.”
8 Epist. 93, 10, 37 (CSEL 34 II, 481-482; PML 33, 339) : “si enim sacra­
menta cum peccatoribus communicando, sicut putatis, periit ecclesia, quae
fuerat in orbe terrarum.”
‘Epist. 105, 1, 2 (CSEL 34 II, 596; PML 33, 396) : "vos enim eis dicitis
propter traditores, quos non ostendistis, remansisse ecclesiam Christi in sola
Africa partis Donati."

14

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

The basis of this manner of acting was the Donati st contention
that manifest sinners, especially members of the hierarchy, could
not belong to the Church, and therefore separation from them was
necessary to prevent contamination and to preserve one’s own
sanctity.5 To prove their point they resorted to Holy Scripture.
Characteristic texts quoted by them were, Depart, depart, go ye
out from thence, touch no unclean thing: go out of the midst of
her, be ye clean, you that carry the vessels of the Lord (Isa.
52:11) ;8 and What hath the chaff to do with the wheat (Jer.
23:28) ?7 To these and other texts they added the argument that
the sanctity of the individual depended on the sanctity of the sect
to which.he adhered.8 The inevitable conclusion was that since no
other Church was innocent and the Donatists alone were the holy
Body of Christ, sanctity in all its forms was their peculiar property.
Though the Donatists admitted that before the affair at Car­
thage the entire Church could and did sanctify,9 yet after the
schism they maintained that while a minister separated from their
sect retained his own baptism, he no longer had the power of adBTixeront, op, cit., pp. 224-225. “Toute leur doctrine parvenus à son dévelopement repose sur ces deux assertions: 1° Les pécheurs publics et
manifestes, et notamment les évêques et les prêtres prévaricateurs, n’appar­
tiennent pas à l’Êglise. 2e Hors de la vraie Église les sacrements ne
sauraient être validement administrés. Ils justifiaient leur premier principe
par cette considération que l’Êglise visible doit être sainte et immaculée, et
qu’elle serait souillée par l’existence en elle de membres évidemment pervers
et corrompus.” Cf. P. Batiffol, Le Catholicisime de Saint Augustin (3rd
ed. ; Paris, 1920), pp. 260-261. “À les en croire, en effet, il faut rompre
avec les méchants pour n’être pas souillé par leur péchés, et l’on doit re­
noncer à l'unité pour préserver sa sainteté individuelle.''
0 Contra epist. Farm., 3, 4, 20 (CSEL 51, 125; PML 43, 98): “recedite
recedite, exite inde et immundum nolite tangere, exite de medio eius et
separamini, qui fertis vasa domini.”
7 Ibid., 3, 3, 17 (CSEL 51, 121; PML 43, 96) : “quid paleis, inquit, ad
triticum?”
8 Contra Crescon., 3, 37, 41 (CSEL 52, 448; PML 43, 518): “et post
haec quasi in extremo concludis: non potest innocens esse qui sectam non
seqtiitur innocentis.”
8De unico bapt., 14, 24 (CSEL 53, 26; PML 43, 608) : “restat ut fatean­
tur bonos cum malis in sacramentorum Christianorum communione sine ulla
sua labe mansisse et usque ad tempus Caeciliani perseverasse ecclesiam
Christi non sine ullis hominibus malis tamquam in horreo iam reconditam,”

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

15

ministering it to others.1" Behind such a statement was the reason­
ing that just as Christ was one and indivisible so also the Church.11
Thus the Church, the Holy Spirit, and baptism were inseparable.
One alienated from the Church could not receive the Holy Spirit
and baptism.12 Since association with the Church at Carthage pre­
vented union with the Donatist sect, a person baptized in such
communion really received neither baptism nor the Holy Spirit.
But because of the necessity of this sacrament for sanctification,
the Donatists insisted on rebaptizing anyone converted to their
sect,13 on the ground that as members of the true and holy Body
of Christ they alone could minister it validly and fruitfully.
The dispute was not confined exclusively to the Body of Christ.
It reverted ultimately to Christ the Head. Augustine, as will be
seen, taught that the Body was holy in its members and sacra­
ments due to the sanctifying influence of Christ the Head. The
Donatists made the sanctifying power of the sacraments, and the
sanctity of the one receiving the sacraments depend on the worthi­
ness of the minister. The sacraments could sanctify if the ad­
ministrator was good.14 If the one dispensing the sacrament was

)

r.
i

M Contra epist. Parin. 2, 13, 30 (CSEL 51, 81 ; PML 43, 72) : "recedens
ab ecclesia baptismum quidem non amittit, ius dandi tamen amittit."
L1Tixeront, op. cit., p. 225. “En tout cas, ils reproduisaient ses arguments
et demandaient, comme lui, s’il était possible, puisque l’Êglise était une et le
Christ indivisible, de recevoir le baptême en dehors de cette Église et de ce
Christ”
aDe bapt., 5, 23, 33 (CSEL 51, 290; PML 43, 193) : “ecclesiam et spiri­
tum et baptismum dixit ab invicem non posse separari et ideo, qui ab ec­
clesia separati sunt et a spiritu sancto, etiam a baptismo vult intellegi
separatos.”
w Contra Crescon., 1, 26, 31 (CSEL 52. 351; PML 43, 462) : “tu quare
tamquam certissimum et consequentissimum concludebas in parte Donati
esse hominem baptizandum, quia nos etiam ibi esse concedimus baptismum.”
Contra Part. Donati, 207 (CSEL 51, 11 ; PML 43, 30) : “Rogo, respondete
nobis, quid vultis rebaptizare.”
14 In Ps. 10, 5 (PML 36, 134) : “Non enim confidunt in Domino, qui tunc
esse dicunt sancta sacramenta, si per sanctos homines dentur.” Contra litt.
Petii., 2, 35, 81 (CSEL 52, 68; PML 43, 287) : "Neque enim spiritus sanc­
tus in quemquam manus impositione pontificis poterit inseri, nisi aqua purae
conscientiae praecesserit generatrix." In Jo. Ev., Tr. 4, 9 (PML 35, 1410) :
“quomodo habent humiliari, qui dicunt: Nos baptizamus, nos quod damus
nostrum est, et quod nostrum est, sanctum est.”

16

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

unworthy, the recipient was not sanctified but shared in the guilt
of the minister.15
The Donatists then drew the logical conclusion from such a
teaching. If the sanctity of the sacraments depended on the
sanctity of the minister, and each one receiving baptism from such
a minister was good,10 then in the Donatist Church there was no
evil. Christ’s parable relating to the mixture of the wheat and the
chaff was not to be applied to the Church but to the world.17 Thus
the Donatist Church was not only the true Church, but its holiness
was the same as that of the future glorious Church.1H-No member
of this Church was stained with any sin or vice ;19 there were only
holy, just, and chaste members.20
As -the controversy with Augustine progressed the Donatists
admitted that if evil members did exist in their Church, they were
hidden,21 but the majority of the members were just.22 This new
view modified somewhat their position on the sacraments. By
™ Contra lilt. Petit., 1, 5, 6 (CSEL 52, 6; PML 43, 248) : "qui fidem a
Perfido sumpserit non fidem percipit sed reatum.”
“ Contra Crescon., 1, 27, 32 (CSEL 52, 351; PML 43, 462) : “sed ipsam
quidem legem et scientiam et sacrificium corporis et sanguinis Christi talia
bona esse, quae possint homines et habere et mali esse, baptismum vero tale
bonum esse, quod quisquis habuerit necessario bonus sit?”
17Brevic. collât, cum Donat., 8, 10 (CSEL 53, 60; PML 43, 629) : “etiam
ipsi fassi sunt in ecclesia esse permixtos saltem occultos malos, zizania vero
inter triticum non in ecclesia, sed in ipso mundo permixta dixerunt, quoniam
dominus ait: ager est hic mundus.”
“ Contra epist. Farm., 3, 3, 17 (CSEL 51, 121 ; PML 43, 95): “unde
persuaderet hominibus caecis communionem Donatistarum non solum ec­
clesiam veram esse, sed etiam talem iam hoc tempore, qualis post ultimam
ventilationem ecclesia sancta futura est.”
19Ibid., 2, 7, 13 (CSEL 51, 57-58; PML 43, 58) : “Omitto dicere quam
scelerata superbia dicatur neminem esse inter collegas suos vel se ipsum
non esse cum aliqua macula et vitio non membrorum, sed quod peius est
morum.”
20 In Io. Ev.t Tr. 6, 12 (PML 35, 1431) : “Non sunt apud nos, dicant, nisi
sancti, justi, casti, sobrii ; non adulteri, non feneratores, non fraudatores,
non perjuri, non vinolenti.”
Λ Contra part. Donati post gesta, 8, 11 (CSEL 53, 108; PML 43, 659):
“victi evidentia veritatis malos in ecclesia usque in finem saeculi permixtos
esse confessi sunt, sed eos occultos esse dixerunt.”
33In Ps. 10, 1 (PML 36, 131) : “qui commemorando et exaggerando mul­
torum in Ecclesia peccata, quasi apud ipsos justi aut omnes aut plures sint.”

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

17

baptism Christ became the Head of the Christian through an un­
faithful minister but more excellently through a faithful one.23

The Reply of Augustine
In combating the Donatist view of sanctity Augustine did not
directly oppose to it the sanctity of the Catholic Church. To have
proclaimed without any further proof that the Catholic Church
was holy because it was the Body of Christ would have been futile,
since with equal vigor the Donatists asserted this privilege for their
own sect. Moreover outwardly there seemed to be no difference
between the two Churches.24 Augustine’s method of attack had to
seek other channels.
Since the adversaries disputed only about the Church as Christ’s
Body, but were in agreement about the person of Christ, Augustine
appealed to Christ the Head for knowledge about His Body.2®
Such information he found in the. Scriptures. From the Old
Testament there were applied to Christ such texts as—And He
shall rule from sea to sea, and fro-m the river unto the ends of the
earth (Ps. 71:8). I will give thee the Gentiles for thy inheritance,
and the utmost parts of the earth for thy possession (Ps. 2:8).
* Contra Crescon,, 4, 20, 23 (CSEL 52, 523-524; PML 43, 561): “fit
Christus origo Christiani et per dispensatorem infidelem, sed melius per
fidelem, christianus radicem figit in Christo etiam per colonum reprobum,
sed melius per probum, potest Christus caput esse Christiani et per Felicianum, sed melius existimas per Primianum.”
^Ibid., 2, 4, 6 (CSEL 52, 364-365; PML 43, 470) : “item tu dixisti nobis
et vobis unam esse religionem, eadem sacramenta, nihil in Christiana· ob­
servatione diversum.” W. J. Simpson, St. Augustine and African Church
Divisions (London, 1910), ρρ. 55-56. “In almost every town and village
dwelt in resolute antagonism and' watchful jealousy the Catholic and
Donatist Churches. They were identical in organization, and originally
identical in faith.”
26 Simpson, op. cit., p. 71, “This Catholic Church is the Body of Christ.
Entire Christ consists of Head and Body. Donatists do not dispute concern­
ing the Head, that is the Person of our Lord, but concerning His Body,
which is the Church. Augustine therefore appeals to the Head, concerning
Whom we agree, to inform us as to the Body, concerning which we differ.
Now, argues Augustine, the Head informs us through prophet and psalmist
that the obvious characteristic of the Body of Christ would be its world­
wide extension, or catholicity.”

18

The J)octrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed (Gen.
22:18).28 In the New Testament Augustine found the Church
compared to a field world, wide in extent (Matt. 13:38).2T Thus
catholicity was an evident characteristic applied by the Head to
His Body. Since the Donati st Church flourished only in Africa, it
did not have this catholicity of extent.28
To the argument from catholicity Augustine added one from
unity. Just as Christ was one, so also His Body, and the crime of
separation from the Catholic Church consisted in the fact that it
was an attempt to divide Christ’s Body.29 Anyone not united to
this Body was outside the Church of Christ.80 The cumulative
* Contra lift. Petit., 3, 50, 62 (CSEL 52, 214; PML 43, 380) : “propter
ipsius vero ecclesiae unitatem, quae in omnibus dilatatur, cui vos non communicatis, haec testimonia posui de Christo esse praedicta, quia dominabitur
a mari usque ad mare et a flumine usque ad terminos orbis terrae, et : dabo
tibi gentes hereditatem tuam et possessionem tuam terminos terrae, et quod
testimonium dei factum ad Abraham pro nostra, hoc est catholica communione, recitetur, ubi scriptum est: in semine tuo benedicentur omnes
gentes, quod semen interpretatur apostolus dicens: et semini tuo quod est
Christus, unde apparet in Christo non solum Afros aut Africam, sed omnes
gentes habituras benedictionem, per quas catholica dilatatur ecclesia, tanto
ante promissum.”
” Ibid., 2, 78, 174 (CSEL 52, 108; PML 43, 312) : “cum dominus dixerit:
ager est hic mundus, messis autem est finis saeculi, cum de frumentis et
zizanis dixisset; sinite utraque crescere usque ad messem.”
28 Epist. 49, 3 (CSEL 34 II, 142; PML 33, 190) : “etenim ecclesia catholica est etiam in Africa, quia per omnes terras eam deus esse voluit et
praedixit, parts autem vestra, quae Donati dicitur, non est in illis omnibus
locis.”
“ Contra Gaudent., 1, 36, 46 (CSEL 53, 245 ; PML 43, 734) : “habetis
enim res magnas, quas inter vestras iustitias ventiletis, divisionem Christi,
rescissionem sacramentorum Christi, desertionem pacis Christi, bellum contra membra Christi, criminationes in coniugem Christi, negationem promissorum Christi, hae sunt iustitiae vestrae.” Cf. Mersch, op. cit., p. 56. "C’est
même là qui rend si énorme le crime des schismatiques : ils ont divisé le
Christ, alors que les Juifs eux-mêmes n’ont pas osé lui briser les os; ils ont
mis le Christ en lambeaux, alors que les bourreaux ont respecté sa robe ; ils
l’ont réduit a n’être qu’un petit parti, alors que Satan n’a pas eu l’audace de
le jeter en bas du temple.”
80 Tixeront, op. cit., p. 385. “De cette Église le premier caractère est
l’unité. Il n’y a qu’une vraie Église, cela est clair, puisqu’il n’y a qu’une
épouse du Christ ; mais dans cette Église même règne l’union, l’unité, et
quiconque est hors de cette unité est hors de l’Église.”

’
]

1
f

<
■
■
j
|
Ί
' |
;
|

i
1
11
ii
jl
]
|
J

Γ
>
’
i
!
1
|
J
f
[

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

■

19

I

t

*

I»

I

i

i

t
j
I

force of the two arguments resolved into the following dictum:
Christ the Head speaking of His Body showed that it was both
catholic and united. Therefore the Donatist Church, particular and
separated, could not be the true Body of Christ.
It is true that against the Donatists Augustine demanded union
with the Church as a visible and hierarchical entity. However, he
regarded this external communion as a necessary condition for
participating in the inner life or holiness of Christ’s Body,31 since
whoever was not in Christ’s Body could not have Christ as his
Head. Between Christ the Head and His Body Augustine saw
what might be classed as a sort of personal union—the Head spoke
in the person of the Body. Thus when the Head said that He was
holy, the Body constituting one person with Him was holy also.32
In this union the Head communicated to His members the Holy
Spirit,33 charity,34 and grace.35 Since the Donatists were not in
external union with this Body they did not participate in its inner
51 Mersch, op. cit., p. 56. “L’unité, dit-il, mais elk est ce qui nous sanctifie
et ce qui nous sauve. Il n’y a qu’elle qui prie vraiment, il n’y a qu’elle qui
puisse être agréable à Dieu ; parce que, encore une fois, l’unité, c’est le corps
du Christ, c’est le Christ.”
“In Ps 85, 4 (PML 37, 1084) : “Neque enim . . . caro sola erat et Ver­
bum, sed et caro, et anima, et Verbum: et totum hoc unus Filius Dei, unus
Christus, unus Salvator; in forma Dei aequalis Patri, in forma servi caput
Ecclesiae. Ergo Quoniam sanctus sum, cum audio, vocem ejus agnosco; et
hic separo meam? Certe inseparabiliter a corpore suo loquitur, cum sic
loquitur.”
83 Epist. 185, 10, 46 (CSEL 57, 40; PML 33, 813) : “sed multo magis
isti eum non acceperunt, ubî a corporis compage divisi, quod solum corpus
vivificat spiritus sanctus, extra ecclesiam et contra ecclesiam ecclesiae sac­
ramenta tenuerunt.”
34 In Ps. 98, 4 (PML 37, 1261): “Qui ergo plenus est charitate, plenus est Deo; et multi pleni charitate, civitatem faciunt Deo.”
æ Contra part. Donati post gesta, 21, 34 (CSEL 53, 136; PML 43, 674) :
“nunc adtendamus verba illa, quibus Corinthiorum ecclesiam in epistulae
principio sic laudat, ut dicat : gratias ago deo meo semper pro vobis in
gratia dei quae data est vobis in Christo lesu, quia in omnibus divites facti
estis in illo, in omni verbo et in omni scientia, sicut testimonium Christi
confirmatum est in vobis, ita ut nihil vobis desit in ulla gratia, ecce sic
erant ditati in Christo in omni verbo et in omni scientia, ita eis nihil deerat
in ulla gratia, ut in illis essent, qui resurrectionem mortuorum adhuc usque
non crederent.”

20

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

life.36 Only by rejecting their error and returning to Catholic unity
could they share in the life of Christ’s Body.37
This teaching of Augustine that no one outside the Body of
Christ could have Christ as his Head became the essential note of
distinction between Augustinian and Donatist sanctity. For Au­
gustine the sanctity of the Body was due to a vital influence
emanating from the Head. On the contrary the Donatists cut off
both from the Head and Body relied on a self-sanctification which
left them no other alternative than to separate themselves from
sinners out of fear of contamination. Such a problem did not exist
for Augustine. Since Christ was one with His Body,88 there was
no reason to fear that this inner divine life of the Body could ever
be contaminated by the sins of man, and consequently there was
no need of divorcing one’s self from the external unity of the
Church.30
Thus Augustine conceived the visible Church as a mixture of
good and evil. To illustrate this he compared it to a net holding
good and bad fishes,40 to a harvest of wheat and chaff,41 to the
w Epist. 141, 5 (CSEL 44, 238; PML 33, 579) : “Quisquis ergo ab hac
catholica ecclesia fuerit separatus, quantum libet laudabiliter se vivere
existimet, hoc solo scelere, quod a Christi unitate disiunctus est, non habebit
vitam.”
Contra Crescon., 2, 15, 18 (CSEL 52, 377; PML 43, 477) : “ad illum fon­
tem signatum, hoc est ad spiritus sancti donum, quo caritas dei diffunditur
in cordibus nostris, nullus istorum nisi mutatus accedit, ita omnino mutandus,
ut non sit alienus, sed sit caelestis particeps pacis, sanctae socius unitatis."
In Ps. 39, 28 (PML 36, 451) : “Quasi enim unus homo rogat Deum,
membra Christi, corpus Christi ubique diffusum, unus mendicus, unus
pauper.”
88 Contra epist. Parm., 2, 17, 36 (CSEL 51, 91 ; PML 43, 78) : “quoniam
dominus, qui ait : sancti estote, quia et ego sanctus sum, ita inviolabiliter
facit sanctos suos versari inter malos, si custodiant eam quam accipiunt
sanctitatem, quemadmodum ipse dominus lesus nulla contagione malignitatis
in ludaeorum gente pollutus est.” De bapt., 5, 4, 4 (CSEL 51, 266; PML 43,
179) : “ac per hoc simul oportet intellegatur eos, quos nulla zizania, nulla
palea, si ipsi frumenta esse voluissent, in societate ecclesiae toto orbe diffusae
poterant maculare et ideo nulla existente causa se ab eodem unitatis vinculo
dirruperunt.”
40 Epist. 93, 9, 34 (CSEL 34 II, 480; PML 33, 338) : “Ipsa est ergo ec­
clesia, quae intra sagenam dominicam cum malis piscibus natat.”
a Contra Crescon., 3, 35, 39 (CSEL 52, 447; PML 43, 517) : “ecclesiam
teneo plenam tritico et palea.”

I

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

21

Ark in which were clean and unclean animals,42 and to a lily among
thorns.43 Just as in these enumerated cases the good element was
not harmed by the evil, so too in the Church the wicked did not
defile the good.44
By distinguishing the interior and exterior elements of the
Church Augustine reconciled the seeming contradiction between
his statement that the Church was spotless and at the same time
was composed of good and evil. In assigning an unparalleled
sanctity to her he was dealing with those belonging to her inner
life of charity. When he spoke of the composition of good and
evil, he had in mind also the mere external union of the evil with
the Church.45 This mixture of good and evil had to be tolerated
until a final and definitive separation would be made between them
at the Last Judgment.46 Until that time the only separation allowed
and even counselled was an internal withdrawing of the heart from

I
*

L
I

** Epist. 108, 7, 20 (CSEL 34 Π, 633-634; PML 33, 417); “agnoscamus
arcam Illam, quae praefiguravit ecclesiam; simul illic munda animalia simus
nec in ea nobiscum etiam immunda portari usque in finem diluvii recusemus.”
49 Epist. 93, 9, 28 (CSEL 34 II, 472-473; PML 33, 335) : "sed in scrip­
turis divinis quaerit ecclesiam et, ut promissa est, reddi conspicit, ipsa est
enim de qua dicitur : Sicut lilium in medio spinarum ita proxima mea in
medio filiarum, quae nec spinae dici possent nisi malignitate morum nec
filiae nisi communione sacramentorum.”
44 De unico bapt.} 14, 23 (CSEL 53, 24; PML 43, 607): “quoniam non
se arbitrabantur in unitate et communione sacramentorum Christi alienis
malis posse maculari.”
45 De bapt., 6, 3, 5 (CSEL 51, 301; PML 43, 199) : "quos non .pertinere
ad sanctam ecclesiam dei, quamvis intus esse videantur, ex hoc apertissime
apparet, quia isti sunt avari raptores faeneratores invidi malivoli et cetera
huiusmodi, illa autem columb
*a
unica pudica et casta, sponsa sine macula et
ruga, hortus conclusus, fons signatus, paradisus cum fructu pomorum et
cetera quae de illa similiter dicta sunt, quod non intellegitur nisi in bonis
et sanctis et iustis, id est non tantum secundum operationes munerum dei
bonis malisque communes, sed etiam secundum intimam et supereminentem
caritatem spiritum sanctum habentibus.”
48 Contra epist. Parm., 2, 4, 9 (CSEL 51, 55; PML 43, 56) : "sed istorum
populorum atque civitatum tunc erit aperta separatio, cum ista messis
fuerit ventilata.” Ps. contra part. Donati, 204, 205 (CSEL 51, 11; PML
43, 30) : “sed nobis exemplum datum est malos fratres tolerare, ut, cum non
possunt excludi, solo separemur corde.”

I

J

I

22

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

the sin of the evil members.4* This did not mean that these holy
members of Christ’s Body were themselves without sin. The
axiom—the Church is holy in her saints—had to be understood in
a two-fold sense. On earth the saints sinned either venially or
mortally, but as long as they were joined to Christ’s Body they
could be cured.48 In heaven- the saints could not sin, and so only
in this final stage would the Church be without spot or stain.40
It must be remembered that in distinguishing in the Church an
interior and exterior union Augustine was not teaching that the
two elements were to be separately conceived. For him the Church
was an institution communicating divine life to its adherents. The
sacraments in the Church were the means to this end ; divine life
or holiness the end itself.50 Thus the essential holiness of the
Contra epist. Parm., 2, 18, 37 (CSEL 51, 93; PML 43, 79) : “et exeunt
de medio malorum atque separantur interim corde, ne forte, cum id facere
per seditionem schismatis volunt, prius a bonis spiritaliter quam a malis
corporaliter separentur/’ Ibid., 3, 1, 2 (CSEL 51, 99; PML 43, 83) : “ut, si
forte non possent auferre malos a congregatione sua, auferendo malum ex
se ipsis, id est non cum eis peccando nec eis ad peccandum consentiendo aut
favendo.”
"Batiffol, op. cit., pp. 262-263. “Les saints mêmes pèchent chaque jour,
mais leurs péchés sont sans gravités, et il suffit pour les effacer chaque jour
de la prière quotidienne: Remettez-nous nos dettes. Toute l’Église dit chaque
jour à Dieu dans l’oraison dominicale: Remettez-nous nos dettes, et Dieu
les remet, en effet. Puis, il y a les pécheurs coupables de fautes grièves, mais
qui les reconnaissent et qui en font pénitence: ils sont des membres infirmes
dans le corps du Christ, ils sont guérissable, à condition de n’être pas
amputés.”
48 Brevic. collât, cum Donat., 3, 10, 20 (CSEL 53, 69; PML 43, 635) : “sed
eandem ipsam unam et sanctam ecclesiam nunc esse aliter, tunc autem aliter
futuram, nunc habere malos mixtos, tunc non habituram.”
64 Batiffol, op. cit., pp. 266-267. "On ne peut donc pas dire, comme Reuter,
que nous surprenons dans la pensée propre d’Augustin une double idée de
l’Église, l’une ‘acatholique/ sinon même ‘anticatholique/ selon laquelle
l’Église est une pure communio sauciorum; l’autre catholique et meme ‘vulgarkatolisch/ selon laquelle l’Église est une société hiérarchique et une
communio sacramentorum. Cur d’abord concevoir l’Église comme une société
de saints n’est une conception anticatholique que si on conçoit l’Église
uniquement comme une société des saints. D’autre part, concevoir l’Église
comme une empirique societas sacramentorum, et rien que cela, est une con­
ception, non pas catholique, mais acatholique. Les deux conceptions ne sont
donc justes qu’à la condition de n’être pas exclusives l’une de l’autre. . . .
Et, au fond, il n’y a pas de Catholicisme sans cette conciliation de la sanc­
tification qui est la fin et de la societas sacramentorum qui est le moyen.”

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

23

Church as a sacramental communion did not consist in the absolute
holiness of all its members, but in that the means towards this
holiness—the Church’s sacraments, ministry, and existence should
have sanctification as their aim and effectively realize it.51

I

The Sanctity of the Sacraments
t

I

!

It has been shown that the Donatists in not having Christ as
their source of sanctity placed it in the individual. That is why
in their doctrine on the sacraments they insisted on the innocence
and holiness of the minister lest the sacrament be defiled, Augus­
tine’s teaching with its emphasis on the influence of Christ the
Head placed the sanctity of the sacraments not in the minister but
in Christ and God.
In the sacraments Augustine distinguished a visible element—
the sacramentum or sacramental sign—and an invisible element—
the res or virtus sacramenti52—which consisted in grace.61
*63 This
virtus sacramenti was an objective reality independent of the
dispositions of the dispenser or recipient of the sacrament.64 The
sacramentum and the virtus sacramenti were united by the form
61 Tixeront, op. cit., pp. 386-387. “Au reste la sainteté de l’Église comme
corps social consiste essentiellement non en ce que tous et chacun de ses
fidèles soient saints, mais en ce que sa doctrine, ses sacrements, son ministère,
son existence même ont pour but la sanctification des âmes, et réalisent ef­
fectivement cette sanctification par la diffusion de la vérité et la transfor­
mation des moeurs. De cette sorte, tout ce qu’il ÿ a eu et ce qu’il y a de
saint sur la terre vient de l’Église et lui appartient; en elle et par elle seule
on peut arriver à la perfection et pratiquer les vrais vertus: Omnes quotquot
fuerunt sancti ad ipsam Ecclesiam pertinent.’ ‘Non ubicumque turtur in­
veniat nidum sibi, ubi ponat pullos suos : in fide vera, in fide catholica, in
societate unitatis Ecclesiae pariat opera sua.’ ”
MIn Io. Ev., Tr. 26, 11 (PML 35, 1611) : “Nam et nos hodie accipimus
visible cibum: sed aliud est Sacramentum, aliud virtus Sacramenti.”
“In Ps. 77, 2 (PML 36, 983-984): “gratia, quae sacramentorum virtus
est.”
64 J. Pourrat, Theology of the Sacraments, Authorized translation from the
third French edition (2d ed. ; St. Louis, 1914), p. 27. “According to St.
Augustine, a spiritual gift is joined with the sacramental sign; this gift is
objective ; it is not created by the faith of the subject, since children receive
it, and yet are unable to make acts of faith. Some dispositions however are
required in an adult, that he may share in the ‘virtus sacramenti.’ ”

F

24

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

of the sacrament which deriving its value from God was likewise
something objective and independent of any human disposition.55
To this distinction there must be added Augustine’s conception
of the Church as a prolongation of the Incarnation. He maintained
that Christ worked through the Church and her ministers in such
a way that an action of the Church or of the minister really was
an act of Christ· Thus a sacrament was an act of Christ through
His Church and minister.58 The minister administered the sacra­
mental sign or the visible element, but the sacramental rite did not
produce grace. This came from Christ alone.57 Consequently the
dispositions of the minister who was merely concerned with the
visible part could in no way harm the invisible element.
Augustine well illustrated this sanctifying influence of the Head
on the sacraments of His Body in the case of baptism. Although
Christ baptized through His ministers, He reserved for Himself
“ Pourrat, op. cit., pp. 29-30. “As we have seen, an objective spiritual gift
is united with the sacramental sign; it is also the wtord of blessing that
brings about this union and thus constitutes the sacrament in all its reality.
Baptismal water could not purify, unless it had been ‘consecrated’ by the
sign of the cross, in the name of Christ, and unless it was accompanied by
the words of the Gospel. . . . That action of the word in the making of the
sacrament is objective, since it unites the spiritual gift to the water of
Baptism, to the oil of Confirmation, and to the Eucharistic bread and wine. ...
The sacrament holds its value from God. Therefore, whatever may be the
state of the minister’s soul, the blessing he utters is valid.”
60 Contra, epist. Parm., 2, 15, 34 (CSEL 51, 88-89; PML 43, 76) : “sed
quod pertinet ad baptismi sanctitatem, adest deus qui det et homo qui ac­
cipiat, sive per se ipsum deo dante sive per angelum, sive per hominem sanc­
tum (sive per Petrum) sive per hominem iniquum, sicut per tam multos vel
latentes vel manifestos.” Cf. Pourrat, op. cit., p. 28. “When the minister
performs the external rite, Christ or the Holy Ghost produces infallibly in
the soul of the subject, grace and other effects of the sacraments. . . . The
sanctification that takes place in the soul when the minister performs the
rite is so truly the result of the divine action, that St. Augustine looks upon
the sacrament as the work of Christ himself, acting through His Church,
and sanctifying the faithful.”
67 Contra Crescon,, 2, 21, 26 (CSEL 52, 385; PML 43, 482) : “baptizant
ergo, quantum attinet ad visibile ministerium, et boni et mali, invisibiliter
autem per eos ille baptizat, cuius est et visibile baptisma et invisibilis gratia,
tingere ergo possunt et boni et mali, abluere autem conscientiam non nisi
ille, qui semper est bonus.”

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

25

alone the power of sanctifying through the sacrament.58 Through
the corporal action of the minister He communicated grace and
the Holy Spirit.56 It was this grace and not the minister’s action
which sanctified.60 Since Christ instituted the sacrament,61 His
divine power was ever present in it and effectively prevented its
impairment through an unworthy minister.63 Even when such a
minister baptized, God gave the Holy Spirit through him.63 Thus
if one received baptism from an unworthy minister, the minister’s
unworthiness would not be communicated but only the sanctity
of the sacrament.64
Augustine also showed the absurdity of the Donatist, view on
the minister’s sanctity determining the sanctity of the sacrament.
The Donatists maintained that each one was reborn in the same
state of grace as the one from whom baptism was received. If it
should not be known that the minister was a sinner—because he
88In Jo. Ev., Tr. 6, 6 (PML 35, 1428) : “Per hanc enim potestatem, quam
Christus solus sibi tenuit, et in neminem ministrorum transfudit, quamvis per
ministros suos baptizare dignatus sit, per hanc stat unitas Ecclesiae.”
& Contra liti. Petii., 3, 49, 59 (CSEL 52, 211; PML 43, 379): “cum
enim dicimus : ‘Christus baptizat,’ non visibili ministerio dicimus . . . sed
occulta gratia, occulta potentia in spiritu sancto.”
00 Contra Crescon., 4, 18, 21 (CSEL 52, 521; PML 43, 560): “nec in­
nocentem facit quemquam qui ei ministrat baptismum, sed dantis dei gratia
et percipientis bona conscientia.”
81 Contra liti. Petii., 2, 35, 82 (CSEL 52, 68; PML 43, 287) : “proinde
aut omnis aqua in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti consecrata purae
i
conscientiae est—non propter eos a quibus ministratur vel a quibus acciIpitur, sed propter illum qui hunc baptismum immaculatus instituit.”
“De bapt., 3, 10, 15 (CSEL 51, 205; PML 43, 144): “baptismus vero
Christi verbis evangelicis consecratus et per adulteros et in adulteris sanctus
Î
est, quamvis illi sint inpudici et inmundi, quia ipsa eius sanctitas pollui non
|i
potest et sacramento suo divina virtus adsistit sive ad salutem bene utentium
sive ad perniciem male utentium.”
;
“Ibid., 5, 20, 28 (CSEL 51, 286; PML 43, 190-191) · “cum dare nemo
possit quod non habet, quomodo dat homicida spiritum sanctum? et tamen
,
etiam intus ipse baptizat: deus ergo dat etiam ipso baptizante spiritum
'
sanctum."
“ Ibid., 4, 12, 18 (CSEL 51, 244; PML 43, 166) : “sed cum baptisma
verbis evangelicis datur, qualibet ea perversitate intellegat ille per quem datur
vel ille cui datur, ipsum per se sanctum est propter illum cuius est. et si
quisque per hominem perversum id accipiens non accipiat tamen ministri
,
perversitatem, sed solâm mysterii sanctitatem."

26

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

was a latent one—then Christ baptized secretly in his place and
became the Head of the Christian. Augustine remarked that it
would always be better to have an evil minister, since Christ then
would always baptize.05
The reason why the Donatists taught that the sacramental effi­
cacy depended on the minister's disposition was to show the in­
validity of baptism conferred in the Catholic Church. The ministers
of this Church had been defiled by the sins of the traditores, and
though they retained their own baptism and Orders, they lost the
power of conferring the sacraments on others. Thus the Donatists
insisted on a repetition of baptism when any Catholic joined their
sect. By showing that Catholic sanctity, whether for the sacraments
or for individuals, was dependent on Christ the Head, Augustine
proved that in neither case was there any defilement. Consequently
since the ministers of the sacraments had not lost their power and
baptized validly, there was no necessity of the Donatist rebaptism.
But Augustine went further. He asserted that baptism existed even
among the Donatists and did not need to be repeated when any of
them returned to Catholic unity. All that the Catholic Bishop de­
manded was that the sacramental form be applied in its integrity.86
If this were done, then it had to be admitted that not only baptism
but also the other sacraments and rites which existed among the
schismatics were valid.67
“Contra lift. Petit., 1, 6, 7 (CSEL 52, 7-8; PML 43, 249) : “alioquin si
talis quisque in gratia spiritali renascitur, qualis est ille a quo baptizatur, et,
cum manifestus est qui baptizat homo bonus, ipse dat fidem, ipse origo et
radix caputque nascentis est, cum autem latet perfidus baptizator, tunc
quisque a Christo percipit fidem, tunc a Christo ducit originem, tunc in
Christo radicatur, tunc Christo capite gloriatur, laborandum est omnibus
qui baptizantur, ut baptizatores perfidos habeant et ignorent eos. quamlibet
enim bonos habuerint, Christus est utique incomparabiliter melior, qui tunc
erit baptizati caput, si perfidus lateat baptizator.”
“De bapt., 3, 15, 20 (CSEL 51, 211; PML 43, 147): “Quamobrem si
evangelicis verbis in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti Marcion bap­
tismum consecrabat, integrum erat sacramentum.” Cf. Batiffol, op. cit., p.
159. “II suffit que la formule soit prononcée littéralement pour que le
sacrement soit, peu important le sens que le ministre donne aux termes qui
la composent.”
Epist. 61, 2 (CSEL 34 II, 223; PML 33, 229): “Itaque cum ad nos
veniunt ex parte Donati ... et amplectimur fratres . . . agnoscentes in eis

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

27

To prove the existence of the sacraments among schismatics
Augustine showed that between Christ and the Church there was
a certain identity. The minister—whether in unity or in schism—
by the indestructible character of his ordination was a representa­
tive of the Church. Consequently Christ still acted through a
minister in schism.68
For the non-repetition of the sacrament Augustine developed
the teaching on the character imprinted by the sacrament. Baptism
imprinted a character, whether it was given in Catholic unity or
in schism, and it was because of this character that the sacrament
was not repeated.69 The experimental proof of this statement
rested on the fact that the Church did not rebaptize those re­
turning to her fold from schism.70
Yet even though baptism existed among those in schism and
was holy, it had no sanctifying power among them.71 The Dona­
tists had maintained that the Church, baptism and the Holy Spirit
were inseparable. Augustine admitted that baptism could be
bona dei, sive sanctum baptismum sive benedictionem ordinationis sive
continentiae professionem sive consignationem virginitatis sive fidem tri­
nitatis et si qua alia sunt.”
68In Ps. 39, 28· (PML 36, 451): “Quasi enim unus homo rogat Deum,
membra Christi, corpus Christi ubique diffusum, unus mendicus, unus pau­
per.” Contra Crescon., 2, 21, 26 (CSEL 52, 385; PML 43, 482) : "baptizant
ergo, quantum attinet ad visibile ministerium, et boni et mali, invisibiliter
autem per eos ille baptizat, cuius est et visibile baptisma et invisibilis
gratia, tingere ergo possunt et boni et mali, abluere autem conscientiam non
nisi ille, qui semper est bonus.”
* De bapt., 6, 1, 1 (CSEL 51, 298; PML 43, 197): "per quos postea
plenarii concilii auctoritate originalis consuetudo firmata est, etiam ovem,
quae foris errabat et dominicum characterem a fallacibus depraedatoribus
suis foris acceperat, venientem ad christianae unitatis salutem ab errore
corrigi , . . characterem tamen in ea dominicum agnosci potius quam
improbari.”
70 De bapt., 1, 1, 2 (CSEL 51, 145; PML 43, 109): "sic et illi, qui per
sacrilegium schismatis ab ecclesiae communione discedunt, habent utique
baptismum, quem priusquam discederent acceperunt, nam si et ipsi redeant,
.non eis iterum datur; unde ostenduntur illud, quod acceperant in unitate
positi, non potuisse amittere separati.”
71 Contra Gaudent., 1, 12, 13 (CSEL 53, 207; PML 43, 711): "ecce que­
madmodum possunt, quos non oportet baptizari, ipsa catholicae unitatis cari­
tate mundari, ut non incipiat eis inesse intus quod et foris inerat, sed incipiat
eis prodesse intus quod foris oberat.” ♦

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies
separated from the Church and the Holy Spirit, but the latter
two were inseparable. Thus the one baptized in the Donati st schism
received the sacrament, but he had to return to the Catholic Church
to receive the Holy Spirit.72 In terms of the sacrament itself
Augustine explained that the sacramentum could be separated from
the res or Artus sacramenti.'’3 Baptism existed among the heretics,
but its virtus or effect—grace and the remission of sins—did not
exist.™ Yet the sacramental integrity of baptism was not impaired
by the perversion of schism, nor was it rendered better by con­
version to Catholic unity. In both cases the sacrament was holy,76*78
™De bapt., 5, 23, 33 (CSEL 51, 290; PML 43, 193): “quemadmodum
autem spiritum sanctum, sicut habent filii dilecti, non habent filii maligni et
tamen baptismum habent, sic et ecclesiam, sicut habent catholici, non habent
haeretici et tamen baptismum habent, nam sanctus spiritus disciplinae fugiet
fictum nec tamen eum fugiet baptismus, itaque sicut potest baptisma esse et
unde se aufert spiritus sanctus, ita potest esse baptisma ubi non est ecclesia.”
7a Pourrat, op. cit., p. 27. “The distinction between the ‘sacramentum’ and
the gift connected with it, is such that sometimes the two may be com­
pletely separated. We may have the ‘sacramentum’ without the ‘virtus
sacramenti.’ ”
nDe bapt., 6, 1, 1 (CSEL 51, 297-298; PML 43, 197) : “nee . . . visum
est quibusdam etiam egregiis viris antistitibus Christi . . . non esse posse aput
haereticos vel schismaticos baptismum Christi, nisi quia non distinguebatur
sacramentum ab effectu vel usu sacramenti ; et quia eius effectus adque usus
in liberatione a peccatis et cordis rectitudine aput haereticos non invenieba­
tur, ipsum quoque sacramentum illic non esse putabatur.” Cf. Pourrat, op.
cit., p. 227. “St. Augustine was equally convinced that Baptism, when re­
ceived outside the Catholic Church, does not remit sins nor impart grace :
it obtains these results, only when the culprit repents, enters the Catholic
unity and receives the rite of reconciliation.”
78De bapt., 5, 21, 29 (CSEL 51, 288; PML 43, 192): “per se ipsum
quia dei est sanctum esse cognoscimus et, sive tradatur sive accipiatur a
talibus, nullorum perversitate violari sive intus sive foris.” Ibid., 6, 2, 4
(CSEL 51, 300-301; PML 43, 199) : “dico sacramentum baptismi et bonos
et malos posse habere, posse dare, posse accipere, et bonos quidem utiliter
ac salubriter, malos autem perniciose adque poenaliter, cum illud tamen in
utrisque sit aequaliter integrum, adque nihil interesse ad eius aequalem in
omnibus integritatem, quanto peior id habeat inter malos, sicut nihil interest,
quanto melior id habeat inter bonos, ac per hoc nihil etiam interest quanto
peior id tradat, sicut nihil interest quanto melior; adque ita nihil interest
quanto peior id accipiat, sicut nihil interest quanto melior, illud enim per se
ipsum et in eis qui non aequaliter iusti sunt et in eis qui non aequaliter iniqui
sunt aequaliter sanctum est.”

i

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

29

but its sanctifying effect was realized only through incorporation
into the Catholic Church.78
AUGUSTINE AND PELAGIAN SANCTITY

The Pelagian Teaching
The Pelagian doctrine on sanctity sprang from a false idea of
human liberty, the essence of which consisted in an equal pos­
sibility of choosing between good and evil. It was as if the will
were perfectly balanced between these two extremes, tending
neither to one side nor to the other.1 This state of equilibrium was
disturbed when the will chose between one or the other, but it was
not permanently destroyed. After such selection the will reverted
to its former state ready to make its choice again. Thus both virtue
and sin were acts of the will, but they were isolated and had no
organic unity either with the will or with any kindred subsequent
act.2
1 Op. imp. contra Jul., 3, 117 (PML 45, 1297) : “An hic libra tua, quam
conaris ex utraque parte per aequalia momenta suspendere, ut voluntas
quantum est ad malum, tantum etiam sit ad bonum libera, vergendo in unam
partem te indicat delirantem?”
2 B. Warfield, Augustine and the Pelagian Controversy (New York,
1897), p. 10. “The peculiar individualism of the Pelagian view of the
world comes out strongly in their failure to perceive the effect of habit on
nature itself. Just as they conceived of virtue as an agglomeration of vir­
tuous acts, so they conceived of sin exclusively as an act, or mass of dis­
connected acts. They appear not to have risen above the essentially heathen
view which had no notion of holiness, except as a series of acts of holiness,
or of sin except as a like series of sinful acts. Thus the will was isolated
from its acts, and the acts from each other, and all organic connection or
continuity of life was not only overlooked but denied. After each act of the
will, man stood exactly where he did before*, indeed, this conception scarcely
allows for the existence of a ‘man’—only a willing machine is left, at each
click of the action of which the spring regains its original position, and is
equally ready as before to perform its function.” Cf. R. Heddé et E. Am­
man, “Pélagianisme,” DTC, XII (1933), 684. “De même que la volontélibre n’a aucune inclination pour le péché avant d’entrer en exercise, de
même elle n’est ni affectée, ni affaiblie par le péché actuel. Tout acte n’étant
qu’une sortie de la possibilité ; la volonté, après cette perturbation, rentre
immédiatement dans son équilibre absolu antérieur. Le péché est une chose
purement actuelle, isolée, indépendante ;*la liberté morale n’est pas influencée
à son détriment ou affaiblie par le fait du péché.”

I

30

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

The source of all sin, then, was the will and not human nature,8
which was created good by God.*
4 Since the will of the sinner was
not weakened by his sin, which remained only as a past event,5*
certainly his nature could not be affected by it. The logical con­
clusion was that if personal sin did not injure the nature of the
one sinning, it could not injure another person’s nature. By this
reasoning the Pelagians denied the transmission of original sin
from Adam to his progeny.8 Each child born into this world was in
the same state as Adam before his fall.78Consequently the Pela­
gians considered the inception of sin in each man as a personal
act which was later followed by a series of isolated sinful acts.
The next logical step was to deny the solidarity of the human
race in good.8 Since human nature was not soiled by original sin
but existed in a natural state of holiness, Christ’s death was not
necessary.8 This eliminated the idea of sanctity as an incorporation
of the human race into Christ’s Body by His death. Instead Pela­
8 Contra duos epist. Pelag., 4, 2, 2 (CSEL 60, 520; PML 44, 609) : “pec­
catum omne non de natura, sed de voluntate descendat.”
4 De nupt. et concup., 2, 3, 9 (CSEL 42, 260; PML 44, 441) : “Pelagiani
et Caelestiani dicunt naturam humanam a bono deo conditam bonam.”
B Op. imp. contra Jul., 3, 187 (PML 45, 1326) : “Omne enim peccatum
antequam fiat, non est; et post factum, memoria sola ejus operis, non ipsa
species manet.”
a De gestis Pelagii, 35, 65 (CSEL 42, 120; PML 44, 357) : “quod pec­
catum Adae ipsum solum laeserit et non genus humanum.”
7Ibid., 35, 65 (CSEL 42, 120; PML 44, 357) : “quod infantes nuper nati
in illo statu sint, in quo Adam fuit ante praevaricationem.”
8 É. Mersch, Le Corps Mystique du Christ (2d ed. ; Bruxelles, 1936) II,
66. “Bref, on a enlevé un mystère de solidarité dans le mal et dans la mort,
et un mystère de solidarité dans le bien et dans la vie.”
• Contra duas epist. Pelag., 1, 7, 12 (CSEL 60, 432-433; PML 44, 556) :
“isti autem inimici gratiae dei, quae data est pusillis et magnis per lesum
Christum dominum nostrum, ideo dicunt antiquos homines dei perfectae
fuisse iustitiae, ne Christi incarnatione, passione, resurrectione, cuius fide salvi
facti sunt, credantur eguisse.” Cf. Heddé et Amman,-op. cit., col. 684. “On
aboutit à abolir la notion chrétienne de la rédemption. Sans doute, les
pélagiens parlent beaucoup de rédemption ; ils ont conservé le mot, non la
chose. Ils parlent de la rémission des péchés, fondée sur la mort du Christ,
mais leur façon de comprendre le péché et l’effet du péché sur l’homme les
contraint à entendre cette remission dans le sens nominaliste de nonimputation des péchés commis; elle n’est qu’une justification extérieure.”

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

31

gian sanctity was a series of disconnected acts of holiness each
stemming from the will’s choice of good, and it was to be attributed
not to God but to man himself.10
In explaining sanctification through Christ’s Body Augustine
attributed a super-eminent sanctity to the Head of the Body. The
Pelagians, however, denied Christ’s nature its proper dignity.11
They admitted that in His birth Christ was free from sin, but only
because His nature was the same as that of other children. There
was no question of sanctity due to Christ’s own excellence or to
a singular grace. The soul of every child was equal in sanctity to
the soul of Christ, because it too was born free from sin.12
By the complete denial of original sin and the necessity of
Christ’s death to destroy such a sin, the Pelagian conception of the
sanctifying power of baptism, the sacrament of Christ’s passion
and death, differed from Augustine’s position.13 They regarded
the sacrament as having only a quasi-necessity. Since children had
no sin, the sacrament could only confer on them a right to enter
the kingdom of heaven. Adults, however, received a remission of
their personal sins through it.14 In addition, some Pelagians held
that the sacrament was necessary both for adults and children in
10 De grat. Christi 1, 42, 46 (CSEL 42, 159; PML 44, 381) : “quod qui
ista sentiunt ignorantes dei justitiam suam volunt constituere.”
Contra duas epist. Pelag., 2, 2, 3 (CSEL 60, 463; PML 44, 573) : “Pe­
lagiani vero nullam carnem peccati nasci asserentes auferunt carni Christi
propriam dignitatem.”
™Ibid., 4, 2, 2 (CSEL 60, 521; PML 44, 609) : “huic laudi adîungunt et
‘quod dominum Christum nulla dicunt macula peccati fuisse respersum,
quantum adtinet ad eius infantiam, quia eius carnem ab omni peccati con­
tagione purissimam non excellentia propria et gratia singulari, sed com­
munione naturae’ quae omnibus inest infantibus adseverant.”
** Contra Jul., 6, 24, 81 (PML 44, 872) : “necesse tamen non sit ad
Christum pro aeterna salute transire : eo quod per sacramentum mortis et
resurrectionis ejus (si tamen vel hoc putatis) commodior via sit, non quod
alia via esse non possit,”
14 Contra duas episi. Pelag., 4, 2, 2 (CSEL 60, 522; PML 44, 610) :
“Laude sanctorum sese contegunt dicentes baptisma perfecte homines in­
novare.” Ibid., 3, 6, 12 (CSEL 60, 139; PML 44, 193) : “non ideo parvulos
baptizari, ut remissionem accipiant peccatorum, sed ut sanctificentur in
Christo."
.

32

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

order that they might receive divine adoption.18 But as if to insist
on the non-essential character of the sacrament, the Pelagians
maintained that even without it and consequently without divine
adoption children could have eternal life outside the kingdom of
heaven,1® and adults could have other possible ways of insuring
their sanctification,17
Through this rejection of the necessity of baptism the Pelagian
system had no place for sanctification by the Holy Spirit and
charity given in this sacrament.18 And whereas Augustine at- tributed a sanctifying power to the grace given in baptism, the
Pelagians denied the whole structure of the doctrine on grace. In
opposition to Augustine’s teaching on the gratuitous character of
grace, the Pelagians admitted the following types :

1) Grace was nature endowed with free will (liberum
arbitrium) with which each one was created.19 In a free
“Ibid., 4, 2, 2 (CSEL 60, 520; PML 44, 609) : “quod omnibus aetatibus
dicunt esse baptismum necessarium, ut scilicet illa creatura in dei filios
adoptetur, non quod aliquid ex parentibus trahat, quod sit lavacro regenera­
tionis expiandum,”
™ Ibid., 1, 22, 40 (CSEL 60, 457; PML 44, 570): “parvulis videlicet
baptismum necessarium non propter remissionem peccatorum, sed tantum­
modo propter regnum caelorum, datis enim eis extra regnum dei locum
salutis et vitae aeternae, etiamsi non fuerint baptizati.”
17 Contra Jul., 6, 24, 81 (PML 44, 872): “necesse tamen non sit ad
Christum pro aeterna salute transire : eo quod per sacramentum mortis et
resurrectionis ejus (si tamen vel hoc putatis) commodior via sit, non quod
alia via esse non possit.”
“De grai. Christi, 1, 39, 43 (CSEL 42, 157; PML 44, 380) : “ecce quo­
modo vult intellegi adiuvari eos qui sub lege peccant, ut per gratiam
Christi iustificati liberentur, tamquam eis non sufficiat sola lex propter
nimiam peccandi consuetudinem, nisi Christi accedat non inspiratio caritatis
per spiritum sanctum, sed intuendum et imitandum in doctrina evangelica
virtutis eius exemplum.” Ibid., 1, 40, 44 (CSEL 42, 157; PML 44, 380) :
“manifestum est ita eum velle nos adiuvari gratia spiritus sancti, non quia
sine illo etiam per solam naturae possibilitatem non possumus resistere
temptatori, sed ut facilius resistamus.” De haer., 88 (PML 42, 48) : “charitatem autem dari negant, qua pie vivitur.”
“De grat. et. Hb. arb., 13, 25 (PML 44, 896) : “Nam et hoc Pelagiani
ausi sunt dicere, gratiam esse naturam, in qua sic creati sumus.” De gestis
Pelagii, 35, 65 (CSEL 42, 120 ; PML 44, 357) : “quod gratia dei et adiu-

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

33

act the Pelagians distinguished the capacity (posse) of
man to perform the act, the choice of his will (velle),
and the act itself (facere). Once God had given the crea­
ture the capacity, due to the grace of free will man could
both will and perform the act.20 Since this free will was
entirely independent of God, all merit, all moral value or
holiness had to be attributed to the creature.21 The will
was such that in itself it was sufficient to perform every­
thing required of it.22 Yet the Pelagians did admit that
man could be helped by the grace of God, not for the es­
sential performance of the action but only for a certain
facility.23 This grace was given when man made a good

>

-

torium non ad singulos actus detur, sed in libero arbitrio sit et in lege atque
doctrina.” Cf. E. Neveut, “Rôle de Saint Augustin dans les Controverses
Pélagiennes,” Divus Thomas, XXXIII, Piac. (1930), 34. “Pelage, sous le
nom de ‘grâce,’ n’entendait autre chose que la ‘nature,’ en possession d’ellemême, c.à.d. créée avec son libre arbitre, à laquelle il ajoutait quelquefois
en passant, et d’une manière assez obscure, le secours de la loi et la ré­
mission des péchés.”
30De grot. Christi 1, 4, 5 (CSEL 42, 127-128; PML 44, 362): “‘nos,’
inquit, ‘sic tria ista distinguimus et certum velut in ordinem digesta parti­
mur. primo loco posse statuimus, secundo velle, tertio esse; posse in natura,
velle in arbitrio, esse in effectu locamus, primum illud, id est posse ad deum
proprie pertinet, qui illud creaturae suae contulit, duo vero reliqua, hoc est
velle et esse ad hominem referenda sunt, quia de arbitrii fonte descendunt? ”
Cf. Warfield, op. cit„ p. 6. “Man is thus a machine, which, just because it is
well made, needs no Divine interference for its right working, and the
Creator, having once framed him and endowed him with the posse, hence­
forth leaves the velle and the esse to him.”
a De gestis Pelagii, 35, 65 (CSEL 42, 120; PML 44, 358): "quoniam
propriam voluntatem habeat unusquisque aut facere aliquid aut non facere.
quod victoria nostra ex dei non sit adiutorio, sed ex libero arbitrio.”
™De grat. Christi, 1, 41, 45 (CSEL 42, 159; PML 44, 381) : “ut videlicet
tamquam via demonstrata, qua ambulare debeamus, iam viribus liberi ar­
bitrii adiutorio nullo alterius indigentes sufficiamus nobis, ne deficiamus in
via, quamvis et ipsam viam contendat etiam sola inveniri posse natura, sed
facilius, si adi uvet gratia.”
™ Contra duas epist. Pelag., 2, 8, 17 (CSEL 60, 479; PML 44, 583-584) :
“Pelagius enim ‘facilius’ dicit inpleri quod bonum est, si adiuvet gratia,
quo additamento, id est addendo ‘facilius,’ utique significat hoc se sa per e,
quod etiamsi gratiae defuerit adiutorium, potest quamvis difficilius inpleri
bonum per liberum arbitrium.”

34

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies
use of his free will,24 and consequently it did not precede
but was merited by an act of the will.26
2) The second type of Pelagian grace consisted in the
Law and revelation. This was merely a grace whereby
God, without any internal influence upon the action, re­
vealed what man had to do.28 It was given only to facil­
itate the action.27
3) The final type of grace centered around the example
of Christ and the remission of sins. The Pelagians taught
that those men who lived before the Law were saved by
their own nature ; those under the Law were saved by it
in the manner already discussed ; those living under Christ
were in a sense saved by Him,28 not as a Priest offering
Himself in spotless oblation but as an example of virtue
proposed for man’s consideration and imitation.28 Since

1, 24, 42 (CSEL 60, 458-459; PML 44, 570-571): “tantumque
constituunt in libero arbitrio, quo in profundum demersus est homo, ut eo
bene utendo dicant hominem mereri gratiam.”
10 De grat. et lib. arb., 14, 27 (PML 44, 897) : “Etsi non datur secundum
merita bonorum operum, quia per ipsam bene operamur; tamen secundum
merita bonae voluntatis datur: quia bona voluntas, inquiunt, praecedit oran­
tis, quam praecessit voluntas credentis, ut secundum haec merita gratia
sequatur exaudientis Dei.”
* De grat. Christi, 8, 9 (CSEL 42, 132; PML 44, 364): “Hinc itaque
apparet hanc eum gratiam confiteri, qua demonstrat et revelat deus quid
agere debeamus, non qua donat atque adiuvat, ut agamus.” Cf. J. Tixeront,
Histoire des Dogmes (4th ed. ; Paris, 1912), II, 445. “En résumé donc, les
pélagiens admettaient des grâces extérieures d’instruction et d’exemples,
peut-être même des grâces intérieures d’illumination; ils n’admettaient pas
la grâce prévenante, intérieure, de la volonté: l’activité divine ne pénétrait
pas au coeur même de la nôtre pour l’élargir et la transformer.”
•De grat. Christi, 1, 41, 45 (CSEL 42, 159; PML 44, 381) : “quamvis et
ipsam viam contendat etiam sola inveniri posse natura, sed facilius, si
adiuvet gratia.”
•Contra duas epist. Pelag., 1, 21, 39 (CSEL 60. 457; PML 44, 569-570) :
“et ante legem dicitis salvos factos esse natura, deinde per legem, postremo
per Christum, quasi hominibus duorum superiorum temporum, ante legem
scilicet et in lege, sanguis Christi non fuerit necessarius, evacuantes quod
dictum est ; unus enim deus, unus et mediator dei et hominum homo Christus
lesus.”
•De grat. Christi, 1, 39, 43 (CSEL 42, 157; PML 44, 380): “ecce
quomodo vult intellegi adiuvari eos qui sub lege peccant, ut per gratiam
Christi iustificati liberentur, tamquam eis non sufficiat sola lex propter nimian
peccandi consuetudinem, nisi Christi accedat non inspiratio caritatis per spiri-

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

35

children were entirely free from sin, they had no need of
this type of grace.30 Adults, however, through faith in
Christ received grace which destroyed their past sins but
acted as no guarantee against future sins.31 Yet since
this faith was an act of man’s free will, it had to be at­
tributed to man and not to God.32 Consequently Christ
was not the efficient cause of human sanctification but only
the exemplary cause.83
turn sanctum, sed intuendum et imitandum in doctrina evangelica virtutis
eius exemplum.” Cf. Warfield, op. cit., p. 11. “Christ could forgive us the
sins we had committed, He could teach us the true way, He could set us a
holy example; and He could exhort us to its imitation. But He could not
touch us to enable us to will the good without destroying the absolute
equilibrium of the will between good and evil.” Cf. Tixeront, op. cit., pp. 448449. “Cette vie nouvelle d’ailleurs, la grâce de Jésus Christ n’en était pas le
principe intime et profond. La grâce pélagienne agissait sur le chrétien par
le dehors, si l’on peut parler ainsi : elle ne l’animait pas ni ne le fortifiait
pas intérieurement. Le Christ restait bien le maître qu’il fallait écouter
et le modèle qu’il fallait imiter; il n’était plus la force qui soulevait l’âme
et la flamme qui entretenait sa charité. Le vivit in me Christus de saint Paul
n’avait aucun sens.”
K Contra Jul., 1, 4, 14 (PML 44, 649): “ut ad regenerandos parvulos
tantummodo Christus sit, ad majores autem Christus Jesus; quia scilicet
Jesus Salvator intepretatur : quod eum parvulis esse non vultis, qui nihil
eos habere, unde illos salvos faciat, praedicatis.”
De grat. et lib. arb., 13, 26 (PML 44, 896-897) : “Dicunt etiam gratiam
Dei, quae data est per fidem Jesu Christi, quae neque lex est neque natura,
ad hoc tantum valere, ut peccata praeterita dimittantur, non ut futura viten­
tur, vel repugnantia superentur.”
"Heddé et Amann, op. cit., col. 684. “Sans doute, les pélagiens recon­
naîtront que la rédemption est réalisée dans l’homme par la foi, mais la foi
est l’oeuvre de l’homme, non de Dieu, elle est le fruit de la liberté. C’est
donc l'homme qui se justifie lui-même, ce n’est pas Dieu qui le justifie.”
** Contra Jul., 4, 3, 23 (PML 44, 750) : “introducens hominum genus, quod
Deo placere possit sine Christi fide, lege naturae.” Cf. Heddé et Amann,
op. cit., col. 684. “Ainsi, le Christ n’est plus un principe vivant, créateur et
sanctificateur; il est simplement un modèle qui nous encourage à nous per­
fectionner dans la justice et à devenir meilleurs que les hommes antérieurs
à lui. Le Christ est le prototype de la moralité, c’est par la méditation et
l’imitation de sa vie, c’est-à-dire par nous-mêmes, non par lui, que nous par­
venons à la sainteté parfaite. Donc tout est le fait de l’homme, l’oeuvre de
l’homme; la grâce n’est pas autre chose que l’influence exercée sur l’homme
par l’exemple du Christ.”

36

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

Since in the Pelagian system free will was all sufficient, it fol­
lowed that through it each one could be entirely free from sin
and easily keep God’s commandments, if he willed to do so.84
This desire for sanctity (perfect sinlessness) was entirely within
the compass of man’s free will. By choosing it the will merited
God’s grace as an afii towards this desire, which, however, could
be attained without God’s help.85 Lest this seemed to be a mere
possibility incapable of fulfillment, the Pelagians pointed to saints
whose sinlessness was such that it was not necessary for them to
ask God’s pardon.86* Because God had given men the power to
share in His divine nature,„then even as God they could be without
sin, for it was only when they were in such a condition that they
were really the children of God.8T Consequently the Pelagians
defined the Church as a society of perfect beings and excluded
from it anyone stained with sin.88

™ De gestis Pelagii, 45, 61 (CSEL 42, 116; PML 44, 355) : "posse enim
hominem esse sine peccato et mandata dei facile custodire, si velit.” Cf.
Neveut, op. cit., p. 36. "Pelage était subtil. Pour lui la possibilité de ne pas
pécher dépendait non de notre volonté, mais de la condition de notre nature.
Or, tout ce qui constitue la nature humaine, appartient évidemment à son
auteur, à Dieu. Donc il n’excluait pas la grâce dans une oeuvre qu’il pré­
sentait comme l’oeuvre de Dieu.”
x Contra Jul., 4, 3, 29 (PML 44, 753) : "Perfacile igitur studio sanctitatis,
quod Deus adjuvat, potest homo carere peccatis. . . . Nam et studium sancti­
tatis sine adjutorio Dei vultis in hominis voluntate praecedere, quod merito
Deus debeat adjuvare, non gratis : et sic creditis hominem in hac aerum­
nosa vita posse carere peccatis, ut non in se habeat quare dicat, Dimitte
nobis debita nostra.”
*' Contra duas epist. Pelag,, 4, 2, 2 (CSEL 60, 522; PML 44, 611):
“quicquid de laude sanctorum, ad hoc, ut vita mortalis in sanctis videatur
non habere peccatum nec sit eis necessarium pro dimittendis debitis suis
precari deum.”
"De gestis Pelagii, 35, 65 (CSEL 42, 120-121 ; PML 44, 357-358) : "quod
filii dei non possunt vocari, nisi omnino absque peccato fuerint effecti. . . .
quod ex illo, quod ait Petrus divinae nos esse consortes naturae, consequens
sit, ut ita possit esse anima sine peccato quemadmodum deus.”
x De haer., 88 (PML 42, 48) : “In id etiam progrediuntur, ut dicant vitam
justorum in hoc saeculo nullum omnino habere peccatum, et ex his Ecclesiam
Christi in hac mortalitate perfici, ut sit omnino sine macula et ruga.”

1
1

1

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

37

The Reply of Augustine
Augustine opened his attack not by immediately countering the
Pelagian doctrine on free will but by undermining their estimation
of human nature. Once it had been admitted that the nature of
each man soiled by a sin inherited from Adam and unable to help
itself needed the healing power of a Redeemer,” then the Pela­
gian system would disintegrate. Since in the physical sense all men
ultimately had Adam as their generator, they constituted with him
a single man. In him all sinned and suffered the consequences of
this sin—death. Opposed to this physical birth was a spiritual re­
birth in the second Adam, Christ. All partaking in this rebirth
were justified and restored to life in Christ.*40 This was merely
the enunciation of the traditional Catholic doctrine of the trans­
mission of original sin through Adam and the destruction of this
sin by Christ. In this teaching were two opposed concepts—sin
and justification, spiritual death and spiritual life.
Christ was the only means whereby the human race could be
freed from original sin.41 This liberation by Christ was not that
of an exemplary cause as the Pelagians wished, but Christ’s death
became the essential condition of that freedom. Though Augustine
taught that Christ was made Head of the human race in His Tn*De pecc. meritis, 2, 30, 49 (CSEL 60, 120; PML 44, 180-181) : “quod
apostolus sine ambiguitate locutus est: quia per hominem mors et per homi­
nem resurrectio mortuorum, sicut enim in Adam omnes moriuntur, sic et
in Christo omnes vivificabuntur? , . . omnium ergo corporis mortem factam
per unum hominem dixit et omnium corporis resurrectionem in vitam aeter­
nam per unum Christum futuram esse promisit. . . . nostrum ergo corpus
mortuum est propter peccatum, Christi autem corpus solum mortuum sine
peccato, ut fuso sanguine sine culpa omnium culparum chirographa deleren­
tur, quibus debitores, qui in eum credunt, a diabolo antea tenebantur, ideo
hic est sanguis meus, qui pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum.”
40Zbid., 1, 28, 55 (CSEL 60, 54; PML 44, 140): “quemadmodum enim
omnes omnino pertinentes ad generationem voluntatis carnis non moriuntur
nisi in Adam, in quo omnes peccaverunt, sic ex his omnes omnino pertinentes
ad regenerationem voluntatis spiritus non vivificantur nisi in Christo, in quo
omnes iustificantur, quia sicut per unum omnes ad condemnationem sic per
unum omnes ad iustificationem.”
41 De nupt. et concup., 2, 11, 24 (CSEL 42, 277; PML 44, 450) : “quia
omnes sub peccato nascimur et per unum solum, qui sine peccato natus est,
liberamur.”

38

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

carnation,42 yet his intention was to show that at the moment of
the Second Adam’s death on the cross Christ the Head entered
into definitive possession of His Body or Church, and thereby com­
municated to it the grace of sanctification and life.43 Therefore,
baptism, the sacrament of incorporation into Christ’s Body,44 the
sacrament of Christ’J death,48 destroyed in each one original sin,48
and became absolutely necessary for salvation.47
The teaching of Augustine on the solidarity of the human race
in evil and good destroyed the Pelagian teaching that all sin was a
personal, isolated occurrence, and that each man sanctified himself
by a series of individual acts of holiness. It reaffirmed the necessity
of Christ’s death for sanctification and conceived all Christianity
as a single body sanctified through the life-giving impulse of the
Head, It showed that the sanctification merited by the cross of
Christ was communicated to the Christian through baptism,48
and therefore the Cross and baptism were necessary to destroy
original sin.
"In Ps, 118, Senn. 19, 6 (PML 37, 1556): “Quia factus est particeps
mortalitatis nostrae, ut et nos participes divinitatis ipsius fieremus.”
aDe pecc. meritis, 1,26, 39 (CSEL 60, 37; PML 44, 131) : “quibus ap­
pareat dominum lesum Christum non aliam ob causam in carne venisse ac
forma servi accepta factum oboedientem usque ad mortem crucis, nisi ut hac
dispensatione misericordi ssimae gratiae omnes, quibus tamquam membris in
suo corpore constitutis caput est ad capessendum regnum caelorum, vivifi­
caret, salvos faceret, liberaret, redimeret, iniuminaret.”
** Contra Jul., 6, 9, 27 (PML 44, 838) : “Non autem habere parvulos
vitam, nisi habeant Christum (quem procul dubio habere non possunt, nisi
induerint eum, eo modo quo· scriptum est, Quotquot in Christo baptizati
estis, Christum induistis."
48De spir. et liti., 6, 10 (CSEL 60, 162; PML 44, 205) : "consepulti ergo
sumus illi per baptismum in mortem.”
** Contra Jul., 2, 10, 33 (PML 44, 697): “sed primorum hominum pec­
catum, in posteros propagatione trajectum. Etiam hujus mali reatus, Baptis­
matis sanctificatione remittitur.”
47De pecc. meritis, 1, 23, 33 (CSEL 60, 32; PML 44, 128) : “in cuius
regnum non intrabit nisi qui renatus fuerit ex aqua et spiritu.”
48 De nat. et gratia, 7, 7 (CSEL 60, 237; PML 44, 250) : “tanto et multo
ardentiore zelo nos oportet accendi, ne evacuetur crux Christi, evacuatur
autem, si aliquo modo praeter illius sacramentum ad iustitlam vitamque
aeternam pervenire posse dicatur.”

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

39

Thus the Pelagian view of baptism’s sanctifying power as en­
tailing divine adoption together with either a remission of per­
sonal sin in the case of adults, or a title to enter the kingdom of
heaven in the case of children had to be discarded in favor of the
Catholic teaching which demanded both a destruction of original
sin and an infusion of a new life. How this was effected Augustine
explained through the action of the Holy Spirit, the Sanctifier,40
giving charity80 and grace.61
In the Pelagian controversy Augustine dwelt especially on grace.
First of all he distinguished exterior and interior grace. Under ex­
terior graces he placed the Gospels and the Law, and to these he
attributed only an extrinsic value in sanctifying in so far as man
reminded of his weakness by them sought the grace of justifica­
tion.63 In itself obedience to such a Law without interior grace
was not sanctity,68 and as a matter of fact it was an impossible
burden.64
46 De spir. et lift., 3, 5 (CSEL 60, 157 ; PML 44, 203) : “Nos autem dici­
mus humanam voluntatem sic divinitus adiuvari ad faciendam iustitiam, ut
praeter quod creatus est homo cum libero arbitrio praeterque doctrinam qua
ei praecipitur quemadmodum vivere debeat accipiat spiritum sanctum.”
Ibid., 16, 28 (CSEL 60, 181-182; PML 44, 218); “hic autem spiritus dei,
cuius dono iustificamur. . . . digitus dei est spiritus dei, per quem sanctifi­
camur.”
64 There seems to be no direct mention of charity being given in baptism.
It is implied from the fact that the Holy Spirit is given in this sacrament
and that He is the giver of charity. Op. imp. contra Jul., 2, 165 (PML 45,
1212) : “Justificat quippe impium Deus, non solum dimittendo quae malo
facit, sed etiam donando charitatem, ut declinet a malo, et faciat bonum
per Spiritum sanctum.”
“De pecc. meritis, 1, 39, 70 (CSEL 60, 70; PML 44, 150) : “In parvulis
certe gratia dei per baptismum eius, qui venit in similitudine carnis peccati,
id agitur, ut evacuetur caro peccati.”
M De spir. et lift., 34, 60 (CSEL 60, 220; PML 44, 240) : “verum etiam
quod visorum suasionibus agit deus, ut velimus et ut credamus, sive ex­
trinsecus per evangelicas exhortationes, ubi et mandata legis aliquid agunt,
si ad hoc admonent hominem infirmitatis suae, ut ad gratiam iustificantem
credendo confugiat, sive intrinsecus, ubi nemo habet in potestate quid ei
veniat in mentem, sed consentire vel dissentire propriae voluntatis est.”
M Contra duas epist. Pelag., 3, 7, 23 (CSEL 60, 515 ; PML 44, 605-606) :
“Quamobrem qui secundum iustitiam, quae in lege est, sine fide gratiae
Christi vivit . . . nullam veram putandus est habere iustitiam.”
64 De spir, et litt,, 19, 32 (CSEL 60, 185; PML 44, 220) : "illa enim sine
adiuvante spiritu procul dubio est littera occidens.”

40

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

For Augustine interior grace was a free gift of God given
without any reference to preceding merits.58 By considering Au­
gustine’s teaching on Adam’s condition before the fall a better
appreciation is had of this interior grace. Adam had the power not
to sin and by means of a special grace (auxilium sine quo non)
he could do good. This was the essence of true liberty. With the
fall man lost grace and his will was weakened, so that his fallen
state was one in which without grace he could neither avoid evil
nor do good.58 The will was still free to do evil, but not to do
good unless liberated by the grace of God.87 So in the process of
sanctification God anteceded every action of man68 and gave grace
which destroyed original sin,59 restored the freedom of the will,80
“ Ibid., 10, 16 (CSEL 60, 168; PML 44, 210) : “per ipsam quippe iustificatur gratis, id est nullis suorum operum praecedentibus meritis.”
“ Tixeront, op. cit., pp. 478-479. “On a vu que notre auteur faisait du
Posse non peccare un privilège d’Adam innocent. Adam avait le pouvoir
d’éviter le mal et, moyennant une grâce dont il sera question plus loin
(auxilium sine quo non), de faire le bien. C’est ce que saint Augustin
appelle proprement la liberté. Cette liberté a été perdue par le péché
d’origine. Nous ne pouvons plus, sans la grâce, éviter le mal, ni, sans une
grâce plus spéciale, faire le bien. Ce n’est pas à dire que nous fassions
nécessairement le mal que nous accomplissons : non, nous le faisons librement,
et en cela consiste précisément le libre arbitre qui nous reste et qu’il faut
bien distinguer de la liberté.”
m Contra duas epist. Pclag., 1, 3, 7 (CSEL 60, 428-429 ; PML 44, 553-554) :
“sed haec voluntas, quae libera est in malis, quia delectatur malis, ideo libera
in bonis non est. quia liberata non est. nec potest homo boni aliquid velle,
nisi adiuvetur ab eo, qui malum non potest velle, hoc est gratia dei per
lesum Christum dominum nostrum.” Cf. Neveut, op. cit., p. 37. “Vaincu
par le péché, l’âme a perdu de sa liberté, elle est tombé sous la dure
nécessité d’avoir le péché, jusqu’à ce qu’elle soit guérie de toute infirmité.”
& De nat, et gratia, 31, 35 (CSEL 60, 259; PML 44, 264): “praevenit
autem, ut sanemur, quia et subsequetur ut etiam sanati vegetemur; praevenit,
ut vocemur, subsequetur ut glorificemur; praevenit, ut pie vivamus, sub­
sequetur ut cum illo semper vivamus, quia sine illo nihil facere possumus,
utrumque enim scriptum est et : deus meus, misericordia eius praeveniet me,
et : misericordia tua subsequetur me per omnes dies vitae meae.”
"De nupt. et concup., 2, 27, 46 (CSEL 42, 301; PML 44, 463) : “gratia
vero ideo ex multis delictis in iustîficationem, quia non solum illud unum
solvit, quod originaliter trahitur, sed etiam cetera, quae in unoquoque
homine motu propriae voluntatis adduntur.”
” Contra duas epist. Pelag., 1, 3, 7 (CSEL 60,428-429 ; PML 44, 553-554) :
“sed haec voluntas, quae libera est in malis, quia delectatur malis, ideo

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

41

and formed the basis for all justification or sanctification.01
Though the question of moral sanctity lies outside the scope of
this work, a brief statement of Augustine’s position as opposed
to the Pelagians in that field throws light on the problem of sanc­
tity. The Pelagians had taught that once God gave to human nature
the ability to perform a good act, the creature through the
natural power of free will could' both will and accomplish the act.
In addition, if they admitted any grace, it was one merited entirely
by an act of man. Thus their moral sanctity was homocentric.
Against such a position Augustine quoted St. Paul, For it is God
who of his good pleasure works in you both the will and the
performance (Phil. 2:13).02 Consequently the beginning and com­
pletion of every act was entirely dependent on God’s grace.03 Since
this grace was a free gift of God, then all progress in human holi­
ness had to be attributed to Him alone. Yet the creature was not
an automaton ; he still had free will, and in cooperating with God’s
grace was sanctified.84
libera in bonis non est, quia liberata non est. nec potest homo boni aliquid
velle, nisi adîuvetur ab eot qui malum non potest velle, hoc est gratia dei
per lesum Christum dominum nostrum.”
** De nat. et gratia, 9, 10 (CSEL 60, 239; PML 44, 252) : “si autem sine
Christi gratia iustificari omnino non potuit.” Ibid., 60, 70 (CSEL 60, 286;
PML 44, 282) : “nullo tamen modo nisi adiuvante gratia salvatoris Christi
crucifixi et dono spiritus eius vel quoslibet ad plenissimam perfectiorem vel
quemquam ad qualemcumque provectum verae piaeque iustitiae pervenire qui
negaverit, nescio utrum recte possit in qualiumcumque Christianorum numero
deputari.”
“De pecc. meritis, 1, 33, 62 (CSEL 60, 63; PML 44, 146) : “deus est
enim, inquit apostolus, qui operatur in nobis et velle et operari pro bona
voluntate."
“Contra duas epist. Pelag., 2, 9, 21 (CSEL 60, 483; PML 44, 586) : “si
enim sine illo nihil possumus facere, profecto nec incipere nec perficere,
quia, ut incipiamus, dictum est : misericordia eius praeveniet me, et ut
perficiamus, dictum est: misericordia eius subsequetur"me.”
** De spir. et lift., 9, 15 (CSEL 60, 168; PML 44, 209) : “iustificati gratis
per gratiam ipsius ; non quod sine voluntate nostra fiat, sed voluntas nostra
ostenditur infirma per legem, ut sanet gratia voluntatem et sana voluntas
impleat legem non constituta sub lege nec indigens lege.” De grat. et lib. arb.,
16, 32 (PML 44, 900-901) : “Certum est nos facere, cum facimus: sed ille
facit ut faciamus, praebendo vires efficacissimas voluntati, qui dixit, Faciam
ut in justificationibus meis ambuletis, et judicia mea observetis et faciatis.''

42

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

Finally Augustine maintained that no one except Christ was
free from sin.85 This difference of opinion between him and the
Pelagians reverted back to the question of original sin. In denying
this sin and in claiming that all nature was without sin, the Pela­
gians considered concupiscence as something inherent in nature88
to which even Christ was subject.8*
* For Augustine concupiscence
was the result of original sin.88 Christ, born of a Virgin, was en­
tirely free from concupiscence,88 original sin, and personal sin.
* 0
Yet for the ordinary man the case was different. All his sins were
forgiven in baptism, but concupiscence remained.
*
1 Since it was
in the daily struggle against this remnant due to Adam’s fall that
sin occurred, man could only be sinless when concupiscence was
removed by the death of the body.’2 Sometimes the fault com­
“By implication, however, he does except the Blessed Virgin Mary. De
nat. et gratia, 36, 42 (CSEL 60, 263-264; PML 44, 267): “excepta itaque
sancta virgine Maria, de qua propter honorem domini nullam prorsus, cum
de peccatis agitur, haberi volo quaestionem.”
* Op. imp. contra Jul., 1, 71 (PML 45, 1094) : “Hanc autem voluptatem
et concupiscentiam ante peccatum in paradiso fuisse, res illa declarat, quia
ad delictum via per concupiscentiam fuit, quae cum pomi decore oculos
incîtasset, spem etiam jucundi irritavit saporis. Non ergo potuit haec con­
cupiscentia, quae cum modum non tenet, peccat; cum vero intra limitem
concessorum tenetur, affectio naturalis et innocens est : non, inquam, potuit
fructus esse peccati, quae docetur, non suo quidem vitio, sed voluntatis,
occasio fuisse peccati.”
” Ibid., 4, 54 (PML 45, 1371) : “ne diceres Christi genitalia aliquando . . .
et in nonnullos illicitos usus contra ejus sanctum propositum se illam
partem sancti ejus corporis erexisse.”
“ Ibid., 1, 71 (PML 45, 1095) : “Praecessit mala voluntas, qua serpenti
subdolo crederetur ; et secuta est mala concupiscentia, qua cibo inhiaretur
illicito.”
”Ibid., 4, 58 (PML 45, 1374) : “Natus enim de carne per sanctum con­
cipiente Spiritum, absit ut in se haberet discordiam carnis et spiritus.”
m De correpi, et gratia, 11, 30 (PML 44, 934) : “et quae potentior quam
Dei unigenitus Filius, aequalis Patri et coaeternus, pro eis homo factus, et
sine suo ullo vel originali vel proprio peccato ab hominibus peccatoribus
crucifixus?”
71 Conira JhL, 6, 17, 52 (PML 44, 853) : “Sic ergo et concupiscentia, quae
manet oppugnanda atque sananda, quamvis in Baptismo dismissa sint cuncta
omnino peccata, non solum nem sanctificatur, sed potius ne sanctificatos
aeternae morti obnoxios possit tenere, evacuatur.”
73 Op. imp. contra Jul., 6, 8 (PML 45, 1514-1515) : “Non est ergo hujus
vitae justitia, vitium non habere, sed vitia non eis consentiendo minuere,

J

!

,

j

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

4

43

mitted would be grievous ; at other times only venial.73 Yet in each
case it would be remitted by the grace of Christ the Redeemer
and not by the Pelagian grace dependent on man’s own will.74
It was through this teaching on concupiscence that Augustine
explained how one could be a son of God and yet sin. Men did not
sin because they were sons of God, but because they were still
sons of this world.76 In other words, as long as they acted from
charity, which made them sons of God, they did not sin. Sin came
from being a son of the world or from the remnants of con­
cupiscence.78
Thus Augustine evidently held that no one could be so perfect
in this life that he would be without sin.77 A relative perfection,
eisque resistendo, temperanter et juste et pie vivere. Nullum autem cui
resistamus habere vitium, posterioris est vitae, quae bene gestae praesentis
est praemium?’
* Contra duas epist.Pelag., 1, 14, 28 (CSEL 60, 446-447; PML 44, 563) :
“Hi omnes concupiscentiae partus et ipsius concupiscentiae reatus antiquus
baptismatis ablutione dimissi sunt ; et quidquid nunc parit ista concupiscentia,
si non sint illi partus, qui non solum peccata, verum etiam crimina nuncupan­
tur, pacto illo cotidianae orationis, ubi dicimus : dimitte sicut dimittimus, et
elemosynarum sinceritate mundantur.” De perj. iitst. hominis, 9, 20 (CSEL
42, 20; PML 44, 302): “sed qui ad ipsam perfectionem inreprehensibiliter
currit, carens criminibus damnabilibus atque ipsa peccata venialia non negle­
gens mundare elemosynis.”
”De nupt. et concup., 2, 27, 46 (CSEL42, 301 ; PML44,463) : “gratia vero
ideo ex multis delictis in iustificationem, quia non solum illud unum solvit,
quod originaliter trahitur, sed etiam cetera, quae in unoquoque homine motu
propriae voluntatis adduntur."
70 Contra duas epist. Pelag., 3, 3, 4 (CSEL 60, 488; PML 44, 589) : “pec­
cant enim et filii dei, quoniam, si dixerint se non habere peccatum, se
ipsos seducunt et veritas in eis non est, sed ea condicione peccant, qua sunt
adhuc filii huius saeculi ; qua vero gratia sunt filii dei, non utique peccant,
quia omnis qui natus est ex deo non peccat,”
74 Ibid., 3, 3, 4 (CSEL 60, 489-490; PML 44, 590) : “et tamen eos malos
“
esse dicit et nosse bona dare filiis suis, nurpquid inde mali, unde filii dei?
absit, sed inde mali, unde adhuc filii saeculi, iam tamen filii dei facti pignore
spiritus sancti.” De grat. Christi, 1, 21, 22 (CSEL 42, 142; PML 44, 370371): “secundum istam caritatem melius intellegitur dictum: qui natus est
ex deo, non peccat et quia non potest peccare, quia caritas, secundum quam
- natus ex deo est, non agit perperam nec cogitat malum.”
77 Pe pecc. meritis, 2, 13, 18 (CSEL 60, 90; PML 44, 162) : “Sunt ergo in
terra iusti, sunt magni, fortes, prudentes, continentes . . , non sunt sine
peccato.”

44

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

however, was possible in so far as in comparison with an evil per­
son another appeared just. Yet even here the just person had to
pray daily for a remission of his sins.78 No matter how great this
relative perfection might be, it could never be equal to that of
God.78 Even that vessel of election, St. Paul, despised his own
justice in considering the incomparable perfection of Christ.80
Therefore the Church here on earth was not a society of perfect
beings. Just as Christ was not glorious before His resurrection,
so the Church, His Body, would not be glorious until it was in
heaven. Christ cleansed it in baptism, and in a sense the Church
was glorious and without spot in this sacrament, in so far as in it
the members of the Church received a remission for all their past
sins and a title to a pardon for future sins. In this manner Christ
continued to perfect His Church until one day glorious in heaven
it would be completely spotless.81
ί
j
1

;

J

i
[
I
I
I
;
!

*

78 Contra duas epist. Pelag., 3, 5, 15 (CSEL 60, 503-504; PML 44, 599) :
“unde fieri potest, ut in comparatione iniquorum . . . îustos eos fuisse dicen­
dum sit. ... et tamen praecepit eis dominus in oratione dicere : dimitte nobis
debita nostra.”
79 De nat. et gratia, 33, 37 (CSEL 60, 261; PML 44, 265) : “ego quidem
hoc sentio, quia etiam cum fuerit in nobis tanta iustitia, ut ei addi omnino
nihil possit, non aequabitur creatura creatori.”
“De pecc. meritis, 2, 11, 16 (CSEL 60, 88-89; PML 44, 161) : “sed pro­
fecto secundum illam iustitiam, qua se noverat iustum, se vituperavit atque
distabuit aestimavitque se terram et cinerem mente conspiciens Christi
iustitiam, in cuius non tantum divinitate, sed nec in anima nec in carne ullum
potuit esse peccatum, secundum quam iustitiam, quae ex deo est, etiam
Paulus apostolus illud suum, quod secundum iustitiam, quae ex lege est,
fuit sine querella, non solum damna, verum etiam stercora existimavit,”
iaDe perf. iust. hominis, 15, 35 (CSEL 42, 36; PML 44, 310): “cum
enim dominus ipse secundum formam servi, per quam se mediator coniunxit
et ecclesiae, non fuerit glorificatus nisi resurrectionis gloria . . . quomodo
dicenda est ante resurrectionem suam· ecclesia eius esse gloriosa? mundat
ergo eam nunc lavacro aquae in verbo abluens peccata praeterita et pellens
ab ea dominationem malorum angelorum, deinde perficiens eius sanitates
facit eam occurrere in illam gloriosam sine macula et ruga.” Contra duas
epist. Pelag., 4, 7, 17 (CSEL 60, 540-541 ; PML 44, 622) : “si enim dixerint
se non habere peccatum, respondet eis Iohannes, quod se ipsos decipiarit et
veritas in eis non sit ; si autem confitentur peccata sua, cum se velint esse
Christi corporis membra, quomodo erit illud corpus, id est ecclesia, in isto
adhuc tempore perfecte, sicut isti sapiunt, sine macula et ruga, cuius membra

The Doctrine of Augustine Against the Heresies

45

non mendaciter confitentur se habere peccata? quapropter et in baptismate
dimittuntur cuncta peccata et per ipsum lavacrum aquae in verbo exhibetur
Christo ecclesia sine macula et ruga, quia, nisi esset baptizata, infructuose
diceret: dimitte nobis debita nostra, donec perducatur ad gloriam, ubi ei
perfectius nulla insit macula et ruga." De nupt. et contup., 1, 33, 38 (CSEL
42, 250; PML 44, 435) : “ut eodem lavacro regenerationis et verbo sancti­
ficationis omnia prorsus mala hominum regeneratorum mundentur atque
sanentur, non solum peccata quae omnia nunc remittuntur in baptismo, sed
etiam quae posterius humana ignorantia vel infirmitate contrahuntur, non ut
baptisma quotiens peccatur, totiens repetatur, sed quia ipso quod semel datur
fit, ut non solum antea verum etiam postea quorumlibet peccatorum venia
fidelibus impetretur, quid enim prodesset vel ante baptismum paenitentia,
nisi baptismus sequeretur, vel postea, nisi praecederet.”

CHAPTER II

The Uncreated Cause

of

Sanctification

THE TRINITY

I

The consideration of the Trinity in sanctification is prompted
by the various opinions expressed on God’s nature by the pro­
ponents of the three heresies concerned. The Manicheans not only
rejected the divine authorship of all creation, but they also denied
God's real holiness by teaching a pantheistic system of all good
emanating from God. Again in one form or other the Manicheans,
Donatists, and Pelagians denied God’s influence in sanctification.
By combining Augustine’s replies to these false opinions an idea
may be formed of God's own holiness and its communication to
others.
Augustine’s development of the position of Christ in sanctifying
rested on his teaching against the Manichean and Pelagian denial
of original sin. With this was linked the character and necessity
of Christ’s death. The African bishop insisted that man was de­
filed by the sin of Adam and could only be cleansed by the sanc­
tifying action of Christ as Mediator, Redeemer, and Priest. But
not content to portray this real sacrificial act of the natural Christ
performed once on Calvary, Augustine also conceived Christ as a
continuous, active principle in the sanctification of the members of
His Body. Since both the Pelagians and Manicheans denied
Christ’s sanctity, Augustine established its real nature. Then he
showed that this sanctity of the natural Christ was communicated
to the members of Christ’s Body through Christ’s capital grace.
Here the saint had the Pelagians in mind and to a lesser degree
the Manicheans, but he also was plainly teaching that all sanctity,
whether individual, corporate, or sacramental, came from God
alone, the Donatîst teaching notwithstanding.
As to the Holy Spirit in sanctification Augustine concerned him­
self with asserting that He was a divine Person and the principle
of sanctification both in the Trinity and in men. This teaching
was partly occasioned by the Manichean denial of the divinity of
46

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

47

this Person, and partly by the Pelagian contention that man’s free
will, which-could merit the Holy Spirit, was sufficient for sanc­
tification. Since the Donatists separated themselves from the
Church, Augustine portrayed the Holy Spirit as the soul of
Christ’s Body communicating grace and charity only to those
united to it.

God, Source of All Sanctification
Though he teaches that God alone can comprehend His own
nature,1 Augustine knew that man could arrive at some under­
standing, however imperfect,2*of the divinity,8 both by considering
God as a being of supreme excellence to whom submission was
due,4*and also by excluding from Him all imperfection.8 By com­
bining this double process Augustine treats of the holiness of God.
In a merely negative sense Augustine conceives God’s sanctity
not only as infinitely distant from created perfection8 but also as
something inviolable and incorruptible.7 Passing to a positive con­
1 Conf., 13, 16 (CSEL 33, 359; PML 32, 853) : “Nam sicut omnino tu es,
tu scis solus.”
* De Gen. ad lilt., 5, 16 (CSEL 28 I, 159; PML 34, 333) : “illa substantia
ineffabilis sit nec dici utcumque homini per hominem possit nisi usurpatis
quibusdam locorum ac temporum verbis, cum sit ante omnia tempora et
ante omnes locos.”
* In Ps. 134, 6 (PML 37, 1742) : “continuo Deus temperavit laudem suam,
et hoc de se dixit quod capi dulciter posset.”
*De doct. Christ,, 1, 6, 6 (PML 34, 21) : “Et tamen Deus, cum de illo
nihil digne dici possit, admisit humanae vocis obsequium, et verbis nostris
in laude sua gaudere nos voluit. Nam inde est et quod dicitur Deus. Non
enim revera in strepitu istarum duarum syllabarum ipse cognoscitur ; sed
tamen omnes latinae linguae scios, cum aures eorum sonus iste tetigerit,
movet ad cogitandam excellentissimam quamdam immortalemque naturam.”
*In Ps. 85, 12 (PML 37, 1090): “Deus ineffabilis est; facilius dicimus
quid non sit, quam quid sit.”
β De nat. et gratia, 33, 37 (CSEL 60, 261; PML 44, 265) : “ego quidem
hoc sentio, quia etiam cum fuerit in nobis tanta iustitia, ut ei addi omnino
nihil possit, non aequabitur creatura creatori.” Op. imp contra Jul., 3, 24
(PML 45, 1257) : “Et tamen sinit haec Deus, incomparabiliter justis omni­
bus justior.”
7 Contra Fortunat., 11 (CSEL 25 I, 89; PML 42, 116): “deum esse in­
violabilem, incorruptibilem et inpenetrabilem et incoinquinabilem, et qui
nulla ex parte corrumpi potest, et cui nulla ex parte noceri possit.”

48

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

sideration of the divine excellence the African bishop identifies
God with His attributes and shows that in Him no one perfection
transcends another. Since God is the Absolute Being, He is not
wise, strong, just, but wisdom, strength, and justice are God be­
cause they are one with His divine essence.8 Though God is great,
good, wise, blessed, true, and whatever else is not unworthy of
Him, His greatness is the same as His wisdom; His goodness is
the same as His wisdom and greatness ; His truth is the same as
all these things. In God it is not one thing to be blessed, and an­
other to be great, or wise, or true, or good, or to be wholly Him­
self.8 Yet in spite of this insistence on the unity of this infinite
variety of perfection in the Godhead, Augustine sees God’s good­
ness as the source of all sanctity—divine and human.10 This good­
ness, and consequently the sanctity of God, is so perfect and selfsufficient that it can neither be increased nor diminished.11
In order to understand more clearly how God’s goodness is His
sanctity, one must realize that it is because God is good that man
tends to union with Him.12 In other words goodness is the motive
of divine love. Thus love is added to the concept of holiness. Now
human sanctity is directly proportionate to each man’s love for
*De Triti., 6, 4, 6 (PML 42, 927) : “Deo autem hoc est esse quod est
fortem esse, aut justum esse, aut sapientem esse, et si quid de illa simplici
multiplicitate, vel multiplici simplicitate dixeris, quo substantia ejus sig­
nificetur.” Cf. É. Gilson, Introduction à L’Étude de Saint Augustin (Paris,
1931), p. 280.
'Ibid., 6t 7, 8 (PML 42, 929): "Deus vero multipliciter quidem dicitur
magnus, bonus, sapiens, beatus, verus, et quidquid aliud non indigne diet
videtur : sed eadem magnitudo ejus est, quae sapientia ; non enim mole
magnus est, sed virtute : et eadem bonitas quae sapientia et magnitudo, et
eadem veritas quae illa omnia : et non est ibi aliud beatum esse, et aliud
magnum, aut sapientem, aut verum, aut bonum esse, aut omnino ipsum esse.”
10 De civ. Dei, 11, 24 (CSEL 40 I, 547; PML 41, 338): “Sed si nihil
est aliud bonitas divina quam sanctitas.”
11 In Ps. 134. 4 (PML 37, 1740) : “quia sic bonus est Dominus, ut istis
non indigeat quo sit bonus. Denique ista non laudo sine illo; illum autem
sine istis perfectum, non indigum, incommutabilem, nullius bonum quaerentem
quo augeatur, nullius malum timentem quo minuatur, invenio."
Ps. 134, 6 (PML 37, 1742) : “Tendebatis enim vos fortassis videre
bonum omnium bonorum, bonum a quo sunt omnia bona, bonum sine quo
nihil est bonum, et bonum quod sine caeteris bonum est."

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

49

God,13 When this love is in its incipient stage, sanctity is in a
corresponding phase, and at each increase in love sanctity pro­
gresses.14 Yet created love can never attain such an intensity that
the creature becomes absorbed into the divine essence.16 Therefore
man’s sanctity never goes beyond a participation in God through
love?8 God’s love for Himself, however, is such that it is identical
with the divine essence, God is love (I John 4:8)?’ For such a
love there must be a corresponding sanctity. If God realizes His
love for Himself through identity with His essence, then the
resultant union, or God’s sanctity, is realized through a like
identity. That God is substantial sanctity is expressive of this fact.18
This goodness or sanctity of the divine essence precludes the
possibility of sin in God?B Augustine explains divine impeccability
through God's infinite act of adhesion to His essence. The principle
of all sin is an evil will30 which relinquishes a higher object for
a Contra duos epist. Pelag., 3, 7, 21 (CSEL 60, 511; PML 44, 604):
"porro si in hac vita pio nemine dubitante quanto amplius diligimus deum,
tanto sumus utique iustiores.”
14 De nat. et gratia, 70, 84 (CSEL 60, 298; PML 44, 290) : "Caritas ergo
inchoata inchoata justitia est ; caritas provecta provecta iustitia est ; caritas
magna magna iustitia est ; caritas perfecta perfecta iustitia est.”
“ De mor. eccl., 1, 11, 18 (PML 32, 1319): “At eum sequimur diligendo,
consequimur vero, non cum hoc omnino efficimur quod est ipse, sed ei
proximi, eumque mirifico et intelligibili modo contingentes, ej usque veritate
et sanctitate penitus illustrati atque comprehensi."
u Epist. 140, 23, 56 (CSEL 44, 203; PML 33, 562): “sic incorporeae
creaturae rationales ipsius creatoris fiunt participatione meliores, cum ei
cohaerent purissima et sanctissima caritate."
11 De Trin., 7, 3, 6 (PML 42, 938) : “quia scriptum est, Deus charitas est
(I Joan. IV, 8).”
ta/n Ps, 134, 3 (PML 37, 1740) : “Ille bono suo bonus est, non aliunde
participato bono: ille seipso bono bonus est, non adhaerendo alteri bono.”
De civ. Dei, 11, 24 (CSEL 40 I, 547; PML'41, 338): “cum sit et Pater
spiritus et Filius spiritus, et Pater sanctus et Filius sanctus, proprie tamen
ipse vocatur Spiritus sanctus tamquam sanctitas substantialis et consubstan­
tialis amborum."
“ De Gen. contra Man., 2, 29, 43 (PML 34, 220); “et Deum dicimus
tantae bonitatis esse, tantae justitiae, tantae incor ruptionis, ut neque peccet,
neque ipse alicui noceat.”
Λ De civ. Dei, 12, 9 (CSEL 40 I, 579; PML 41, 356) : "Cum ergo malae
voluntatis efficiens naturalis vel, si dici potest, essentialis nulla sit causa (ab

50

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

something less worthy?1 Since God is His own essence, He cannot
abandon it for anything else, and consequently by nature He is
impeccable.22 Thus God’s will always in harmony with His essence
becomes the norm for all morality?3 Be ye perfect as your heavenly
Father is perfect (Matt. 5:48) is the challenge given to every
creature?4
Christ and Sanctification
The Original Sanctity of Man Destroyed by Sin
In his pristine state man was created in the image and likeness
of this God of infinite perfection25 and endowed with the life of
grace?’ Through this gift of grace man’s nature was elevated in
a certain sense to God’s own nature,27 and consequently in it
ipsa quippe incipit spirituum mutabilium malum, quo minuitur adque de­
pravatur naturae bonum, nec talem voluntatem facit nisi defectio, qua
deseritur Deus, cuius defectionis etiam causa utique deficit).
*
’
“Ibid., 12, 7 (CSEL 40 I, 577; PML 41, 355) : “Nemo igitur quaerat
efficientem causam malae voluntatis; non enim est efficiens sed deficiens,
quia nec illa effectio sed defectio. Deficere namque ab eo, quod summe est,
ad id, quod minus est, hoc est incipere habere voluntatem malam.”
** Op. imp. contra Jul., 5, 31 (PML 45, 1471) : “Et ideo ista natura non
potest omnino peccare; quia non potest se ipsa deserere, nec meliorem habet
cui debeat inhaerere, et cujus possit desertione peccare . . . quoniam Dei
natura peccare nec vult posse, nec potest velle.”
**Zn Ps. 35, 16 (PML 36, 352-353) : “illi sunt recti corde, qui sequuntur
in hac vita voluntatem Dei .... Quia non vis voluntatem tuam dirigere
ad voluntatem Dei, sed Dei vis curvare ad tuam. Illa recta est, sed tu
curvus : voluntas tua corrigenda est ad illam, non illa curvanda est ad te *. et
rectum habebis cor.”- Cf, W. Tolley, The Idea of Cod in the Philosophy of
Si. Augustine (New York, 1930), p. 150. “There can be no conflict for
Augustine between God’s goodness and his will, since any primacy of one
faculty over another is made impossible by the perfect simplicity of the
divine nature.”
* Contra epist. Farm., 2, 17, 36 (CSEL 51, 91; PML 43, 78) : “quoniam
dominus, qui ait; sancti estote, quia et ego sanctus sum.”
* Contra Adimant., 5 (CSEL 25 I, 125; PML 42, 136) : “Ad imaginem
autem dei factum hominem non tantum genesis sed etiam apostolus clamat.”
* De correpi, et gratia, 11, 29 (PML 44, 933) ; “Adam non habuit Dei
gratiam? Imo vero habuit magnam, sed disparem.”
” Contra Adimant., 5 (CSEL 25 I, 125; PML 42, 136) : “filii ergo dei
sunt homines renovati ad eius imaginem.”
1

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

51

primarily consisted man's holiness. Eventually, however, Adam,
in whom the whole human race was represented, turned from
God to sin,28 thereby destroying both in himself and in his progeny
God’s image23 and the life of grace.80 In this condition of separa­
tion man was no longer holy.81 To return to his former state of
holiness in some manner or other he had to destroy sin and re­
cover grace.
Sometimes an attempt is made to draw a technical distinction
between justification and sanctification. In this sense justification
would involve the destruction of sin, and sanctification would be
restricted to the infusion of a new life. Actually, however, both
terms may be used synonymously,82 and it is in this sense that
Augustine employs them.88
As such the term sanctification can be applied not merely to the
destruction of sin and the concomitant infusion of a new life but
* De corrept. et gratia, 10, 28 (PML 44, 933) : “Quia vero per liberum
arbitrium Deum deseruit, justum judicium Dei expertus est, ut cum tota
sua stirpe, quae in illo adhuc posita tota cum illo peccaverat, damnaretur.”
•J. Burnaby, Amor Dei (London, 1938), p. 144. “The imago Trinitatis
in man has been deformed by turning away from God; its renewal, which
must be the work of grace, will be the re-direction or re-centering of the
soul’s trinity upon God instead of upon self. It is this reformation or re­
newal for which Christ is our example, and to which union with Christ
enables us, inasmuch as the grace of God culminates in the Incarnation.”
* De spir. et Utt., 27, 47 (CSEL 60, 201-202; PML 44, 229) : “qua gratia
in interiore homine renovato iustitia scribitur, quam culpa deleverat, et haec
misericordia super genus humanum per lesum Christum dominum nostrum.”
“ Γη Ps. 61, 21 (PML 36, 744) : “Ergo cum sis injustus, esse non potes
justus, nisi convertendo te ad quamdam justitiam manentem; a qua si
recedis, injustus es; ad quam si accedis, justus es.” De duabus animabus, 10
(CSEL 25 I, 65 ; PML 42, 102) : “etenim anima quamvis sit inmortalis,
tamen quia mors eius rite dicitur a dei cognitione aversio, cum se convertit
ad deum, meritum est aeternae vitae consequendae.”
” F. Prat, The Theology of St. Paul, trans, from the eleventh French
edition by John Stoddard (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1926), I, 171.
"In them justice is not simply a fiction, it is as real and as personal to them
as the sin which it replaces. It is not merely the prelude of a new life, and
as it were the negative side of a divine operation, of which sanctification
is the positive complement. It is the new life itself, and is indeed the same
thing as sanctification.”
“ St. Augustine speaks of the grace of sanctity being conferred in baptism
in Ps. 85, 4 (PML 37, 1084). Elsewhere» Op. imp. contra Jul., 2. 113 (PML
45, 1197), he says that justifying grace is given in the sacrament.

52

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

also to the whole work of the redemption. This broader concept entails a fuller consideration of man’s fall. The first and most important consequence of Adam’s sin against God is the resulting
enmity between the Creator and the creature.’4 This accounts for
Augustine’s reference to sin as an aversion from God86 and to
man as a child of wrath?® From this enmity arises man’s subjection both to Satan and to death?7 In the former case the subjec­
tion is primarily of the moral order and consists in the struggle
against illicit pleasure by man’s free will weakened through concupiscence?8 In the latter case the subjection belongs to the
physical order?0
MDe pecc. meritis, 2, 20, 34 (CSEL 60, 106 ; PML 44, 171) : "nec est iste
in filiis hominum quisquam nec fuit nec erit excepto uno mediatore, in quo
nobis propitiatio et iustificatio posita est, per quam finitis inimicitiis pecca­
torum reconciliemur deo."
* Contra Fortunat., 17 (CSEL 25 I, 93; PML 42, 119) : "peccando enim
aversi eramus a deo."
* De nat. et gratia, 3, 3 (CSEL 60, 235; PML 44, 249) : "si enim iam
sumus in Christo nova creatura, tamen eramus natura filii irae sicut et
ceteri."
”De Trin,, 13, 12, 16 (PML 42, 1026): "Quadam justitia Dei ίη po­
testatem diaboli traditum est genus humanum, peccato primi hominis in
omnes utriusque sexus commixtione nascentes originaliter transeunte, et
parentum primorum debito universos posteros obligante." Cf. J. Rivière, “Le
Dogme de la Rédemption chez Saint Augustin," Rev. Sc. Ret., VII (1927),
439. “Cette doctrine nous éclaire, en effet, sur la relation logique et, si l’on
peut dire, la proportion relative des conséquences funestes qu’entraîne la
défaillance originelle. La première et la plus grave est l’état de péché
qu’elle fait peser sur le genre humain ou, en d'autres termes, l'inimitié
divine qui atteint tout homme dès sa naissance. De cette inimitié l’assujettis­
sement au démon et la mort qui en est la principale forme dérivent à titre
de corollaires."
* Rivière, op. cit., p. 435. "Or, pour saint Augustin, notre captivité est
évidemment d’abord et surtout d’ordre moral. ‘Nous ne respirons plus,' expose
un des sermons déjà cités, ‘dans cette atmosphère de liberté (qui devrait
être la nôtre). Car nous ne jouissons pas de cette pure vérité et de cette
sagesse qui, demeurant en elle-même, renouvelle toutes choses (Sap., VU,
27). Nous sommes tentés par la délectation des biens temporels et nous
avons tous les jours à lutter contre les attraits du plaisir défendu. . . .’
D’un mot, c’est la concupiscence qui paralyse les énergies natives de notre
libre arbitre et en fausse la direction.”
* De pecc. meritis, 2, 34, 54 (CSEL 60, 124; PML 44, 185) : “unde
mirandum non est et mortem corporis non fuisse eventuram homini, nisi

’
h

1

j

|

i

î

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

53

It is by thus considering sanctification that Augustine can treat
under it man's liberation from Satan, the daily struggle against
concupiscence, and even the physical resurrection of the body in
the sense tint the return of man to his former state entails the
final victory of the body over death. For the same reason Augus­
tine also considers the infusion of a new life in man as necessarily
involving not only the restoration of God’s image and sonship but
also divine inhabitation.
Christ as Mediator, Redeemer, and Priest

Augustine reiterates the traditional Catholic teaching that man
himself unable to heal the breach separating him from God must
rely on the mediatorship of Christ.
*
0 This mediation is of a moral
order41 reconciling man to God through a remission of sin and
an infusion of grace.42 Christ’s title to mediator lies in the fact
that’ in the unity of His person He possesses both a divine and
praecessisset peccatum." Cf. Rivière, op. cit,, p. 435, ‘‘De plus, notre
captivité a aussi un aspect physique, qui est tout à la fois la suite et le
signe du précédent. Car le péché originel est la cause de notre mort, et. la
mort, d’après Hébr., Π, 14, nous met ‘sous l’empire' tout particulier ’dé­
démon. Voilà pourquoi celui-ci reçoit chez saint Augustin le titré 'dtf
praepositus mortis.'1
“ Con}., 7, 18, 24 (CSEL 33, 163; PML 32, 745): "Et quaerebam
”
conparandî roboris, quod esset idoneum ad fruendum le, nec inveniebam?
donec amplecterer mediatorem dei et hominum, hominem Christum lesum. ’
w

Cf. F. Cayré, Les Sources de l’Amour Divin (Paris, 1934), p. 156. “Tous
les hommes ont besoin d’un médiateur, cur ils sont tous victimes du péché
d’Adam ; l'intervention du Christ est nécessaire, d’autant qu’il est l’unique
médiateur.’’
u Epist. 140. 28, 68 (CSEL 44, 215; PML 33, 568): “per hoc enim
- mediator effectus est, ut nos reconciliet deo per humilitatem." Cf. J. Mohan,
De Nominibus Christi Doctrinam Divi Augustini Christologicam et Soteriologicam Exponentibus (Mundelein, 1936), p. 47. “Mediator noster igitur
in hunc mundum venit, ut removeret obstaculum quod nostram reconcilia­
tionem cum Deo impediebat. Atque in hoc munere reconciliationis Christus
exhibebat suam mediationem moralem.”
De spir. et liti., 6, 10 (CSEL 60, 162; PML 44, 206) : “nempe satis
elucet mysterio dominicae mortis et resurrectionis figuratum vitae nostrae
veteris occasum et exortum novae demonstratamque iniquitatis abolitionem
renovationemque iustitiae.”

54

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

human nature which enable Him to stand between the two ex­
tremes of man and God/® and to reconcile them in Himself.4*
Though the mediation is really an act of Christ's human nature,4®
it cannot be conceived as independent of the divine nature. Each
extreme necessarily involves the other. Christ is not a man-media­
tor without His divine nature, nor a God-mediator without His
human nature. Divinity without humanity is not a mediator, nor
is humanity without divinity a mediator, but between divinity alone
and humanity alone there is as mediator the human divinity and
the divine humanity of Christ.48
Many Greek Fathers preceding Augustine held that the work
of reconciliation or the sanctification of the human race was ac­
complished principally by the historic fact of the Incarnation—
God became man that men might become gods.47 That Augustine
“De cons, evang., 1, 35, 53 (CSEL 43, 59-60; PML 34, 1070) : “et quia
omnia quae in contrarium pergunt per aliquid medium redducuntur, ab
aeterna iustitia temporalis iniquitas nos alienabat, opus ergo erat media
iustitia temporali, quae medietas temporalis esset de imis, iusta de summis,
adque ita se nec abrumpens a summis et contemperans imis ima redderet
summis, ideo Christus mediator dei et hominum dictus est inter deum inmortalem et hominem mortalem deus et homo, reconcilians hominem deo,
maxiens id quo erat, factus quod non erat.”
“De etoct. christ., 1, 34, 38 (PML 34, 33) : “Ego sum via, et veritas,
et vita (Joan. XIV, 6) : hoc est, per me venitur, ad me pervenitur, in me
permanetur. Cum enim ad ipsum pervenitur, etiam ad Patrem pervenitur;
quia per aequalem ille cui est aequalis agnoscitur ; vinciente et tanquam ag­
glutinante nos Spiritu sancto, quo in summo atque incommutabili bono
permanere possimus.”
“De civ. Dei, 9, 15 (CSEL 40 I, 430; PML 41; 269) : "Nec tamen ob hoc
mediator est, quia Verbum . . . sed mediator, per quod homo.”
“Serm. 47, 12, 21 (PML 38, 310): "Inde et mediator Dei et hominum;
quia Deus cum Patre, quia homo cum hominibus. Non mediator homo
praeter deitatem; non mediator Deus praeter humanitatem. Ecce mediator;
Divinitas sine humanitate non est mediatrix, humanitas sine divinitate non
est mediatrix; sed inter divinitatem solam et humanitatem solam, mediatrix
est humana divinitas et divina humanitas Christi.”
«C. Van Crombrougghe, “La Doctrine Christologique et Sotériologique
de St. Augustin,” Rev. Hist. Ecci., V (1904), 479-481. “Un corps de doc­
trine sotériologique, dont on a d’abord en ces dernières années reconnu toute
importance, est connu sous le nom de théorie réalistico-mystique, à cause
du réalisme mystique, d’origine néo-platonicienne, dont elle s’inspire. La
formule, dont on se servait d’ordinaire pour l'exprimer : Dieu est devenu

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

55

was cognizant of this teaching is evidenced by his frequent use of
it.48 But the predominant idea in the Bishop of Hippo’s view of
reconciliation is Christ’s death,*
*9 and to it he subordinates the
sanctifying effect of Christ’s mediation. Christ’s unmerited death
has effaced sin and reconciled man to God.a° Therefore, in Christ
the office of mediator is identical with that of redeemer,51 and
homme pour que nous devenions divins comme lui, signifiait que l’oeuvre
rédemptrice est en grande partie accomplie par le fait historique de l’incar­
nation même. Celle-ci était regardée comme constituant par elle-même une
délivrance de la mort et d’une communication du divin a l’humanité tout
entière. Cétait peut-on dire une interprétation particulière et philosophique
de la doctrine plus générale exprimée par le symbole de foi Nicéo-Constantinopolitain.
Cette conception très en faveur auprès des Pères qui par leur formation
philosophique appartiennent à l’école d'Alexandrie, se rencontre également
chez l’évêque d’Hippone.”
** Episl. 140, 4, 10 (CSEL 44. 162; PML 33, 542) : “descendit ergo ille,
ut nos ascenderemus, et manens in sua natura factus est particeps naturae
nostrae, ut et nos manentes in natura nostra efficeremur particeps naturae
ipsius.” In Jo. Ev., Tr. 12, 3, 8 (PML 35, 1488) : “Deus voluit esse filius
hominis, et homines voluit esse filios Dei. Ipse descendit propter nos, nos
ascendamus propter ipsum.” De Trin., 4, 2, 4 (PML 42, 889) : “Adjungens
ergo nobis similitudinem humanitatis suae, abstulit dissimilitudinem in­
iquitatis nostrae: et factus particeps mortalitatis nostrae, fecit nos participes
divinitatis suae.”
• Contra Faust., 14, 4 (CSEL 25 I, 406; PML 42, 297) : “suscepit autem
Christus sine reatu subplicium nostrum, ut inde solveret reatum nostrum et
finiret etiam subplicium nostrum.” Contra Juk, 2, 4, 8 (PML 44, 678) :
“Christi enim caro, quod adjungit Ambrosius, damnavit peccatum, quod
nascendo non sensit, quod moriendo crucifixit', nascendo non sensit in se,
moriendo crucifixit in nobis.”
*° Rivière, op. cit., p. 257. “Ainsi doue Augustin reconnaît à la mort du
Sauveur une valeur salutaire et une valeur pénale. A y regarder de près,
on voit même que la première, pour lui, est subordonnée à la seconde: s’il ne
l’a pas formellement érigé en thèse, sa pensée ne s'en dégage pas moins à
force de retouches successives. Si Jésus Christ par sa mort efface les péchés
et nous réconcilie avec Dieu, c’est que cette mort imméritée a payé notre dette.
C’est tout le fond de la satisfactio vicaria: pas plus que les autres Pères,
saint Augustin n’en dégage pas encore les derniers fondements; maïs, d'une
manière incontestable, il en affirme le fait.”
“ De civ. Dei, 9, 15 (CSEL 40 I, 429; PML 41, 268) : “quoniam ipse est
fructus mediationis eius, ut nec ipsi, propter quos liberandos mediator ef­
fectus est, in perpetua vel carnis morte remanerent.” Cf. Mohan, op. cit.,

56

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

Christ becomes man's redemption and sanctification (I Cor.
1:30).62
Still another function of Christ must be added to His role as
mediator and redeemer. It is as priest that Christ offers Himself
as a redemptive sacrifice08 to reconcile man to God by destroying
sin.8* Since Augustine.expressly states that the purpose of Christ’s
priesthood is the sanctification of souls/8 then the sanctification
pp. 50-51. “Eo quod Christus est Mediator noster, sponte quoque infertur
Ipsum esse etiam Redemptorem nostrum. Non autem semper verum est
Mediatorem esse Redemptorem. Nam mediatio est reconciliatio duorum
extremorum, redemptio autem seu satisfactio est utique reconciliatio sed
una cum solutione alicujus debiti. Quis igitur possit esset mediator, quin sit
et redemptor. In reconciliatione autem hominum ad Deum fuit quoque
debitum solvendum. Quo utroque munere Christus unica actione fungitur
quia solvendo debitum peccatorum nostrorum nos reconciliavit Patri. Qua­
propter in hoc casu Christi satisfactio necessario eadem est ac ejus
mediatio.”
68 Op. imp. contra Jul., 1, 140 (PML 45, 1139) : “unde factus est ipse, qui
jactus est nobis sapientia a Deo, et justitia, et sanctificatio, et redemptio."
88 De Trin., 4, 14, 19 (PML 42, 901) : “Ut quoniam quatuor considerantur
in omni sacrificio; cui offeratur, a quo offeratur, quid offeratur, pro quibus
offeratur ; idem ipse unus verusque Mediator, per sacrificium pacis recon­
cilians nos Deo, unum cum illo maneret cui offerebat, unum in se faceret
pro quibus offerebat, unus ipse esset qui offerebat, et quod offerebat.” Cf.
Cayré, op. cit., p. 159. “C’est comme prêtre que le Christ a exercé Ia
médiation entre Dieu et l’homme, en supprimant le péché, vrai ‘mur de
séparation.’ ”
M Contra dues epist. Pelag., 3, 6, 16 (CSEL 60, 505; PML 44, 600) : “ut
ipsam similitudinem carnis peccati voluisse intellegatur apostolus appellare
peccatum, sive quia sacrificia pro peccatis peccata appellabantur in lege,
quae omnia figurae fuerunt carnis Christi, quod est verum et unicum
sacrificium pro peccatis non solum his, quae universa in baptismate diluuntur,
verum etiam his, quae post ex huius vitae infirmitate subrepunt.” Cf. Cayré,
op. cit., p. 159. “Il est venu dans la chair du péché (Rom., VIII, 3), mais
qui n’était pas la chair du péché, n’étant souillé par aucune faute. Ainsi, il
est devenu le vrai sacrifice pour le péché, car il n’avait pas lui-même le
moindre péché.”
“ Contra Faust., 19, 31 (CSEL 25 I, 535; PML 42, 370) : “quem regem
ad regendos et sacerdotem ad sanctificandos fideles suos universus ille
adparatus veteris instrumenti in generationibus, factis, dictis, sacrificiis,
observationibus, festivitatibus omnibusque eloquiorum praeconiis et rebus
gestis et rerum figuris parturiebat esse venturum.”

L

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

57

entailed in this priestly sacrifice of Christ must be considered as
involving His work as mediator and redeemer. This vindicates the
use of sanctification as a synonym for justification in so far as
both terms refer to the entire work of the redemption.
Such a view of sanctification is variously characterized by
Augustine as he considers the effects of original sin in their
manifold nuances. In so far as the enmity between God and man
is destroyed sanctification is reconciliation.58 When it is a ques­
tion of moral release from the power of Satan, sanctification· is
liberation5T or redemption, and Christ is the Redeemer58 and
Savior.58 Since through original sin human nature was defiled80
and wounded,81 sanctification involves Christ as Physician82 in the
acts of cleansing83 healing,84 and mending85 together with the
"De pecc. meritis, 2, 20, 34 (CSEL 60, 106; PML 44, 171): "nec est
iste in filiis hominum quisquam nec fuit nec erit excepto uno mediatore,
in quo nobis propitiatio et iustificatio posita est, per quam finitis inimicitiis
peccatorum reconciliemur deo.”
Contra Felic., 2, 16 (CSEL 25 II, 845; PML 42, 546): “eam rem
mundavit, quae pollui poterat, eam rem liberavit, quae captivari poterat.”
"In Ps. 95, 5 (PML 37, ,1231): “Tenebantur enim homines captivi sub
diabolo, et daemonibus serviebant; sed redempti sunt a captivitate. Vendere
se potuerunt, sed redimere non potuerunt. Venit Redemptor, et dedit pretium ;
fudit sanguinem suum, emit orbem terrarum.”
"Contra Faust,, 2, 4 (CSEL 25 I, 257; PML 42, 211): “quapropter
dominus et salvator noster lesus Christus.”
"Contra Felic., 2, 16 (CSEL 25 II, 845; PML 42, 546): “Christus non
partem dei, non naturam dei liberavit, sed facturam, quam fecit, in peccatum
cadentem per liberum arbitrium sua misericordia liberavit, eam rem mun­
davit, quae pollui poterat.”
01 De nat. et gratia, 53, 62 (CSEL 60, 279; PML 44, 277) : “quid tantum
de naturae possibilitate praesumitur? vulnerata, sauciata, vexata, perdita est.”
"In Ps. 35, 17 (PML 36, 353) : “Medicus enim erat, et phreneticum
curare venerat.”
"De perf. iust. hominis, 15, 34 (CSEL 42, 35; PML 44, 310): “hoc
prorsus agitur, ut cor mundetur et peccatum omne tollatur.”
84De ag. chr., 10, 11 (CSEL 41, 113; PML 40, 297) : “nam si nobiscum
fatentur naturam nostram non sanari nisi recte faciendo.”
"Contra Faust., 2, 4 (CSEL 25 I, 257; PML 42, 211) : “ut et dei filius
verus esset, per quem facti sumus, et hominis filius verus fieret, per quem
refecti sumus.”

58

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

actions of renewing,00 giving life,07 and justifying.08 Finally, sanc­
tification also implies the future resurrection of the body.08

Christ the Head of His Body
Augustine only arrives at the complete picture of sanctification
by joining to the reconciliation of man to God through Christ's
action as Mediator, Redeemer, and Priest the work of Christ
sanctifying the faithful as a continuous active principle of a new
life.70 This he portrays by comparing Christ and the faithful to a
body in which Christ is the Head and the faithful the members.
Just as Adam, the physical Head of the human race, imparts to his
offspring death and sin, so Christ becomes the spiritual Head of all
those who reborn in Him receive a new life of grace and a re­
mission of sin.7x Though Augustine does hold that Christ was
” Ibid., 6, 9 (CSEL 25 I, 300; PML 42, 237) : “sed in spe futuri saeculi,
quam habemus in Christo, qui et animam nostram induens iustitia et corpus
nostrum induens inmortalitate totos nos innovat.” Ibid., 2, 4 (CSEL 25 I,
257; PML 42, 211) : “ut et dei filius verus esset, per quem facti sumus, et
hominis filius verus fieret, per quem refecti sumus.”
97De Gen. contra Man., 2, 8, 10 (PML 34, 201): “id est Dominum
nostrum Jesum Christum, qui peccatum non fecit (I Petr. II, 22) ; et ab
illo recreati et vivificati, restituamur in paradisum,”
* De nat. boni, 31 (PML 42, 561) : “multo magis nunc Justificati in
sanguine ipsius."
“ Enchiridion, 108, 28 (PML 40, 283) : “reconciliari nos oportebat Deo
usque ad carnis resurrectionem in vitam aeternam.” The place of the resur­
rection of the body in the question of sanctification will be treated in
Chapter III under “Divine Inhabitation.”
™ K. Adam, S7. Augustine, the Odyssey of His Soul, trans. Doni Justin
McCann (London: Sheed and Ward. 1932), p. 150. “But the redemptive
activity of Christ is not confined to this work of the atonement. The dynamic
character of Augustine’s view is especially plain in his doctrine that Christ
manifests himself as the continuous active principle of the new life.” Cf. M.
del Rio, “El Cristo Mistico Y La Comunîon De Los Santos, Segun San
Augustin,” Ret. Y Cult., XV (1931), p. 422. “El Cristo natural nds rescata,
el Cristo mistico nos sanctifica ; el Cristo natural rnurio pro nosotros, el Cristo
mistico vive en nosotros ; el Cristo natural nos recomienda con su Padre,
el Cristo mistico nos unifica en él. En una palabra: el Cristo mistico es la
Iglesia que a la vez que completa a su Cabeza es completada por ella.”
71 De grat. Christi (De pecc. orig.), 2, 26, 31 (CSEL 42, 191; PML 44,
401) : “ideo et ipsis caput esse Christum, quia unus mediator est dei
et hominum homo Christus lesus?” In epist. Jo. ad Parthos, Tr. 4, 11 (PML

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

59

constituted Head of the human race in His Incarnation/2 in this
matter he more frequently mentions Christ’s death as the pledge
of this new relationship.73
In a human body though the head and members must be viewed
as separate entities, they constitute a single person. It is the same
with Christ and the members of His Body.74 Christ and His mem-35
35, 2011) : “Ergo duas nativitates attendite, fratres, Adam et Christum: duo
sunt homines ; sed unus ipsorum homo homo, alter ipsorum homo Deus. Per
hominem hominem, peccatores sumus : per hominem Deum justificamur.
Nativitas illa dejecit ad mortem; ista nativitas erexit ad vitam: nativitas
illa trahit secum peccatum; nativitas ista liberat a peccato. Ideo enim venit
Christus homo, ut solveret peccata hominum. In hoc manifestatus est Filius
Dei, ut solvat opera diaboli." Cf. É. Mersch, Le Corps Mystique Du Christ
(2d ed. ; Bruxelles, 1936), II, p, 68. “Considérons d’abord le premier
homme, tel qu’Augustin nous le montre. Adam, dit-il, c’est toute l’humanité.
Tous les hommes sont Adam, et Adam, c’est tous. En lui, ils ont tous
désobéi, et lui est en eux, les rendant pécheurs. Car la vie, en définitive,
ils la tiennent de lui, souillée donc en sa première origine ; souillée encore
par la concupiscence dans laquelle ils l’ont reçue ; souillée enfin par les fautes
qu’eux-mêmes ont commises en obéissant à cette même concupiscence. Dès
leur naissance donc, ou plutôt; par leur naissance, ils sont rendu indignes du
bonheur éternel, en Adam, leur premier père.” Ibid., p. 69. “Mais Dieu a
pris pitié d’elle. A la solidarité dans le mal, il a décidé de remédier par une
oeuvre opposée, une oeuvre de solidarité, elle aussi, mais de solidarité dans
le bien. Sa bonté toute gratuite a donc choisi, dans la masse maudite et
condamnée, un certain nombre d’élus, pour en constituer une autre masse,
la masse sainte et immaculée, la masse des prédestinés. Or cette masse,
telle qu’Augustin la décrit, n’est autre chose que le corps mystique du
Sauveur, considéré dans son aspect intérieur.”
eIn Ps. 118, Serm. 19, 6 (PML 37, 1556): “Quia factus est particeps
mortalitatis nostrae, ut et nos participes divinitatis ipsius fieremus.”
”In Ps. 118 Scrm. 19, 6 (PML 37, 1556): “Quia factus est particeps
mortalitatis nostrae, ut et nos participes divinitatis ipsius fierimus; nos unius
participes ad vitam, ad mortem vero particeps ille multorum.” Serm. 231,
5, 5 (PML 38, 1107): “Tenete pignus mortem meam.” Cf. Van Crombrugghe, op.-cit., p. 495. “c’est à cause de sa mort que le genre humaine est
rentré en grâce avec Dieu. Cet enseignement est supposé dans l’idée de
l’union mystique du Christ avec les fidèles, ainsi que dans celle de la satis-1
faction vicaire."
" De pecc. ntfiritis, 1, 31, 60 (CSEL 60, 61; PML 44, 145): “sic et
apostolus ait: sicut in uno corpore multa membra habemus, omnia autem
membra corporis, cum sint multa, unum est corpus, ita et Christus.”

60

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

bers are distinct, yet they form a single person.78 The members
not only belong to Christ, they are Christ.7” To illustrate the type
of union here represented Augustine quotes Christ’s priestly
prayer : That all may be one, even as thou, Father, in me and I in
thee; that they also may be one in us, that the world may believe
that thou hast sent me. And the glory that thou hast given me, I
have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one
(John 17: 20-22). From this he deduces that just as the Father
and Son are one both in equality of substance and in will, so the
union between Christ and His members is based not only on the
human nature shared in common but also on a union of wills or
of love.77
™In Ps 54, 3 (PML 36, 629) : “Christus autem ... et caput et corpus
est: nec nos a Christo alienos dicere debemus, cujus membra sumus, nec
nos quasi alterum computare; quia erunt duo in carne una." Cf. Mersch,
op. cit., p. 90. “Cette union est si étroite qu’elle fait de nous le Christ luimême, le Christ mystique.”
™ In Ps, 26, En. 2, 2 (PML 36, 200) : “et omnes in illo et Christi et
Christus sumus, quia quodammodo totus Christus caput et corpus est.” Cf.
Mersch, op. cit., pp. 86-88. “Il dit et redit à tout instant que le Christ et
ΓÉglise ne font qu’une seule chose, une seule âme, un seul homme, une seule
personne, un seul juste, un seul Christ, un seul Fils de Dieu. Le Christ
entier, ce n’est donc pas le Sauveur tout seul, c’est la tête unie aux membres,
le Christ uni a ΓÉglise. Les membres du Christ ne font qu’un avec lui, il
est eux et ils sont lui : tous ensemble, repris en son unité, ne font devant
Dieu qu’un seul Fils bien-aimé.”
11 De Trin., 4, 8, 12; 4, 9, 12 (PML 42, 896) : “ut omnes unum sint, sicut
tu Pater in me, et ego in te, ut et ipsi in nobis unum sint; ut mundus credat,
quia tu
misisti. Et ego claritatem quam dedisti mihi, dedi eis, ut iinfi
unum, sicut et nos unum sumus {Joan. XVII, 20-22).
Non dixit, Ego et ipsi unum; quamvis per id quod Ecclesiae caput est et
corpus ejus Ecclesia {Ephes. I, 22, 23), possit dicere, Ego et ipsi, non unum,
sed unus, quia caput et corpus unus est Christus : sed divinitatem suam con­
substantialem Patri ostendens ... in suo genere, hoc est, in ejusdem na­
turae consubstantiali parilitate, vult esse suos unum, sed in ipso . . . non
tantum per eamdem naturam qua omnes ex hominibus mortalibus aequales
Angelis fiunt, sed etiam per eamdem in eamdem -beatitudinem conspirantem
concordissimam voluntatem, in unum spiritum quodam modo igne charitatis
conflatam.” Cf. Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, New English Translation Pro­
vided by the Vatican (Washington, D. C.: NCWC, 1943), pp. 26-27. “Here,
Venerable Brethren, We wish to speak in a very special way of our union

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

61

It is precisely in view of this unity between Head and mem­
bers that the faithful participate not only in the sanctifying action
of Christ’s redemption but also in Christ’s personal sanctity.*
78
As Head of the human race Christ became obedient to the death
of the Cross for no other reason than to vivify, save, redeem,
free, and illumine by the giving of His grace the members of His
Body.79 But Augustine does not stop here; he carries the analogy
to its fullest extent. Since Head and members are one Body, then
what the Church suffers Christ suffers in it. The members also
share in the death and resurrection of the Head, and the life of
Christ becomes the life of the Christian.80
with Christ in the Body of the Church, a thing which is, as Augustine
justly remarks, sublime, mysterious and divine; but for that very reason it
often happens that many misunderstand it and explain it incorrectly. It is
at once evident that this union is very close. In the Sacred Scriptures it is
compared to the chaste union of man and wife, to the vital union of branch
and vine, and to the cohesion found in our body. Even more, it is repre­
sented as being so close that the Apostle says: ‘He (Christ) is Head of the
Body of the Church,’ and the unbroken tradition of the Fathers from the
earliest times teaches that the Divine Redeemer and the Society which is
His Body form but one mystical person, that is to say, to quote Augustine,
the whole Christ. Our Saviour Himself in His sacerdotal prayer did not
hesitate to liken this union to that wonderful unity by which the Son is in
the Father, and the Father in the Son."
78 Mersch, op. cit., p. 121. “C’est au contraire, parce que le Christ de­
meure un, que les fidèles, repris dans son unité, participent à sa sainteté."
Cf. Pius XI, Mortalium animos (Washington, D. C. : NCWC, 1928), p. 15.
“Since the Mystical Body of Christ, that is to say, the Church, is, like the
physical body, a unity, a compact thing closely joined together, it would be
false and foolish to say that Christ’s Mystical Body could be composed of
separated and scattered members. Whoever, therefore, is not united with it
is not a member of it nor does he communicate with its Head Who is Christ.”
“ 78 De pecc. meritis, 1, 26, 39 (CSEL 60, 37; PML 44, 131): "quibus
appareat dominum lesum Christum non aliam oh causam in came venisse
ac forma servi accepta factum oboedientem usque ad mortem crucis, nisi
ut hac dispensatione misericordissimae gratiae omnes, quibus tamquam mem­
bris in suo corpore constitutis caput est ad capessendum regnum caelorum,
vivificaret, salvos faceret, liberaret, redimeret, inluminaret.”
“In Pj. 62, 2 (PML 36, 749) : "quidquid patitur Ecclesia ipsius in tri­
bulationibus hujus saeculi, in tentationibus, in necessitatibus, in angustiis . . .
ipse patitur. ... Si ergo in illo mortui sumus, et in illo resurreximus, et

62

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

The communication of Christ’s life or sanctity may be conceived
with reference either to the entire Body or to the individual mem­
bers. The first type is corporate sanctity and is represented by
Christ the Head choosing the Church as His Body. The second
is individual sanctity resulting from the infusion of grace by
Christ the Head into the individual member.

The Sanctity of Christ
To understand the participation of the members in the sanctity
of the Head, it is necessary first to determine Christ’s sanctity.
In sanctifying man Christ appears as mediator, redeemer, and
priest. Each office demands in Him a super-eminent sanctity. Be­
cause Christ alone came in this flesh without sin, He alone could
mediate between God and man.81 In view of His mission as re­
deemer Christ was also free from sin,82 If sin were in Christ,
He could not heal in man’s nature an evil existing in His own.88
The purity of the priest was also a necessary condition for sacfice.84 Since a sinner could offer nothing pure, Christ offered Him­
self as an immaculate oblation and victim.88 It was fitting that
ipse in nobis moritur, et in nobis resurgit (ipse est enim unitas capitis et
corporis).” Cf. Adam, op, cit., pp. 49-50. “When the Christian is incor­
porated in him by faith and love, he obtains a share in his life, death and
resurrection. ‘He is the Head, we are the body ; what he has suffered in his
own person, that we have also suffered in him.’ . . . The essential point
for him was the certainty that the Head of the Body lived and suffered,
died and rose again for his members, and in that way redeemed them from
the guilt of sin.”
“Enchiridion, 108, 28 (PML 40, 282-283) : “Cum vero genus humanum
peccata longe separaverunt a Deo, per Mediatorem, qui solus sine peccato
natus est, vixit, occisus est, reconciliari nos oportebat Deo.”
“Zn epist. Jo. ad Parthos, Tr. 4, 2, 8 (PML 35, 2010) : “In quo non est
peccatum, ipse venit auferre peccatum. Nam si esset et in illo peccatum,
auferendum esset illi, non ipse auferret.”
" Contra Jul., 5, 15, 58 (PML 44, 816): “Hoc autem quod non est
bonum Christus in natura si haberet sua, non sanaret in nostra.”
84 Cayré, op, cit., p. 159. “Cette pureté du prêtre n’est qu’une des condi­
tions du sacrifice agréable à Dieu, mais à cette qualité les autres sont inti­
mement liées dans le Christ, qui les réalise toutes à la perfection.”
“ In Ps. 149, 6 (PML 37, 1953): “Nihil mundum invenit in hominibus,
quod offerret pro hominibus, seipsum obtulit mundam victimam. Felix vic­
tima, vera victima, hostia immaculata 1”

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

63

there should be such a high priest: holy, innocent, undefiled, set
apart from sinners, become higher than the heavens, who did not
need to offer sacrifice daily, as other priests, first for His own
sins.88
If the Incarnation was motivated by the redemption of man
from sin,87 it must be admitted that Christ’s sanctity in the Incar­
nation was motivated by the same redemption. In other words, to
sanctify man Christ Himself had. to be holy, since His sanctity
had as its purpose the breaking of the power of sin.88
When the Fathers of the Church allude to Christ as being
anointed, they are referring to His sanctification, since they use
these two terms synonymously. Throughout their writings they
distinguish between an anointing of Christ’s human nature by the
divinity itself and by grace. The scholastic terminology generally
applied to this distinction regards the first type of anointing as
Christ’s substantial sanctification and the second as His accidental
*“ De pecc. mVritis, 2, 13, 19 (CSEL 60, 91 ; PML 44, 163) : “talem enim
decebat, inquit, habere nos principem sacerdotum, iustum, sine malitia, in­
contaminatum, separatum a peccatoribus, altiorem a caelis factum, non ha­
bentem cotidianum necessitatem sicut princeps sacerdotum primum pro suis
peccatis sacrificium offerre.” Cf. Mohan, op. cit., p, 61. “Iterum Domini
nostri sanctitatem explicat S. Augustinus cum declarat sacrificium rite of­
ferri posse a sacerdote justo et sancto dumtaxat, ut et homines vitiosos hoc
vero sacrificio mundentur, Christus enim solus est ille sanctus et justus
sacerdos, quia ei non opus est ut offerrat prius sacrificium pro peccatis
propriis.”
" Enchiridion, 108, 28 (PML 40, 282-283) : “Sed cum factus est Adam,
homo scilicet rectus, mediatore non opus erat. Cum vero genus humanum
peccata longe separaverunt a Deo, per Mediatorem, qui solus sine peccato
natus est, vixit, occisus est, reconciliari nos oportebat Deo usque ad carnis
resurrectionem in vitam aeternam,”
“ Op. imp. contra Jul., 4, 134 (PML 45, 1429) : "quando ipsum Christum
non discernitis a carne peccati, nullamque carnem dicentes originaliter esse
peccati, sic illum caeteris coaequatis, ut etiam ipsum habuisse genuinam ne­
gare cogamini sanctitatem, qui natus est de Spiritu sancto et virgine Maria,
expers ommino delicti, quia expers illius conceptionis quae commixtione fit
sexuum? Quia et Jeremias et Joannes, quamvis sanctificat! in uteris matrum,
traxerunt tamen originale peccatum. . . , Erant ergo illi et natura filii irae
ab uteris matrum, et gratia filii misericordiae ab uteris matrum ; quia nec
illa eis adhuc inerat sanctitas, quae vinculum solveret successionis obnoxiae
quod suo tempore solvi oportebat.”

64

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

sanctification.88 In the works of Augustine examples of this double
sanctification are also found.
Christ’s substantial sanctification by uncreated grace.—Augus­
tine explains this sanctification through the hypostatic union of
the two natures in the one divine Person, Since the divine Son is
holy with the holiness of God, then Christ’s human nature is sanc­
tified in that Person, or it shares in the sanctity of the divine
Word.90
Though Augustine attributes this sanctification to the Second
Person of the Trinity, yet elsewhere he also mentions that God is
anointed by God and receives the name of Christ.91 If this text is
& Collegii Sahnanticensis Cursus Theologicus, XIV, “De Incarnatione.”
(1879), p. 324. “Dicendum est humanitatem Christi ex vi unionis hyposta­
ticae ad personam divinam sanctificatum fuisse formaliter per aliquod sub­
stantiale. . . . Principium hujus assertionis fundamentum desumitur ex testi­
moniis SS. Patrum,, apud quos idem est aliquem esse unctum, sive esse
Christum, ac esse sanctum : apud eosdem etiam Christus Dominus dicitur
singulariter unctus oleo, et delibutus unguento divinitatis. Ex quibus prin­
cipiis, satis liquido infertur quod juxta illorum sententiam Christus Dominus
fuerit sanctus sanctitate substantiali, et independenter a sanctitate accidentali,
qua puri homines justi sancti constituuntur, et appellantur.” Cf. E. Hugon,
Le Mystère de l'incarnation (Paris: 1913), p. 211. “Le Sauveur est oint
par l’union hypostatique, par le don même de la personne du Verbe. Or,
dans le language sacré, oint et Christ designent celui qui est l’objet des
complaisances divines, qui possède la vraie sainteté, cette justice intérieure,
seule beauté qui plaît a Dieu.”
90 In Jo. Ev., Tr. 108, 5 (PML 35, 1916): “Verbum illud in principio
Deus? In quo et‘ipse filius hominis sanctificatus est ab initio creationis suae,
quando Verbum factum est caro; quia una persona facta est Verbum et
homo. Tunc ergo sanctificavit se în se, hoc est hominem se in Verbo se;
quia unus Christus Verbum et homo, sanctificans hominem in Verbo.” The
principle behind this communication is expressed by the following text
Serm. 214, 7 (PML 38, 1069) : “Cum sit enim totus Filius Dei unicus
Dominus noster Jesus Christus Verbum et homo, atque ut expressius dicam,
Verbum, anima, et caro; ad totum refertur quod in sola anima tristis fuit
usque ad mortem (Matth., XXVI, 38) ; quia Filius Dei unicus Jesus
Christus tristis fuit: ad totum refertur quod in solo homine crucifixus est,
quoniam Filius Dei unicus Jesus Christus crucifixus est : ad totum refertur
quod in sola carne sepultus est.”
“ Contra Faust., 13, 7 (CSEL 25 I, 386; PML 42, 286): “illum itidem
psalmum, ubi deus unctus a deo dicitur et utique Christus ipsa unctione
declaratur.” De praedest. sanet., 16, 33 (PML 44, 984) : "Domine, tu es

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

»

65

taken as representing consecration by the Trinity, in conjunction
with - the preceding text it gives an example of appropriation in
the sanctification of Christ’s human nature. The Second -Person
communicates His own sanctity to His human nature, yet the
Trinity also cooperates in this sanctification.®2
Christ’s accidental sanctification by created grace.—Christ’s ac­
cidental sanctity is due to the Holy Spirit.®3 This reception of·
the Holy Spirit by Christ is again compared to an anointing,
but in this case it is not an anointing of His human nature by
the uncreated grace of union but .by created grace. This sanctifi­
cation took place at the time of the Incarnation and was entirely
gratuitous.8*
qui fecisli coelum et terram. . . . Convenerunt enim . . . adversus sanctum
puerum tuum Jesum quem unxisti.”
*· In the Incarnation though the Word alone communicated His personality
to Christ’s humanity, yet the Trinity effected this union. Cf. De Trin., 2,
10, 18 (PML 42, 857) : “humanam illam formam ex Virgine Maria Trini­
tas operata est, sed solius Filii persona est; visibilem namque Filii solius
personam, invisibilis Trinitas operata est.” It would seem then that the
Trinity would also have a part in sanctifying Christ’s human nature. Cf.
E. Portalié, “Augustin,” DTC, I, (1909), 2348, “Un autre progrès de la
théorie trinitaire d’Augustin, c’est l’insistence à faire de toute opération
divine ad extra l’oeuvre indistincte des trois personnes. Seulement comme
chaque personne possède la nature divine particulière, on attribue à chacune
d’elles dans les opérations extérieures le rôle qui convient au caractère
de son origine: simple appropriation, diront les latins après Augustin.”
Augustine explicitly states that God created Christ sinless. Contra Jul., 2,
4, 8 (PML 44, 678) : “Sed Deus qui genuit Filium sibi coaeternum, quod
in principio Verbum erat, per quod creavit omne quod non erat, etiam ipsum
creavit hominem sine vitio.” Patristic teaching makes mention of an
anointing both by the Trinity—St. Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres., 3, 18, 3 (PMG 7,
934), and by the Word—St. Gregory Naz., Orat., 30, 21 (PMG 36, 131).
* Serm. 214, 6 (PML 38, 1069) : “ideo dicitur natus de Spiritu Sancto
et virgine Maria : ut unum eorum pertineat, non ad gignentem, sed ad
sanctificantem, alterum vero ad concipientem atque parientem. Propterea,
inquit, quod nascetur ex te Sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei. Quia Sanctum,
ideo de Spiritu sancto; quia nascetur ex te, ideo de virgine Maria, quia
Filius Del, ideo Verbum caro factum est (Joan. I, 14).”
wDe Trin., 15, 26, 46 (PML 42, 1093-1094) : “Dominus ipse Jesus Spiri­
tum. sanctum non solum dedit ut Deus, sed etiam accepit ut homo; prop­
terea dictus est plenus gratia (/οαη. I, 14) et Spiritu Sancto (Lue., XI, 52,

66

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

The created grace of Christ does not differ specifically from
the grace which justifies man.85 The difference is a matter of de­
gree only, in so far as Christ receives the grace in its fulness and
man in varying proportions.89 From this one may conclude that
Christ’s accidental sanctity resulting from this grace is not spe­
cifically different from human sanctity. It does, however, surpass
human sanctity and is the greatest possible.8T
The Impeccability of Christ.—In the sanctification of fallen
humanity there is presupposed a change from injustice to justice,88
and there is always the possibility that the acquired holiness may

et IV, 1). Et manifestius de illo scriptum est in Actibus Apostolorum:
Quoniam unxit eum Deus Spiritu sancto (Act. X, 38). Non utique oleo
visibili, sed dono gratiae, quod visibili significatur unguento quo baptizatos
ungit Ecclesia. Nec sane tunc unctus est Christus Spiritu sancto, quando
super eum baptizatum velut columba descendit (Maith. III, 16) : tunc enim
corpus suum, id est, Ecclesiam suam praefigurare dignatus est, in qua
praecipue baptizati accipiunt Spiritum sanctum: sed ista mystica et invisibili
unctione tunc intelligendus est unctus, quando Verbum Dei caro factum est
(Joan. I, 14) ; id est, quando humana natura sine ullis praecedentibus bo­
norum operum meritis Deo Verbo est in utero virginis copulata, ita ut cum
illo fieret una persona.”
” De praedest. sanet., 15, 31 (PML 44, 982) ; “Ea gratia fit ab initio fidei
suae homo quicumque Christianus, qua gratia homo ille ab initio suo factus
est Christus.”
“De grat. ei lib. arb., 9, 21 (PML 44, 893) : “Nos autem ex plenitudine
ejus accepimus, et gratiam pro gratia (Joan. I, 16). Ex ejus itaque pleni­
tudine accepimus pro modulo nostro tanquam particulas nostras ut bene
vivamus, sicut Deus partitus est mensuram fidei (Rom. XII, 3).” In Jo. Ev.,
Tr. 14, 10 (PML 35, 1508-1509) : “Hominibus ad mensuram dat, unico
Filio non dat ad mensuram. . . . Sed Christus qui dat, non ad mensuram
accipit.” St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, III, 7, 11 c, and ad 1 m, with ref­
erence to this text of St· Augustine speaks of the infinity of Christ’s habitual
grace, not absolutely but in the sense that this grace cannot be limited in
Christ. In so far as it is created it is finite.
™ Op. imp. contra Jul., 6, 23 (PML 45, 1557) : “sicut in Christo justitiae
formam non primam esse, sed maximam, quia fuerunt justi et ante ipsum.”
* De corrept. et gratia, 11, 30 (PML 44, 935): “Per hunc Mediatorem
Deus ostendit eos, quos ejus sanguine redemit, facere se ex malis deinceps
in aeternum bonos, quem sic suscepit, ut nunquam esset malus, nec ex malo
factus semper esset bonus.”

i

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

67

be lost.00 Because Christ’s human and divine natures are hypostatically united in the divine Person,*
100 Christ’s substantial holi­
ness not only cannot be lost,101 but it does not even admit the
possibility of antecedent or subsequent sin.102* Consequently one
must also conclude that Christ’s accidental holiness cannot be
soiled by sin.108 Indeed Christ’s impeccability is a consequence
of this double sanctification.104*
De praedest. sanct., 14, 26 (PML 44, 979) : “Item si dixerit, justum, si
a sua justitia recesserit, in qua diu vixit, et in ea fuerit impietate defunctus, in
qua, non dico unum annum, sed unum diem vixerit, in poenas iniquis debitas
hic iturum, nihil sibi sua praeterita justitia profutura.”
100 De ag. chr., 20, 22 (CSEL 41, 123; PML 40, 302): “de ceteris enim
sapientibus et spiritalibus animis recte dici potest, quod habeant in se ver­
bum dei, per quod facta sunt omnia ; sed in nullo eorum recte dici potest,
quod verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis, quod in solo domino
nostro lesu Christo rectissime dicitur.” Cf. Van Crombrugghe, op. cit.,
p. 246. "il arrive à établir que le Christ n'est pas seulement théophore,
comme les saints, mais constitue réellement ‘un être’ avec le Verbe.”
101 Contra Faust., 16, 15 (CSEL 25 I, 456; PML 42, 325): “dissimilis
peccatori Christus, quia semper sanctus.”
Mohan, op. cit., p. 41. “Neque proprium commisit peccatum, uti facile
patet, quia ejus sanctitas ex conjunctione ineffabili cum verbo in unitate
personae hoc praecludit. Absentia hujus duplicis generis peccati in Domino
Jesu optime exponitur per nomen Peccati. Nulla igitur voluptate carnalis
cpncupiscentiae seminatus sive conceptus, et ideo nullum peccatum originali­
ter trahens ; Dei quoque gratia Verbo Patri unigenito, non gratia Filio, sed
natura, in unitate personae modo mirabili et ineffabili adjunctus atque con­
cretus, et ideo nullum peccatum et ipse committens, tamen propter similitudi­
nem carnis peccati in qua venerat (Rom 8:3). dictus est et ipse peccatum.
Enchiridion 41, 13 (PML 40, 252-253). Cf. Op. imp. contra Jul., 6, 22
(PML 45, 1553). Ideo Adam primus ille, secundus iste; quia sine carnis
concupiscentia factus ille, natus iste: sed ille tantum homo, iste vero et
Deus et homo: et ideo ille potuit non peccare, non sicut iste peccare non
potuit.”
108 De praedest. sanet., 15, 31 (PML 44, 892) : “eodem Spiritu fit in nobis
remissio peccatorum, quo Spiritu factum est ut nullum haberet ille peccatum.”
104 Petavius, Theologica Dogmatica, Vol. VI, De Incarnatione (Paris:
Vives, 1867), XI, VII, p. 443. “Communis haec antiquorum Patrum est
sententia, quam variis modis explicare, atque adstruere solent. ... Et
quoniam ... duplex est sanctitatis ratio ; una, quam Θετικήν, id est positivam
appellant ; quae in forma quadam vel quasi forma sanctificante posita est :
altera, quam negativam vocant, quam Graeci άναμαρτησίαν vocant, Hierony­
mus impeccantiam ; quae peccati maculam excludit.”

68

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

Not only original sin but also personal sin is incompatible with
the Son of God.108 To explain Christ’s freedom from the sin- of
Adam Augustine relies on the virginal conception. He attributes
the moral deordination in which original sin consists to a physical
deordination present in ordinary generation.108 Because of His
singular birth from the virgin Mary,10T Christ is entirely free not
only from moral deordination or original sin,10” but also from
physical deordination which consists in the conflict of the flesh
against the spirit.108 Thus the human nature of Christ is like that
possessed by Adam before his fall.110
”·De corrept. et gratia, 11, 30 (PML 44, 934) : “et quae potentior quam
Dei unigenitus Filius, aequalis Patri et coaeternus, pro eis homo factus, et
sine suo ullo vel originali vel proprio peccato.”
IMVan Crombrugghe, op. cit., p. 247. “Les spéculations d’Augustin sur
la nature et le rôle de la concupiscence s’inspirent, en réalité, de son at­
tachement au monachisme ... et plus encor du désir de trouver dans la
génération une déordination physique, qui puisse expliquer la déordînation
morale du péché originel.” Cf. Gilson, op. cit., p. 189, n. 1.
101 De symbolo, 3, 6 (PML 40, 630) : “Natus· est de Spiritu sancto et
virgine Maria, Et ipsa nativitas humana, humilis et excelsa. Unde humilis?
Quia homo natus est ex hominibus. Unde excelsa? Quia de virgine. Virgo
concepit, virgo peperit, et post partum virgo permansit.
*'
108 Op. imp. contra Jul., 4, 134 (PML 45, 1429) : “qui natus est de Spiritu
sancto et virgine Maria, expers omnino delicti, quia expers illius concep­
tionis quae commixtione fit sexuum?” Cf. Van Crombrugghe, op. cit., p. 246.
"La conception virginale du Christ occupe dans la théologie d’Augustin une
place marquante. Le saint Docteur y trouve surtout le moyen approprié et
préétabli par Dieu pour préparer au Verbe une nature humaine, réelle et
véritable, mais non entachée du péché originel.”
108 Op. imp. contra Jul., 4, 58 (PML 45, 1374) : “Natus enim de carne per
sanctum concipiente Spiritum, absit ut în se haberet discordiam carnis et
spiritus.” Cf. Mohan, op. cit., p. 42. “Tandem esse in Domino nostri fomitem
peccati S. Augustinus prorsus negabat Quae fomes intelligitur velut illa
passio quae contra voluntatem rationalem se erigit et ad peccandum allicit.
Suam doctrinam hac de re nitide proponit S. Doctor iterum sub titulo
Secundi Adam'. 'Haec prima est gratia quae data est primo Adam: sed
hac potentior est in secundo Adam. Prima est enim qua fit ut habeat homo
justitiam si velit: secunda ergo plus potest, qua etiam fit ut velit, et tantum
velit, tantoque ardore diligat, ut carnis voluntatem contraria concupiscentem
voluntate spiritus vincat.’ De corrept. et gratia, 11, 31 (PML 44-935).”
310 Contra Jul., 5, 15, 55 (PML 44, 814-815) : “et aliud est doncupiscentia
qua caro concupiscit adversus spiritum, sine qua fuit ante peccatum primus
homo, qualem nobis exhibuit humanam naturam Christus homo.”

L.

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

69

As regards personal sin Augustine sees Christ’s grace of union
demanding a complete harmony between God’s will and the human
will of Christ111 so that Christ is not only free from sin and its
desire,112 but He cannot sin.118 Thus when Augustine treats of the
impeccability of Christ’s human nature, he always has in mind
that Christ is a divine Person. If sin were admitted in Christ’s

>

,

l

i

111 Contra serm. arian., 7 (PML 42, 688) : “Ut autem Mediator Dei et
hominum homo Christus Jesus (I Tim. II, 5) non faceret propriam, quae
Deo adversa est, voluntatem, non erat tantum homo, sed Deus et homo; per
quam mirabilem singularemque gratiam humana in illo sine peccato ullo
posset esse natura. Propter hoc ergo ait, Descendi de caelo, non ut factam
voluntatem meam, sed voluntatem ejus qui me misit’, ut ea causa esset
tantae oboedientiae, quae omnino sine ullo peccato esset hominis quem
gerebat, quia de caelo descenderat ; hoc est, non tantum homo, verum etiam
Deus erat,”
118 Op. imp. contra Jul,, 4, 57 (PML 45, 1373) : “Dicis castitatem Christi
continua integritate celsam: sed homo es, cui non videtur castitas integra,
ubi magnitudine et perfectione voluntatis bonae non solum non committuntur,
sed nec cupiuntur illicita.”
De praedest. sanet., 15, 30 (PML 44, 982) : “Numquid metuendum fuit,
ne accedente aetate homo ille libero peccaret arbitrio? Aut ideo in illo non
libera voluntas erat, ac non tanto magis erat, quanto magis peccato servire
non poterat?” That Christ had free will, however, is evident from the fol­
lowing text. De civ. dei, 16, 41 (CSEL 40 Π, 198-199; PML 41, 520):
“Potestatem habeo ponendi animam meam et potestatem habeo iterum
sumendi eam. Nemo eam tollit a me; sed ego eam pono a me, et iterum
sumo eam.” Cf. Mohan, op, cit., pp. 42-43. “Attamen prae ante quoque
habeantur haec tria facta de Christo, videlicet Dominum nostrum non posse
peccare ; plenum esse gratiae ; necnon gaudere visione beatifica. Quae enim
omnia libertati Christi humanitatis adversari videntur. Nam Eum deter­
minant ad Ipsum bonum in se, scilicet ad Deum, a quo physice avelli nequit.
Quamobrem prorsus declarandum est libertatem Christi humanae naturae
non sese extendere ad bonum aut malum eligendum. Relate igitur ad hanc
questionem ex Doctoris nostri testimonio per nomina Christi exhibita tan­
tum docetur libertas voluntatis Domini nostri humanae quoad mortem sub­
eundam.” Cf. Van Crombrugghe, op. cit., pp. 255-256. “L'on sait, en effet,
que, dans la théologie augustinienne, la perfection de la liberté n’implique
nullement la possibilité de pécher ; elle l’exclut, au contraire, comme pouvant
entraver l’exercise raisonnable de l’activité humaine. La communauté de
régime des deux natures, devait, au témoignage d’Augustin, trouver ou
rendre la volonté humaine parfaite et conséquemment excluait tout désordre
de la volonté.”

70

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

human nature, it would have to be attributed to the divine
Person.114
Christ is also impeccable in view of His mission as redeemer.
Since Christ came to take away sin, if sin were in Him, He could
not fulfil His mission, for it would be impossible for Him to heal
in man’s nature an evil existing in His own.115 Finally due to the
beatific vision which He possessed from the moment of the In­
carnation Christ cannot sin.110 Alone of all men Christ can say,
The prince of this world is coming and in me he has nothing'
m Serm. 12, 12, 12 (PML 38, 106): “Et Dominus noster Jesus Christus
Verbum Patris . . . sanctifica vît carnem, nec inde pollueretur.” Contra Faust.,
20, 11 (CSEL 25 I, 549; PML 42, 377) : “itaque nos Christum filium dei,
verbum dei, incontaminabiliter carne indutum corde credimus, ore confitemur,
quia illa substantia contaminari nec carne potest, quae nulla re potest.”
““In epist, Io. ad Parthos, Tr. 4, 2, 8 (PML 35, 2010) : “in quo non est
peccatum, ipse venit auferre peccatum. Nam si esset et in illo peccatum,
auferendum esset illi, non ipse auferret.” Contra Jul., 5, 15, 58 (PML 44,
816) : “Hoc autem quod non est bonum Christus in natura si haberet sua,
non sanaret in nostra.”
116 De divers, quaest., 83, 65 (PML 40, 60) : “Quantum autem intersit inter
hominem quem Dei Sapientia gestabat, per quem liberati sumus, et caeteros
homines, hinc intelligitur, quod Lazarus nisi exiens de monumento non sol­
vitur; id est, etiam renata anima nisi resolutione corporis libera ab omni
peccato et ignorantia esse non potest, quamdiu per speculum et in aenigmate
videt Dominus : illius' autem linteamina et sudarium, qui peccatum non fecit,
et nihil ignoravit, in monumento inventa sunt (Joan. XX, 7). Ipse enim so­
lus in carne non tantum monumento non est oppressus, ut aliquod peccatum
in eo inveniretur (Isai. LIII, 9) sed nec linteis implicatus, ut eum aliquid
lateret aut ab itinere retardaret.” Cf. A. Caron, “La Science du Christ dans
Saint Augustin et Saint Thomas,” Angelicum, VII (1930), pp. 501-502. “La
différence entre l’Homme-Dieu et les autres hommes consiste en ce qu’une
âme même rendue à la vie, ne peut être affranchie de tout péché et de l’ig­
norance qu’après la dissolution du corps, aussi longtemps qu’elle ne voit le
Seigneur qu’un énigme et à travers un miroir; l’Homme-Dieu au contraire
n’avait aucun péché, rien ne lui était caché et rien ne pouvait retarder sa
marche ici-bas. Il voyait donc sans énigme et sans miroir; il contemplait la
divinité face à face dans une connaissance pleine et entière, et cela depuis
l’heure de l’incarnation. Car, comme il n’a jamais été soumis au péché pas
même un instant, ainsi n’a-t-il jamais connu les hésitations et les ombres
de l’ignorance, qui ne sont dissipées que par la clairvue de la béatitude.”

9

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

(John 14:30).111 Alone of all men He need not say, Forgive us
our debts (Matt. 6:12).117
118119
Of Christ’s priesthood alone can be
said : It was fitting that man should have such a high priest, holy,
innocent, undefiled, set apart from sinners, and become higher
than the heavens, who does not need to offer sacrifice daily, as
the other priests, first for His own sins (Heb. 7:26-27).lie
Certain consequences of Christ's double sanctification.—Augustine’s statement that as man Christ possessed the Holy Spirit120
lends itself to an interesting comparison between Christ’s sanctity
and that of man. It must always be remembered that in addition
to the accidental grace which He shares with man, Christ possesses
the grace of union which is proper to Him alone. This grace is
not an accidental participation of the divinity but consists in the
union of the two natures in one Person.121 For this reason there
is never a question of Christ being an adopted son of God, an
effect produced in man by habitual or sanctifying grace.122 Christ

*

*

B

117In Ps. 140, 3 (PML 37, 1816) : “Quomodo enim potest de Domino
nostro Jesu Christo, de illo agno immaculato, de illo in quo solo non est
inventum peccatum, qui solus verissime dicere potuit, Ecce venit princeps
mundi hujus, et in me nihil inveniet (Joan. XIV, 30).”
™De pecc. meritis, 3, 13, 23 (CSEL 60, 150; PML 44, 200) : “quam

4

I

i

71

“

orationem (i.e. dominicam) quisquis cuilibet, etiam homini sancto et dei
voluntatem scienti atque facienti, praeter unum sanctum sanctorum dicit in
hac vita necessariam non fuisse, multum errat nec potest omnino illi ipsi
placere quem laudat.”
119 Ibid., 2, 13, 19 (CSEL 60, 91; PML 44, 163): “talem enim decebat,
inquit, habere nos principem sacerdotum, iustum, sine malitia, incontaminatufn, separatum a peccatoribus, altiorem a caelis factum, non habentem coti­
dianam necessitatem sicut princeps sacerdotum primum pro suis peccatis
sacrificium offerre.”
130De Trin., 15, 26, 46 (PML 42, 1093) : “Dominus ipse Jesus Spiritum
sanctum non solum dedit ut Deus, sed etiam accepit ut homo.”
131 Ibid., 15, 26, 46 (PML 42, 1093-1094) : “id est, quando humana natura
sine ullis praecedentibus bonorum operum meritis Deo Verbo est in utero
virginis copulata, ita ut cum illo fieret una persona.”
™ Contra Secund., 5 (CSEL 25 II, 912; PML 42, 581): “ut sit ipse
primogenitus in multis fratribus, quos ei pater ad fraternam societatem non
aequalitate substantiae, sed adoptione gratiae generavit.” Cf. St. Thomas,
op. cit., Ill, 23, 4 c.

72

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

is always the natural Son of God.123 Thus the grace of union
precludes a merely accidental participation of the divinity and
sonship by adoption, but it does not exclude an accidental sanc­
tification.

Sanetity Through Union in Christ’s Body
Individual sanctity.—Now one must consider this sanctification
of the physical Christ in its application to the union of the faith­
ful in Him. As mediator between God and man Christ is the
Head of His Body, and His members are one with Him. Just
as the human nature of Christ is substantially sanctified in His
divine Person, so in being one with Him His members are also
sanctified in the same Person.124 Thus Christ’s substantial sanc­
tification through the hypostatic union becomes a sanctification of
those incorporated into His Body. Because Christ the Head is
™0p. imp. contra Jul., 1, 138 (PML 45, 1137) : "quod ipse homo nunquam
ita fuit homo, ut non esset unigenitus Dei Filius, propter unigenitum Ver­
bum.”
131 In Jo. Ev., Tr, 108, 5 (PML 35, 1916) : “Sed quoniam per hoc quod
mediator Dei et hominum homo Christus Jesus factus est caput Ecclesiae,
illi membra sunt ejus; ideo ait quod sequitur, Et pro eis ego sanctifico
meipsum, Quid est enim, Et pro eis ego sanctifico meipsum, nisi, eos in
meipso sanctifico, cum et ipsi sint ego? Quoniam de quibus hoc ait, ut dixi,
membra sunt ejus, et unus est Christus caput et corpus. . . . Cum enim
dixisset, Et pro eis ego sanctifico meipsum, ut intelligeremus hoc eum
dixisse, quod eos sanctificaret in se, mox addidit, Ut sint et ipsi sanctificati
in veritate. Quod quid est aliud quam, in me, secundum id quod veritas est
Verbum illud in principio Deus? In quo et ipse filius hominis sanctificatus
est ab initio creationis suae, quando Verbum factum est caro; quia una
persona facta est Verbum et homo. Tunc ergo sanctificavit se in se, hoc
est, hominem se in Verbo se; quia unus Christus Verbum et homo, sanctifi­
cans hominem in Verbo. Propter sua vero membra, Et pro eis, inquit, ego,
id est, quod prosit etiam ipsis, quia et ipsi sunt ego; sicut mihi profuit in
me, quia homo sum sine ipsis: Et ego sanctifico meipsum, hoc est, ipsos
in me tanquam meipsum sanctifico ego, quoniam in me etiam ipsi sunt ego.
Ut sint et ipsi sanctificati in veritate. Quid est et ipsi, nisi, quemadmodum
ego; in veritate, quod ipse sum ego?” Cf. Mersch, op. cit., p. 127. “La grâce
est l’écoulement en nous, les membres, de la sainteté parfaite que met, dans
notre chef, l’incarnation, parce que nous, en lui, mystiquement, nous sommes
lui.”

i

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

»

73

holy, His Body is holy also, and each member of that Body is
holy.128
It must not be supposed that this sanctification of the members
is the same as that effected in Christ by the grace of union,128
which belongs to the Word alone.121 Augustine sees it as the re­
sult of the communication of Christ’s habitual grace, which as
Head of His Body He diffuses through all His members.128
Since Christ is the Head of His Body, His habitual or capital
grace exceeds the grace of His members.12® This is commonly
mIn Ps. 85, 4 (PML 37, 1084): "unus Christus, unus Salvator; in
forma Dei aequalis Patri, in forma servi caput Ecclesiae. Ergo, Quoniam
sanctus sum cum audio, vocem ejus agnosco; et hic separo meam? Certe
inseparabiliter a corpore suo loquitur, cum sic loquitur. , , . audeat et corpus
Christi, audeat et unus ille homo clamans a finibus terrae (Psal. LX, 3),
cum capite suo, et sub capite suo dicere, Quoniam sanctus sum. ... si
membra sunt facti corporis ejus, et dicunt se sancta non esse, capiti ipsi fa­
ciunt injuriam, cujus membra sancta non sunt.”
Op. imp. contra Jul., 6, 18 (PML 45, 1542) : “non ex Deo poscitis et
sumitis veram, quae dicta est justitia Dei; non illa qua justus est Deus; sed,
quae datur ex Deo; sicut Domini est salus (Psal. III, 9), non qua Dominus
salvus fit, sed qua salvos facit.”
mEpist. 187, 13, 40 (CSEL 57, 117; PML 33, 847) : “Verbum caro fac­
tum est. . . . singularis ergo est illa susceptio nec cum hominibus aliquibus
sanctis quantalibet sapientia et sanctitate praestantibus ullo modo potest esse
communis.”
139 De praedest. sanci., 15, 31 (PML 44, 982) ; “Appareat itaque nobis in
nostro capite ipse fons gratiae, unde secundum uniuscujusque mensuram se
per cuncta ejus membra diffundit. Ea gratia fit ab initio fidei suae homo
quicumque Christianus, qua gratia homo ille ab initio suo factus est Christus :
de ipso Spiritu et hic renatus, de quo est ille natus ; eodem Spiritu fit in
nobis remissio peccatorum, quo Spiritu factum est ut nullum haberet ille
peccatum.” Op. imp. contra Jul., 1, 138 (PML 45. 1137) ; “Qua ergo gratia
homo ille ab initio factus est bonus, eadem gratia homines qui sunt membra
ejus ex malis fiunt boni.” Cf. É. Mersch, “Deux Traits de la Doctrine
Spirituelle de Saint Augustin,” Nouv. Rev. Théol., LVII (1930), 404. “un
chrétien n’étant, mais de façon incomplète et participée, rien d’autre que
ce que le Christ est en plénitude.” At times, as above, St. Augustine speaks
of a diffusion of grace; at other times he makes explicit mention of a diffu­
sion of sanctity. Cf. Contra Utt. Petit., 2, 104, 239 (CSEL 52, 153; PML
43, 341).
"De gestis Pelagii, 14, 32 (CSEL 42, 87-88; PML 44, 339-340) : “neque
enim, quamvis esset apostolus Paulus multum excellens membrum Christi

74

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

spoken of as Christ’s fulness of grace, and Augustine considers
it as a proof of Christ’s divinity and consequently of His power
to sanctify.130 From this fulness each member receives grace.131
To illustrate the mode of communication between the Head and
members Augustine uses the parable of the vine and branches.
It is due to a unity in nature that the vine can contribute a vital
influence to its branches. Because as God Christ did not have the
same nature as man, He took a common nature with man so that
He might be as the vine and men as the branches.132 Thus Augus­
tine harmonizes the functions of Christ’s two natures in sanctify­
ing. It is because Christ is divine and has a plenitude of grace
that He has the power to sanctify, but it is only because He is
human that He can communicate this sanctity to man.

_________
i
corporis, nullas plures et ampliores gratias accepit ipsum totius corporis
caput, sive in carne sive in anima hominis, quam creaturam suam verbum
dei in unitatem personae suae, ut nostrum caput esset et corpus eius essemus,
assumpsit, et re vera si esse possent in singulis omnia, frustra de membris
corporis nostri ad hanc rem data similitudo videretur.”
In Jo. Ev., Tr. 13, 3, 8 (PML 35, 1496) : “salutem suam intelligebat
in Christo esse. Jam dixerat superius, Nos omnes de plenitudine ejus acce­
pimus (Joan. 1, 16) : “et hoc est confiteri Deum est. Quomodo enim omnes
homines de plenitudine ejus accipiunt, nisi ille sit Deus? Nam si sic ille
homo ut non Deus, de plenitudine Dei accipit etiam ipse, et sic non Deus
est. Si autem omnes homines de plenitudine ejus accipiunt, ille est fons, illi
bibentes.”
De grat. et lib. arb., 9, 21 (PML 44, 893) : “Sed habetis Evangelium
secundum Joannem tanta luce clarissimum, ubi Joannes Baptista de Domino
Christo dicit, Nos autem ex plenitudine ejus accepimus, et gratiam pro
gratia (Joan. 1, 16). Ex ejus itaque plenitudine accepimus pro modulo nostro
tanquam particulas nostras ut bene vivamus, sicut Deus partitus est mensu­
ram fidei (Rom. XII, 3) ; quia unusquisque proprium donum habet a Deo,
alius sic, alius autem sic (I Cor. VII, 7) ; et ipsa est gratia: sed insuper
accipiemus et gratiam pro gratia, quando nobis vita aeterna reddetur, de qua
dixit Apostolus, Gratia autem Dei vita aeterna in Christo Jesu Domino
nostro.”
133 In Jo. Ev., Tr. 80, 1 (PML 35, 1839) : “Iste locus evangelicus, fratres,
ubi se dicit Dominus vitem, et discipulos suos palmites, secundum hoc dicit
quod est caput Ecclesiae, nosque membra ejus mediator Dei et hominum
homo Christus Jesus (I Tim. Π, 5). Unius quippe naturae sunt vitis et
palmites: propter quod cum esset Deus, cujus naturae non sumus, factus
est homo, ut in illo esset vitis humana natura, cujus et nos homines palmites
esse possemus.”

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

*

75

Corporate sanctity.—Just as in the physical sphere every head
has its proper body, so too in the spiritual realm Christ the Head
has the Church as His Body. This mystical union between the
Head and Body rests on the common bond of human nature,188
and it is so intimate that a single personality, as it were, results.184
Therefore, in the same manner as the human head speaks for its
whole body, with equal right Christ speaks in the person of His
Body. For this reason when He says, I am holy, He is referring
not merely to Himself but to His whole Body.186 Thus the Church
becomes the holy Body of Christ188 through a participation in
Christ’s own sanctity.187
Augustine portrays this communication of sanctity from Head
to members in still another way. He implies that Christ is not
merely a means of justification and sanctification but is identified
with them.188 Since all the faithful are a single person in Christ,139
Christ’s Body is likewise identified with this justification and
sanctification.140
133 De perf. iust. hominis, 15, 35 (CSEL 42, 36; PML 44, 310) : “cum enim
dominus ipse secundum formam servi, per quam se mediator coniunxit
ecclesiae.”
131 Serm. 294, 10, 10 (PAIL 38, 1341) : “et solus Christus de Maria natus
unus est Christus, et cum corpore suo caput unus est Christus.”
v* In Ps. 85, 4 (PML 37, 1084): “Ergo, Quoniam sanctus sum, cum
audio, vocem ejus agnosco; et hic separo meam? Certe inseparabiliter a
corpore suo loquitur, cum sic loquitur.”
™ Contra Faust., 12, 16 (CSEL 25 I, 345; PML 42, 263) : “sicut ecclesia
corpus Christi in unitatem conlecta sublimat et perficit.” Contra Crescon·., 2,
13, 16 (CSEL 52, 374; PML 43, 476): “quid in ecclesia, quae sanctum
corpus est Christi.”
137 Mersch, “Deux Traits de la Doctrine Spirituelle de Saint Augustin,”
op. clt., p. 398. “Tout, dans l’Êglise, vient du Christ. C’est lui et lui seul qui
est, en elle, la racine, la source, le principe et la cause de tout bien. Toute
la vie qu’elle possède est la vie qu’elle reçoit, et si cette vie est intérieure
comme est toute vie, elle est antérieure en lui et par lui.”
138 Op. imp. contra fui., 1, 140 (PML 45, 1139) : “ita est etiam exemplum
gratiae, ut in eum credendo inde nos fieri speremus justos per ipsum, unde
factus est ipse, qui factus est nobis sapientia a Deo, et justitia, et sanctificatio,
et redemptio.”
138In Ps. 119, 7 (PML 37, 1602) ; “et omnes sancti unus homo in Christo.”
™Epist. 140, 30, 73 (CSEL 44. 221; PML 33, 570): “ut nos simus
iustitia dei in ipso, id est in eius corpore, quod est ecclesia, cui caput est.”
Serm. 144, 5, 6 (PML 38, 790): “Unde dictum est: Ut nos simus justitia

76

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

It is possible to draw an analogy between Christ’s sanctification
of His human nature and the sanctification of the Church. There
is the same relation between the divine Word and His assumed
human soul as there is between Christ and the Church, expressed
in each case by the mystical two in one flesh.141 The divine Person
is Sponsus; His flesh the Sponsa.142 In the union of Christ and
the Church Christ is Sponsus to the Church’s Sponsa.143 The acci­
dental holiness of Christ’s human nature is due to the power of
the Holy Spirit.144 The Church is also made holy through the same
Spirit.145 Through His sanctification Christ is full of grace and
truth;143 through her sanctification the Church possesses all the
treasures of wisdom and knowledge.147 The Word Incarnate was
born of Mary. The Church gives birth to Christ’s members, or to
put it more forcibly the Church gives birth to Christ since Christ
Dei in ipso (Il Cor., V, 21). Si enim non in ipso, nullo modo justitia. Si
autem in ipso, totus nobiscum vadit ad Patrem, et haec implebitur in nobis
perfecta justitia."
™ Contra Faust., 22, 38 (CSEL 25 I, 632; PML 42, 424): "occulte
quippe atque intus in abscondito secreto spiritali anima humana inhaeret
verbo dei, ut sint duo in carne una : quod magnum coniugii sacramentum in
Christo et in ecclesia commendat apostolus."
X4i/n epist. Jo. ad Parthos, Tr. 1, 2 (PML 35, 1979) : “et illius sponsi
thalamus fuit uterus Virginis, quia in illo utero virginali conjuncti sunt duo,
sponsus et sponsa, sponsus Verbum et sponsa caro.” Cf. Cayré, op. cit., 186.
“L’union du Verbe et de l’Êglise, marquée par ces titres d’Époux et d’Épouse,
est une union exclusivement spirituelle, comme la grâce, la foi et la
charité qui la produisent. Toutes les âmes qui sont membres de l’Êglise y
participent, et chacune d’elles en particulier est elle-même Épouse du Verbe
dans la mesure où elle vit de Dieu et en Dieu.”
14* Serm. 264, 4 (PML 38, 1215) : "ut procederet de thalamo suo sponsus,
ut desponsaret Ecclesiam virginem caStam.”
144De Trin., 15, 26, 46 (PML 42, 1093) : “Dominus ipse Jesus Spiritum
sanctum non solum dedit ut Detis, sed etiam accepit ut homo; propterea
dictus est plenus gratia (Joan. I, 14) et Spiritu Sancto (Lite. XI, 52, et
IV, 1).”
145 In epist. Jo. ad Parthos, Tr. 2, 3 (PML 35, 1991) : “Ubi inchoata est
Ecclesia, nisi ubi venit de coelo Spiritus sanctus, et implevit uno loco sedentes
centum viginti?”
144 Contra Faust., 19, 31 (CSEL 25 I, 535; PML 42, 370): “qui plenus
gratia et veritate . . . venit legem non solvere sed adinplere."
147Ibid., 12, 46 (CSEL 25 I, 375; PML 42, 279): “et ibi sunt cmnes
thesauri sapientiae et scientiae absconditi."

j
ΐ

<1
i

f
fl'
J
e

f |

|
j

i
I

j
I
j

1

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

77

and His members are one.*
148 Thus the Church prolongs the In­
carnation and continues through the sacraments the sanctification
inaugurated by Christ.1*8 Just as Christ is the fountain at whose
mouth men drink the waters of sanctity,180 so too the Church is
the well of living water,181 outside which there is neither life nor
eternal salvation.182 The Church alone then is the depository of
sanctity.188
Synthesis of corporate and individual sanctity.—Perhaps no text
better explains corporate and individual sanctity together with the
213, 7, 7 (PML 38, 1064) : “Numquid non virgo sancta Maria
et peperit, et virgo permansit? Sic et Ecclesia, et parit, et virgo est. Et si
consideres, Christum parit: quia membra ejus sunt qui baptizantur. l'os
estis, inquit Apostolus, corpus Christi et membra (I Cor. XII, 27).”
148 Op. imp. contra Jul„ 3, 114 (PML 45, 1296): “Nam et praecipiunt
homines, et benedicunt, et per divina Sacramenta sanctificant."
1M In Jo. Ev., Tr. 13, 3, 8 (PML 35, 1496) : “Si autem omnes homines de
plenitudine ejus accipiunt, ille est fons, illi bibentes.”
™ Contra Faust., 22/87 (CSEL 25 I, 692; PML 42, 458) : “illa ecclesia
est, quae vocatur puteus aquae vivae.”
188 De pecc. meritis, 3, 11, 19 (CSEL 60, 145; PML 44, 196-197) : “quibus
docemur praeter Christi societatem, quae in illo et cum illo fit, cum sacra­
mentis eius inbuimur et eius membris incorporamur, vitam salutemque
aeternam adipisci neminem posse.”
“•Adam, op. cit., pp. '52-53. “According to Augustine there exists be­
tween the Church and the Body of Christ an identity, not indeed of external
manifestation but of inward nature: the Church is the sole place wherein
Christ works in his members through his Holy Spirit. So saints are possible
only in the Church, and they do occur there, though there is unworthiness
also. These saints, because they are impregnated with the Spirit of their
head, are the fruitful source of the Church’s grace, the treasure and sup­
port of the Church. There is no grace in the Church which is not somehow
due to the communion of Saints. The visible distributors of grace are the
officials of the Church, its servants, who have their authority neither from
themselves, nor from the faithful, but directly from Christ. Consequently
the Church is the true and only home of salvation, the revelation and
manifestation of Christ’s saving power, the Body of Christ.
Augustine’s identification of the Church with the Body of Christ is the
basis of his teaching that the Church is the only home of salvation, and of
his severity towards all schismatical and heretical communities. The older
he grew, the less favourable was his judgment on them. In the end he went
so far as to say that ‘outside the Church there is nothing but the damned,’
a proposition that was condemned by the Church at the time of the
Jansenist controversy.”

78

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

ensuing relations between Head, Body, and members than, No one
has ascended into heaven except him who descended from heaven,
the Son of Man who is in heaven (John 3:13). Christ descended
from heaven without His Body, the Church, yet clothing Him­
self with this Body He ascends to heaven.164 The individual Chris­
tian through incorporation into the Church becomes identified
with the unity of Christ’s Body, and thereby becoming a spiritual
man ascends to heaven.155 This spiritual rebirth and ascension is ef­
fected by the grace of Christ the Head sanctifying His Body and its
members.156 Though this sanctity is the property of Christ and
belongs to the whole Body, yet in the individual members it is
entirely personal.167
Sanctity and sin in Christ's Body.—To explain the seeming
contradiction between the sanctity of Christ’s Body and the actual
131 J. Boutet, “Saint Augustin, L’unité des chrétiens dans le Christ,” Vie
Spirituelle, LIII (October, 1937), 86-87. “La tête est descendue; elle est
montée avec le corps. Le Christ est revêtu de son Église qu’il a fait paraître
devant lui sans tache et sans ride. . . . L’unité nous unit à lui ; et ceux-là
seuls ne montent pas avec lui qui auront refusé d’être un avec lui. . . . Car
si par la charité il est avec nous sur la terre, par la même charité nous
sommes avec lui dans le ciel.”
155 De pecc. mentis, 1, 31, 60 (CSEL 60, 60; PML 44, 144) : “ ‘sic,’ inquit,
‘fiet generatio spiritalis, ut sint caelestes homines ex terrenis, quod adipisci
non poterunt, nisi membra mea efficiantur, ut ipse ascendat qui descendit,
quia nemo ascendit nisi qui descendit.’ nisi ergo in unitatem Christi omnes
mutandi levandique concurrant, ut Christus, qui descendit, ipse ascendat,
non aliud deputans corpus suum, id est ecclesiam suam, quam se ipsum . . .
ascendere omnino non poterunt, quia nemo ascendit in caelum, nisi qui de
caelo descendit, filius hominis, qui est in caelo.”
15,1 In Jo. Ev„ Tr. 12, 3, 8 (PML 35, 1488): “Deus voluit esse filius
hominis, et homines voluit esse filios Dei. Ipse descendit propter nos, nos
ascendamus propter ipsum. Solus enim descendit et ascendit, qui hoc ait,
Nemo ascendit in coelum, nisi qui descendit de coelo. Non ergo ascensuri
sunt in coelum quos facit filios Dei? Ascensuri plane: haec nobis promissio
est, Erunt aequales Angelis Dei (Matth. XXII, 30), Quomodo ergo nemo
ascendit, nisi qui descendit? Quia unus descendit, unus ascendit.”
167 Mersch, Le Corps Mystique du Christ, II, p. 77. “Cette sainteté, ensuite,
se communique du chef aux membres. De la sorte, l’incarnation s’étant, en
quelque façon, étendue, comme par degrés, à tous les fidèles, la vie sur­
naturelle, bien qu’en étant personnelle à chacun, demeure cependant, et cela
en chacun, propriété du Christ et chose de l’ensemble.”

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

79

fact of sin in its members Augustine distinguished between the
eternal and temporal aspects of the Church, In her future glorified
life the entire Body of Christ will be without sin.168 On earth
the Church can and does sin in its members.169
It cannot be objected that such sin is impossible on the grounds
that it ultimately discredits the sanctity of Christ since Christ and
His members form a single person. Even while insisting on this
union between Christ and the faithful, Augustine maintains that
a clear distinction must be made between what is proper to the
Head alone and to the Body alone.160 Though Christ and the
168 De perf. iust. hominis, 15, 35 (CSEL 42, 35-36 ; PML 44, 310) : “satis
significavit, quando erit sine macula et ruga aut aliquid eius modi : tunc
utique, quando gloriosa. . . . cum enim dominus ipse secundum formam
servi, per quam se mediator coniunxit ecclesiae, non fuerit glorificatus nisi
resurrectionis gloria , . .. quomodo dicenda est ante resurrectionem suam
ecclesia eius esse gloriosa?”
In Ps. 140, 6 (PML 37; 1818) : “Ergo si Dominus noster Jesus
Christus nos figurans in charitate corporis sui, quamvis esset ipse sine
peccato, dixit, Verba delictorum meorum; dixit autem hoc ex persona
corporis sui : quis audet in membris ejus dicere non se habere peccatum.”
Cf. C. Dowd, The Visible Sanctity of the Church as a Note and a Motive
of Credibility (Washington, D. C. : C.U.A. Press, 1941), p. 14. “He pre­
sumed the clear fact that there are sinful members in the Church and pro­
posed a distinction in the life of the Church as a solution. . . . This distinc­
tion of Saint Augustine is that which exists between the Church in heaven
which is-perfectly holy and that on earth which is only essentially so. It is
to be" noted, however, that this Church on earth is perfectly holy as regards
the means of sanctification and salvation. It is only in the members that
there is found ignorance and infirmity.”
190 De doct. christ., 3, 31, 44 (PML 34, 82) : “Prima de Domino et ejus
corpore est, in qua scientes aliquando capitis et corpfc>ris, id est, Christi et
Ecclesiae unam personam nobis intimari (neque enim frustra dictum est
fidelibus, Ergo Abrahae semen estis (Galat. III, 29), cum sit unum semen
Abrahae, quod est Christus), non haesitemus quando a capite ad corpus, vel
a corpore transitur ad caput, et tamen non receditur ab una eademque per­
sona. Una enim persona loquitur dicens, sicut sponso imposuit mihi mitram,
ei sicut sponsam ornavit me ornamento (Isai. LXI, 10) ; et tamen quid
horum duorum capiti, quid corpori, id est, quid Christo, quid Ecclesiae
conveniat, utique intelligendum est.” In Jo. Ev., Tr. 28, 1 (PML 35, 1622) :
“Non enim Christus in capite et non in corpore, sed Christus totus in capite
et in corpore. Quod ergo membra ejus, ipse : quod autem ipse, non continuo
membra ejus.”

I

80

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

Church are two in one flesh, it is on this two that Augustine now
places emphasis. The Church is not the Word ; it is not God ; it is
not He by whom all things were made.101 The same argument
applies to the individual members. Though each member can
rightly say that he has in himself the Word made flesh, yet of
none can be said, The IVord was made flesh (John 1:14).182 In
other words from the previous discussions it is evident that Christ’s
Body is an organism in which Head and members participate in
the same life of grace. As Head of the Body Christ diffuses
into His members His capital grace which is essentially the same
as His habitual grace. In Christ habitual grace produces an acci­
dental sanctification; it has the same effect in His members since
this grace differs in Head and members not specifically but in
degree. Christ, however, also possesses the grace of union—the
Word was made flesh (John 1:14)—which results in a substantial
sanctification incompatible with sin. Since His members do not
possess this grace, they may be and are sinners.188
This possibility of sin may be explained also by the fact that
through His redemption Christ did not restore man to the state
of the innocent Adam. Before the fall Adam had the possibility
of persevering in his state of original innocence and of avoiding
sin entirely.184 His sanctification neither depended on Christ’s
“*■ in Ps. 142. 3 (37, 1847): ‘'Christus et Ecclesia, duo in carne una.
Refer ad distantiam majestatis duo. Duo plane. Non enim et nos Verbum,
non enim et nos in principio Deus apud Deum, non enim et nos ille per
quem facta sunt omnia.” Cf. del Rio, op. cit,, p. 425, “para que canozcâis que
el esposo y la esposa es un solo hombre, segfiin la carne de Cristo, y no
segùn la divînidad.”
iaDe ag. chr„ 20, 22 (CSEL 41, 123; PML 40, 302) : “de ceteris enim
sapientibus et spiritalibus animis recte dici potest, quod habeant in se ver­
bum dei, per quod facta sunt omnia; sed in nullo eorum recte dici potest,
quod verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis, quod in solo domino
nostro lesu Christo rectissime dicitur.”
1,n This idea is adequately expressed by the phrase, justus autem et
justificans nemo nisi Christus. Though Christ’s members are just, they
cannot justify each other. The power of justifying belongs to Christ alone
and is a sign of His divinity. Cf. De pecc. meritis, 1, 14, 18 (CSEL 60,
18; PML 44, 119). Sin, of course, is impossible in the divinity, but the
members of Christ’s Body can sin.
184 J. Tixeront, Histoire des Dogmes (4th ed. ; Paris, 1912),-II, p. 478.
“On a vu que notre auteur faisait du posse non peccare un privilège d’Adam
innocent.”

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

81

death nor was it assailed by concupiscence. The sanctification of
fallen humanity stems from Christ’s redemptive death, and it is
subject to the constant assaults of concupiscence.186 It is in this
struggle that man falls.188
Sin as it effects the Church presents an interesting study.
Augustine regards evil members as being in external communion
with the Church without participating in its inner life.18’ By this
he does not mean that at a given instant they may not share in
its vital influence.188 His thought transcends this momentary union
to embrace the permanent union of those predestined to memDe corrept. et gratia, 11, 29 (PML 44, 933-934) : “Adam non habuit,
Dei gratiam? Imo vero habuit magnam, sed disparem. Ille in bonis erat, quae
de,bonitate sui Conditoris acceperat: neque enim ea bona et ille suis meritis
comparaverat, in quibus prorsus nullum patiebatur malum. Sancti vero in hac
vita, ad quos pertinet liberationis haec gratia, in malis sunt, ex quibus
clamant ad Deum, Libera nos α malo (Maith. VI, 13). Ille in illis bonis
Christi morte non eguit: istos a reatu et haereditario et proprio, illius Agni
sanguis absolvit. Ille non opus habebat eo adjutorio, quod implorant isti cum
dicunt: Video altam legem in membris meis, repugnantem tegi mentis meae,
et captivantem me in lege peccati, quae est in membris meis. Infelix ego
homo, quis me liberabit de corpore mortis hujus? Gratia Dei per Jesum
Christum Dominum nostrum (Rom. VII, 23-25).”
Contra duas epist. Pelag., 1, 14, 28 (CSEL 60, 446-447; PML 44, 563) :
“Hi omnes concupiscentiae partus et ipsius concupiscentiae reatus antiquus
baptismatis ablutione dimissi sunt ; et quidquid nunc parit ista concupiscentia,
si non sint illi partus, qui non solum peccata, verum etiam crimina nuncu­
pantur, pacto illo cotidianae orationis, ubi dicimus : dimitte sicut dimittimus,
et elemosynarum sinceritate mundantur.”
™ De bapt., 6, 3, 5 (CSEL 51, 301; PML 43, 199) : “quos non pertinere
ad sanctam ecclesiam dei, quamvis intus esse videantur, ex hoc apertissime
apparet, quia isti sunt avari raptores faeneratores invidi mali vol i et cetera
huiusmodi, illa autem columba unica pudica et casta, sponsa sine macula et
ruga, hortus conclusus, fons signatus, paradisus cum fructu pomorum et
cetera quae de illa similiter dicta sunt, quod non intellegitur nisi in bonis
et sanctis et iustis. id est non tantum secundum operationes munerum dei
bonis malisque communes, sed etiam secundum intimam et supereminentem
caritatem spiritum sanctum habentibus.”
M M. Jacquin, “La Question de la Prédestination,” Rev. Hist. Eccl.,
V (1904), 732. “D’ailleurs, ceux qui ont été laissés dans la masse de péché
peuvent recevoir eux aussi des grâces et des grâces efficaces, celles de la
foi et de la justification par example, et cependant, selon saint Augustin ils
ne sont pas pour cela prédestinés et ne l’ont jamais été.”

82

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

bership in Christ’s Body. Thus ’even though the evil transitorily
may possess grace and divine filiation, in the end they will be cut
off from this source of holiness?89 Conversely one may conclude
that at a given moment the elect may be in the state of mortal sin
and cut off from the sanctity of the Church. Ultimately, however,
they will be saints due to the gift of predestination.
Yet in spite of this sin in her members the Church possesses
indefectible sanctity resulting from her espousal to Christ,170 who
can never be separated from His Body.171 The Church is holy in
her Head ?72 in her soul, the Holy Spirit ;178 and in His two gifts

™De bapt., 5, 28, 39 (CSEL 51, 296-297; PML 43, 197) : “certe manifes­
tum est id, quod dicitur in ecclesia intus et foris, in corde, non in corpore
cogitandum, quandoquidem omnes, qui corde sunt intus, in arcae unitate per
eandem aquam salvi fiunt, per quam omnes qui corde sunt foris, sive etiam
corpore foris sint sive non sint, tamquam unitatis adversarii moriuntur.”
170 Contra Faust., 22, 38 (CSEL 25 I, 632; PML 42, 424) : “est enim et
sancta ecclesia domino lesu Christo in occulto uxor, occulte quippe atque
intus in abscondito secreto spiritali anima humana inhaeret verbo dei, ut
sint duo in carne una : quod magnum coniugii sacramentum in Christo et in
ecclesia commendat apostolus, proinde regnum terrenum saeculi huius, cuius
figuram gerebant reges, qui Saram polluere permissi non sunt, non expertum
est nec invenit ecclesiam coniugem Christi, id est, quam fideliter illi tam­
quam principio viro suo subdita cohaereret, nisi cum violare temptavit et
divino testimonio per fidem martyrum cessit correptumque in posterioribus
regibus honoravit munere, quam correptioni suae subdere in prioribus non
evaluit, nam quod tunc in eodem rege prius et posterius figuratum est, hoc
in isto regno prioribus et posterioribus regibus adinpletum.” Cf. Mersch,
Le Corps Mystique du Christ, II, 71. "ce n’est plus seulement l’indéfectible
sainteté de l’Église» c’est tout l’ensemble des principaux attributs de la
sainteté chrétienne et de la grâce, qu’il conclut du même rattachement au
Sauveur,”
inDe tiupt. et concup., 1, 10, 11 (CSEL 42, 223; PML 44, 420) : “hoc
enim custoditur in Christo et ecclesia, ut vivens cum vivente in aeternum
nullo divortio separetur.”
173In Ps. 85, 4 (PML 37, 1084) : “unus Christus, unus Salvator; in forma
Dei aequalis Patri, in forma servi caput Ecclesiae, Ergo, Quoniam sanctus
sum, cum audio, vocem ejus agnosco; et hic separo meam? Certe insepara­
biliter a corpore suo loquitur, cum sic loquitur."
8, 11, 13 (PML 38, 72) : “Sanctificatio nulla divina et vera est,
nisi ab Spiritu sancto. Non enim frustra dictus est proprie Spiritus Sanctus.”

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

83

of charity1 T4 and grace?” But far from restricting this holiness
to the inner life of the Church Augustine also maintains that the
Church is holy in her external constitution, in her sacraments?™
in her doctrine?77 and in her faith?78 Thus even though beset bycountless scandals and the sin of her members, the Church as
Christ’s Body still cries out, Preserve my soul for I am holy.170

The Holy Spirit in Sanctification

It has already been shown that Augustine conceives divine
holiness as consisting in God’s identity with His own essence
through love. Therefore, such sanctity involves both charity and
unity. In the Trinity the Holy Spirit is the bond joining the
Father and Son through charity, and consequently He is their sub­
stantial and consubstantial sanctity?80 For this reason He receives*
178
™Conira lift. Petit., 2. 80, 178 (CSEL 52, 110; PML 43, 314) : “et uni­
tatis sanctissimum vinculum et caritatis supereminentissimum donum.”
in Op. imp. contra Jul., 2, 133 (PML 45, 1197) : “et tamen eos negare non
potes ad hanc ex multis delictis justificantem gratiam, cum ad Baptisma
veniunt, pertinere?'
™ Contra Crescon., 4, 20, 24 (CSEL 52, 524; PML 43, 562) : “illa namque
per se ipsa vera et sancta sunt propter deum verum et sanctum cuius sunt,”
xnDe perf. iust. hominis, 19, 42 (CSEL 42, 45; PML 44, 315) : “quos vel
commemorat vel tacet scriptura divina."
178 De spir. et Hit., 29, 51 (CSEL 60, 207; PML 44, 233): “fide igitur
lesu Christi inpetramus salutem.”
”·In Ps. 85, 4 (PML 37, 1085) : “Ergo dicat et unusquisque christianus,
imo dicat totum corpus Christi, clamet ubique patiens tribulationes, diversas
tentationes et scandala innumerabilia, dicat, Custodi animam meam, quoniam
sanctus sum” Cf. Pius XI, op. cit., p. 15. “The mystical Spouse of Christ
has in the course of the centuries remained unspotted nor can it ever be
contaminated. St. Cyprian says : ‘The Spouse of Christ cannot commit
t adultery; she is incorrupt and modest, she knows one house, she guards
with chaste modesty the holiness of one room? This same holy martyr mar­
veled, and with reason, how anyone could think that ‘the unity which pro­
ceeds from the stability of God and is bound together by the sacraments of
heaven could be torn asunder in the church or separated by the wills of the
discordant? ”
190De Trin,, 6, 5, 7 (PML 42, 927-928) : “Quapropter etiam Spiritus
sanctus in eadem unitate substantiae et aequalitate consistit. Sive enim sit
unitas amborum, sive sanctitas, sive char itas, sive ideo unitas quia charitas,
et ideo chantas quia sanctitas?* De civ. Dei, 11, 24 (CSEL 40 I, 547; PML

I

84

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

the names of Charity and Sanctity,161 together with the proper
name of Holy Spirit.182 This power of the Holy Spirit to sanctify
is not limited to His internal action in the Trinity. It extends to
human sanctification as well, since as the inseparable and undivided
communion between the Word and the Father, the Holy Spirit is
not only Holiness, but He is also the Sanctifier of all that becomes
holy.183
Augustine defines this sanctifying mission of the Third Person
as that of the Gift184 (the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father
and Son as their Gift),183 because in this term he sees the means
whereby the Persons in the Trinity are united and also the prin­
ciple conveying supernatural life to men.188 The basis of this giv-

It

41’, 338) : “cum sit et Pater spiritus et Filius spiritus, et Pater sanctus et
Filius sanctus, proprie tamen ipse vocatur Spiritus sanctus tamquam sanc­
titas substantialis et consubstantialis amborum.”
™l/)e aff. chr., 16, 18 (CSEL 41, 119; PML 40, 300) : “et ipsam carita­
tem et sanctitatem, qua generator et generatus ineffabiliter sibi copulantur.”
Serm. 8, 11, 13 (PML 38, 72) : “Sanctificatio nulla divina et vera est,
nisi ab Spiritu sancto. Non enim frustra dictus est proprie Spiritus Sanctus.”
Episi. 232, 5 (CSEL 57, 515; PML 33, 1028) ; “est quaedam sanctitas
omnium, quae sancte fiunt, sancti fica trix, ipsius incommutabilis verbi, per
quod narratur illud pricipium, et ipsius principii, quod pari se verbo narrat,
inseparabilis et indivisa communio."
184 L. Verpeaux, Le Rôle Personnel du Saint Esprit dans la Sanctification
des Ames (Lyon, 1910), p. 46. “Les Grecs attribuaient au Saint-Esprit
cette note caractéristique, d’être par essence et personnellement, une puis­
sance, une vertu de sanctification δύναμις άγιαστιχή, saint Augustin le
définit en disant qu’il est le Don par excellence. C’est là, en quelque sorte,
le principe général, dont il fait dériver la sanctification par l’Esprit-Saint.”
De Trin., 4, 20, 29 (PML 42, 908) : “Et sicut Spiritui sancto donum
Dei esse, est a Patre procedere; ita mitti, est cognoisci quia ab illo procedat.
Nec possumus dicere quod Spiritus sanctus et a Filio non procedat.” Ibid.,
5, 14, 15 (PML 42, 921): “Exiit enim, non quomodo natus, sed quomodo
datus.”
180 F. Cavallera. “La Doctrine de Saint Augustin sur l’Esprit-Saint à
propos du ‘De Trinitate’,” Rech., Théol. Ane. Méd., II (1930), 367-368.
“Parmi les autres appellations s’appliquant à l’Esprit-Saint . . . c’est celle
de donum . . . Augustin y voit à la fois le terme de la donation par laquelle
sont unis le Père et le Fils et le principe des bienfaits de tout ordre par
lesquels la Trinité manifeste sa bonté à l’égard des hommes.” Cf. Cayré,
op„ oit., p. 192. “Tous les biens que l’homme reçoit, en particulier dans
l’ordre surnaturel, nous viennent par l’Esprît-Saint ; il est lui-même par ex­
cellence et éminement le ‘Don de Dieu.’ ”

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

85

ing, whether in the Trinity or to man, is charity—God is charity
(I John 4:8).187 Since divine love tends to communicate itself to
rational creatures,188 charity qualifies the Holy Spirit’s special in­
tervention in the sanctification of man,189 whereby He establishes
union between God and His creatures.190 This latter unity is anal­
ogous to that which the Holy Spirit effects between the Father
and Son.101
However, the mission of the Holy Spirit in sanctifying man
embraces more than is contained in the mere notion of charity

.

187De Trin., 15, 19, 37 (PML 42, 1086) : “Quapropter si sancta Scriptura
proclamat, Deus charitas est; iliaque ex Deo est, et in nobis id agit ut in
Deo maneamus, et ipse in nobis, et hoc inde cognoscimus, quia de Spiritu suo
dedit nobis, ipse Spiritus est Deus charitas. Deinde, si in donis Dei nihil
majus est char itate, et nullum est majus donum Dei quam Spiritus sanctus,
quid consequentius quam ut ipse sit charitas, qui dicitur et Deus et ex Deo?
Et si charitas qua Pater diligit Filium, et Patrem diligit Filius, ineffabiliter
communionem demonstrat amborum ; quid convenientius quam ut ille dicatur
charitas proprie, qui Spiritus est communis ambobus?”
188 G. Combes, La Charité d’après Saint Augustin (Paris, ϊ$34), pp. 51-52.
“Et. comme tout se tient dans l’acte d’amour de la Sainte Trinité, cet amour
a pour fin, comme les affections humaines qui en sont la pâle figure, de se
donner. Lisons l’Écriture Sainte. L’Esprit-Saint y est sans cesse appelé
'Don du Dieu.’ Pourquoi? parce qu’il est le don.sublime, le don divin que
la Trinité a fait aux hommes.”
188 Cavallera, op. cit., pp. 380-381. “la troisième personne exprime cette
communion ineffable qui les unit dans leur amour et leur complaisance
mutuelle et dès lors ne saurait être mieux individualisée que par cette
dénomination de charité qui qualifie également son intervention spéciale dans
l’oeuvre de la création et de la sanctification. Les textes sont là nous
rappelant que Dieu est charité, mais que tout particulièrement cette charité
dans ses effets se manifeste comme l’activité propre de l’Esprit-Saînt.”
Serin. 8, 11, 13 (PML 38, 73) : “Spiritu enim sancto ad unitatem
colligimur.”
Jo. Εν,, Tr. 39, 5 (PML 35, 1684) : “Accedant ad Deum, una anima
est omnium. Si accedentes ad Deum, multae animae per charitatem una
anima est, et multa corda unum cor ; quid agit ipse fons charitatis in Patre
et Filio? Nonne ibi magis Trinitas unus est Deus? Inde enim nobis charitas
venit, de ipso Spiritu sancto, sicut dicit Apostolus : charitas Dei diffusa est
in, cordibus nostris per Spiritum sanctum qui datus est nobis (Rom. V, 5).
SÎ ergo charitas· Dei diffusa in cordibus nostris per Spiritum sanctum qui
datus est nobis, multas animas facit unam animam, et multa corda facit
unum cor; quanto magis Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus, Deus unus,
lumen ununi, unumque principium?”

86

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

and unity. To explain this Augustine considers the roles of Christ
and of the Holy Spirit as coalescing into a single action. This is
easily understood when it is realized that while Christ is the Head
of His Body, the Holy Spirit is its soul. Consequently to belong
to Christ one must accept His Spirit.192 As the soul of Christ’s
Body the Holy Spirit is its life-giving principle, in the same man­
ner as the soul gives life to a human body.183 This function of the
human soul in its body warrants a further comparison to the ac­
tion of the Holy Spirit in the Body of Christ. To be vibrant with
physical life each member of the body—whether it be the hand,
eye, or any other part—must be organically united to the whole.
Likewise to share in the life of Christ’s Body or in grace the
member must be incorporated into it through charity.184 Since the
193Ibid., Tr. 9, 7 (PML 35, 1461): “item scriptum est, Quisquis autem
Spiritum Christi non- habet, hic non est ejus (Rom. VIII, 9). Cf. Prat,
op. cit., II, 292-293. “The points of contact between Christ and the Spirit
concern only the glorified Christ, and even this is not in his physical, per­
sonal life at the right hand of the Father, but in his mystical life in the
bosom of the Church. In other terms, the Holy Spirit and the glorified
Christ, who appear everywhere else as two distinct Persons, seem to become
identical in their role of sanctifiers of souls. There, indeed, their sphere of
influence is the same and their fields of action blend; for Christ is the head
or, under a somewhat different figure, the organism of the mystical body,
the soul of which is the Holy Ghost; now in ordinary language, chiefly in
that of St. Paul, almost all vital phenomena can be referred equally to the
soul or to the head. ... It is an identity of operations without confusion of
Persons.”
193 Serm. 267, 4, 4 (PML 38, 1231) : “videtis quid facîat anima in cor­
pore. Omnia membra vegetat ; per oculos videt, per aures audit, per nares
olfacit, per linguam loquitur, per manus operatur, per pedes ambulat: omni­
bus simul adest membris, ut vivant; vitam dat omnibus, officia singulis.
Non audit oculus, non videt auris, non videt lingua, nec loquitur auris et
oculus; sed tamen vivit: vivit auris vivit lingua; officia diversa sunt, vita
communis. Sic est Ecclesia Dei : in aliis sanctis facit miracula, in aliis
sanctis loquitur veritatem, in aliis sanctis custodit virginitatem, in aliis
sanctis custodit pudicitiam conjugalem, in aliis hoc, in aliis illud; singuli
propria operantur, sed pariter vivunt. Quod autem est anima corpori hominis,
hoc est Spiritus sanctus corpori Christi, quod est Ecclesia: hoc agit Spiritus
sanctus in tota Ecclesia, quod agit anima in omnibus membris unius cor­
poris.”
194In Io. Ev., Tr. 27, 6 (PML 35, 1618) : “Spiritum tuum dico animam
tuam : anima tua non vivificat nisi membra quae sunt in carne tua ; unum

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

87

Holy Spirit gives both charity and grace, His sanctifying action is
summed up in these concepts—soul, unity, life. The effects ob­
tained through this unity and new life—a remission of sin,105 a
restoration of God’s image in man,100 and the gift of divine adop­
tion*195
197*—must be attributed to the Holy Spirit as their primary
cause.
The Holy Spirit and moral sanctity.—Though the question of
moral sanctity is beyond the scope of this work a few words on
the Holy Spirit’s action in such a field appear necessary. Since to
avoid sin and perfect his initial sanctity man must subdue the con­
cupiscence remaining in his nature, he is given the Holy Spirit.193
The Spirit enlightens man’s mind and influences his will190 by
guiding it, restraining its wanderings, regulating the rhythm of
its movement, and disciplining its activity.200 Thus by adhering to
si toHas, jam non vivificatur ex anima tua, quia unitati corporis tui non
copulatur. . . . Nihil enim sic debet formidare Christianus, quam separari a
corpore Christi. SÎ enim separatur a corpore Christi, non est membrum ejus:
non vegetatur Spiritu ejus."
195 Contra Crescon., 2, 16, 20 (CSEL 52, 379; PML 43, 478) : “per donum
eius proprium, hoc est sanctum eius spiritum, per quem diffunditur caritas in
cordibus nostris, mundari sanarique poteritis.”
109De spir. et liti., 27, 47 (CSEL 60, 201 ; PML 44. 229) : “hoc enim agit
spiritus gratiae, ut imaginem dei, in qua naturaliter facti sumus, instauret in
nobis.”
107 Z?r corrept. et grat., 15, 47 (PML 44, 945) : “De ipso quippe Spiritu,
alio loco dicit, Accepimus Spiritum adoptionis filiorum, in- quo clamamus,
Abba, Pater (Rom. VIII, 15).”
Op. imp. contra Jul., 2, 137 (PML 45, 1198-1199) : “Contra infirmitatem
vero carnis nunc Christi gratia certamen instituit, postea ejus perficiet sani­
tatem : cujus sanitatis futurae atque perpetuae nunc pignus Spiritum sanc­
tum dedit (Il Cor. V, 5), per quem diffunditur in nostris cordibus charitas
(Rom. V, 5), ut nos ad agonem interim relicta carnis non vinca;t infirmitas.”
™De grat. Christi, 1, 14, 15 (CSEL 42, 138; PML 44, 368): “ac per
hoc quando deus docet non per legis litteram, sed per spiritus gratiam, ita
docet, ut quod quisque didicerit non tantum cognoscendo videat, sed etiam
volendo appetat agendoque perficiat.”
200 Combes, op. cit., p. 65. “Le Saint-Esprit ne se contente pas de prévenir
et de guider la volonté, il contient ses écarts possibles, réprime ses élans
trop prononcés, règle le rythme de son mouvement, et discipline, pour la
rendre plus conquérante, son activité. . . . Cette action régularisa trice du
Saint-Esprit met bien en évidence le caractère spécifique de la charité.
Chacun de nos élans vers Dieu est dirigé avec tant de précision qu’il ne
perd rien de l’ardeur qui l’anime.”

il
Ii

I

88

The Uncreated Cause of Sanctification, the Trinity

the Spirit of God man overcomes his concupiscence to such an ex­
tent that he can say, It is now no longer I that live, but Christ
lives in me (Gal. 2:20).201
m De continent,, 13. 29 (CSEL 41, 179; PML 40, 369) : “Spiritus itaque
hominis adhaerens spiritui dei concupiscit adversus carnem, id est adversus
se ipsum, sed pro se ipso, ut motus ille sive in. carne sive in anima secundum
hominem, non secundum deum, qui sunt adhuc per adquîsitum languorem,
continentia cohibeantur propter adquirendam salutem, ut homo non secundum
hominem vivens iam possit dicere: vivo autem iam non ego, vivit vero in me
Christus.”

CHAPTER III

The Created Means of Sanctification ;
Baptism, Charity, and Grace

In the preceding chapter the role of the Trinity, the uncreated
cause of sanctification, was considered. Now the created means,
baptism, charity, and grace will be treated. These three are not
all inclusive, but the particular character of Augustine’s writings
against the heresies determines their choice here. In each section
the development will be obvious if the heretical opinions are briefly
recalled. The Donatists maintained that baptism conferred outside
their sect was invalid since the Donatist Church alone was the
true Body of Christ. The Pelagians denied the necessity of bap­
tism to remit original sin. There is no dispute between Augustine
and the Donatists as to the nature and qualities of charity. The
question revolves around union with the true Body of Christ as a
condition of possessing it. Against the Pelagians, however, Augus­
tine insisted upon the gratuitous character of this virtue. The sec­
tion on grace is almost entirely motivated by the Pelagian con­
troversy. Though the Manichean heresy is relegated to a minor
position as a motive for this chapter, it must be remembered that
against Mani’s followers Augustine showed the necessity of bap­
tism through which the Holy Spirit, charity, and grace were given.
BAPTISM

The part Augustine attributes to baptism in sanctification can
best be shown by treating the sacrament as a bath of regeneration
and renovation. Such a manner of procedure presupposes a
knowledge of what Adam lost and incurred by his sin. In his
original state Adam was endowed with two types of life, physical
and spirtual. The physical was commensurate with his nature ; the
spiritual exceeded it and was due to a gratuitous gift of God.
Since the immediate consequence of original sin was the loss of
spiritual life, there arose the anomalous condition of Adam trans­
mitting to his progeny physical life and spiritual death. This
89

90

Created Means of Sanctification

death was not a mere négation of life but there was involved also
a principle termed the vetus homo by St. Paul.’ Consequently the
renewal of sanctity in man involves a remission of sin, the restora­
tion of spiritual life, and the neutralization of the vetus homo.
Before baptism is considered as a bath of regeneration and ren­
ovation it must be first pointed out that through this sacrament
the member is incorporated into Christ’s Body.12* This is not a
union of the faithful in Christ barren of all communication. As
the sacrament of Christ’s passion and death,8 baptism reproduces
in the member the death, resurrection, and life of the Head.4*
6Con­
sequently just as Christ’s death sanctified man by destroying sin
and renewing his spiritual life, so baptism sanctifies by destroying
sin in the Christian and giving him the life of Christ.®
Baptism as a Bath
Augustine explains the remission of sin by comparing baptism
to a bath of cleansing water. He applies this idea both to the
1F. Prat, The Theology o/ .ST Paul, trans, from the eleventh French
edition by John Stoddard (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1926) I, 222.
“By associating us with his death, he neutralizes the active principle which
sin had implanted in us, and which constituted the old man; by associating
us with his life, he destroys all the germs of death and confers upon us the
privilege of an endless life : life of the soul and life of the body, life of grace
and life of glory.’’
* Contra Jul., 6, 9, 27 (PML 44, 838): “Non autem habere parvulos
vitam, nisi habeant Christum (quem procul dubio habere non possunt, nisi
induerint eum, eo modo quo scriptum est, Quotquot in Christo baptizat i
estis, Christum induistis (Galat. III, 27).”
* De spir. et litt., 6, 10 (CSEL 60, 162; PML 44, 205) : “consepulti ergo
sumus illi per baptismum in mortem.”
* Ibid., 6, 10 (CSEL 60, 162; PML 44, 205) : “consepulti ergo sumus illi
per baptismum in mortem, ut quemadmodum surrexit Christus a mortuis per
gloriam patris, ita et nos in novitate vitae ambulemus.”
6 Contra Jul., 2, 10, 33 (PML 44, 697) : “sed primorum hominum pecca­
tum, in posteros propagatione trajectum. Etiam hujus mali reatus, Baptis­
matis sanctificatione remittitur.” De nat. et gratia 7, 7 (CSEL 60, 237; PML
44, 250) : “tanto et multo ardentiore zelo nos oportet accendi, ne evacuetur
crux Christi, evacuatur autem, si aliquo modo praeter illius sacramentum
ad justitiam vitamque aeternam pervenire posse dicatur.”

Created Means of Sanctification

91

Church as a corporate entity® and to the individual Christians
forming that Body? Between the two he places a causal connec­
tion so that the sanctity of the individual depends on the reception
of baptism in the Catholic Church alone.*
89

Baptism as a Regeneration

It is quite evident that Augustine considered the remission of
sin or the destruction of the soul’s spiritual death as being equiva­
lent to the reception of spiritual life.0 He explains the restoration
of this life to man by considering baptism as a regeneration or
as a second birth in Christ.10 This restoration of life gives Christ
Λ Contra litt. Petit., 3, 49, 59 (CSEL 52, 212; PML 43, 379): “neque
enim apostolo Paulo non est credendum, qui de illo dixit: viri, diligite
uxores vestras, sicut et Christus dilexit ecclesiam et se ipsum tradidit pro
ea, ut eam sanctificaret mundans eam lavacro aquae in verbo.”
‘De bapt., 4, 12, 18 (CSEL 51, 244; PML 43, 166): “et si quisque per
hominem perversum id accipiens non accipiat tamen ministri perversitatem,
sed solam mysterii sanctitatem, in bona fide et spe et caritate unitati conpaginatus ecclesiae remissionem accipit peccatorum.” Op. imp. eontra Jul.,
5, 64 (PML 45, 1506) : “Ecce parvuli, qui bonum vel malum velle aut nolle
non possunt, tamen quando reluctantes et cum lacrymis reclamantes sacro
Baptismate renascuntur, sancti et justi esse coguntur.” In Ps. 85, 4 (PML
37, 1084) : “sed abluti estis, sed sanctificati estis (I Cor. VI, 11).”
8 De bapt., 4, 21, 28 (CSEL 51, 256; PML 43, 173) : “sic non est inprobandum evangel icum baptismi sacramentum, etiamsi extra ecclesiam fuerit
acceptum, quod tamen quia non proficit ad salutem, nisi ille qui habet in­
tegritatem baptismi sua quoque pravitate correcta incorporetur ecclesiae.”
9Ibid., 7, 19, 37 (CSEL 51, 355; PML 43, 232): “si autem baptismus
sacramentum est gratiae, ipsa vera gratia abolitio peccatorum est, non est
aput haereticos baptismi gratia.” Cf. A. Gendreau.ô'aMctf Augustini Doc­
trina De Baptismo (Baltimore, 1939), p. 46. “Primus igitur effectus sacra. menti Baptismi est gratia, quae ab Augustino dicitur esse remissio pecca­
torum.” Ibid., p. 36. “Attamen in his omnibus notari debet non diserte
locutum esse Augustinum de gratia sanctificante seu de statu gratiae. Potius
effectum negativum Baptismi tractat ... nil invenitur de donis et virtutibus
quae in receptione hujus sacramenti infunduntur.”
18 De pecc. meritis, 1, 18, 23 (CSEL 60, 22-23; PML 44, 122) : “quis enim
Christianorum ferat, cum dicitur ad aeternam salutem posse quemquam
pervenire, si non renascatur in Christo, quod per baptismum fieri voluit eo
iam tempore, quo tale sacramentum constituendum fuit regenerandis in spem
salutis aeternae?”

I

92

Created Means of Sanctification

a title and right over all those who are born again in Him. Just
as the human race born from Adam is physically one with him,
so now those re-born from Christ become spiritually one with
Him,11 and Christ becomes the Head and origin of His mem­
bers.12 In this union Christ gives to His members the Holy
Spirit,18 charity,14 and grace,15 the uncreated and created means
of imprinting Christ's life in the members.

Baptism as a Renovation
In this sense baptism destroys the veins homo,™ or the active
principle resulting in man from Adam’s sin. It opposes to it anittt/r. contra Jul., 2, 191 (PML 45, 1224): “Adam quippe induunt
qui nascuntur, sicut Christum induunt qui renascuntur.” De pecc. meritis, 1,
31, 60 (CSEL 60, 60; PML 44, 144) : “ ‘sic,’ inquit, ‘fiet generatio spiritalis,
ut sint caelestes homines ex terrenis, quod adipisci non poterunt, nisi membra
mea efficiantur, ut ipse ascendat qui descendit, quia nemo ascendit nisi qui
descendit.’ nisi ergo in unitatem Christi omnes mutandi levandique concur­
rant, ut Christus, qui descendit, ipse ascendat, non aliud deputans corpus
suum, id est ecclesiam suam, quam se ipsum—quia de Christo et ecclesia
verius intelligitur : erunt duo in carne una, de qua re ipse dixit: igitur iam
non duo, sed una caro—ascendere omnino non poterunt, quia nemo ascendit
in caelum, nisi qui de caelo descendit, filius hominis, qui est in caelo.”
ω Contra litt. Petii., 1, 5, 6 (CSEL 52, 7; PML 43, 248) : “cur non sinis
ut semper sit Christus origo christiani, in Christo radicem christianus infigat,
Christus christiani sit caput?”
MContra epist. Parm., 2, 11, 23 (CSEL 51, 72; PML 43, 66-67): “et
non per evangelium, in cuius praedicatione spiritus sanctus operatur ad
gignendos in baptismo filios spiritales.”
14 Epist. 140, 22, 54 (CSEL 44, 201 ; PML 33, 561) : “ac per hoc, si deus
lux est et deus caritas est, profecto caritas lux ipsa est, quae diffunditur in
cordibus nostris per spiritum sanctum, qui datus est nobis.” Since the HolySpirit given in Baptism bestows charity, then charity is given at Baptism.
Cf. Gendreau, op. cit., p. 36. “Attamen in his omnibus notari debet non
diserte locutum esse Augustinum de gratia sanctificante seu de statu gratiae.
Potius effectum negativum Baptismi tractat ... nil invenitur de donis et
virtutibus quae in receptione hujus sacramenti infunduntur.”
35 Contra litt. Petii., 3, 49, 59 (CSEL 52, 211; PML 43, 379) : “cum enim
dicimus : ‘Christus baptizat,’ non visibili ministerio dicimus . . . sed occulta
gratia, occulta potentia in spiritu sancto.”
”De pecc. meritis, 2, 27, 44 (CSEL 60, 115; PML 44, 177) : “et filii . . .
damnationem veteri homini debitam sacramento spiritalis regenerationis et
renovationis evadunt.” Cf. Prat, op. cit., II, 257-258. “The old man denotes

Created Means of Sanctification

93

other principle, that of the new man or new life in Christ whereby
men recover the image of God,17 are made sons of God,18 and
consequently new creatures.
While this renovation destroys the vetus homo, yet all the weak­
ness due to sin is not abolished. The state of original justice pos­
tulated an uprightness of the will and a subjection of concupis­
cence. In redeemed man the rectitude of the will is immediately
restored, but concupiscence remains. In this sense the renovation
of man is not yet complete.19 This concupiscence is not to be re-*16
all that we have in common with the first Adam, and all that we inherit
directly or indirectly from him, as the religious Head of humanity. All this
perishes through the fact of our union with the second Adam.”
Contra Adimant., 5 (CSEL 25 I, 125; PML 42, 136) : "et ut manifeste
intellegatur non secundum vetustatem peccati, quae corrumpitur, sed secun­
dum spiritalem conformationem factum esse hominem ad imaginem dei,
item apostolus monet, ut exuti consuetudine peccatorum, id est vetere homine,
induamus novam vitam Christi, quem novum hominem appellat.”
ω De perj. iust. hominis, 18, 39 (CSEL 42, 41 ; PML 44, 313) : “cum ergo
per gratiam renovationis filii dei simus.”
16 J. Henninger, S. Augustinus et Doctrina De Duplici Justitia (Modling
prope Vindobonam, 1935). p. 73. “justificationem nostram esse restitutionem
justitiae originalis. Si hoc bene intelligitur, tenemus elavem solutionis. Etenim,
justitia originalis complectebatur non solum rectitudinem voluntatis, sed
etiam subjectionem concupiscentiae; in nobis autem statim restituitur id, quod
essentiale est, nempe rectitudo voluntatis per caritatem, sed concupiscentia
manet, et sub hoc respectu restitutio justitiae, renovatio hominis nondum
est perfecta.” Cf. Prat. op. cit., II, 258. “It is very evident that death to the
old man is progressive, for the inclination to evil persists even in regenerate
man; but the old man has received a mortal blow; with the antidote of
grace, concupiscence, called here ‘the body of sin,’ is rendered inert and
harmless.” Cf. J. Turmel, “Le Dogme du Péché Originel Dans Saint Au­
gustin,” Rev. Hîst. et Litt. Rei., VII (1902), 128. “La loi de la concupiscence
reste dans les membres, mais elle perd son caractère de péché pour ceux
qui ont reçu le sacrament de la régénération et qui ont commencé à être
renouvelés. Toutefois, ce qui naît de cette concupiscence doit renaître pour
être guéri.” Ibid., p. 130. “Les autres péchés demeurent jusqu’à ce qu’ils
aient été remis. Comment demeurent-ils alors qu’ils sont passés? Ce qui est
passé c'est l’acte, ce qui demeure c’est le reatus. Ici, c’est le contraire, l’acte
demeure, le reatus est passé.”

94

Created Means of Sanctification

stricted to the sexual appetite, but it consists in the whole interior
discord and lack of harmony which man experiences in himself.20
Through successful combat against it man is renewed daily,21 and
his initial sanctity given in baptism is increased.22

The Holy Eucharist, the Symbol of Unity
Since in the three heresies treated Augustine is not especially
concerned with the Holy Eucharist, no mention of this sacra­
ment has yet been made. Nor does the scope of this work con­
cerned primarily with initial sanctity demand a development of
the Holy Eucharist’s part in sanctifying man. Yet the role of
this sacrament in bringing to its culmination the union of Head
and members first established in baptism is so important that at
least the outlines of its sanctifying action must be delineated.
Augustine considers the Eucharist not merely as the sacrament
of the historical body of Christ but also as the sacrament of His
Body, the Church,2’ By receiving the Body and Blood of Christ
* Henninger, op. cit., )>p. 82-83. “Concupiscentia . . . non significat ap­
petitum sensitivum neque simpliciter, neque ut deordinatum, multo minus
restringenda est ad concupiscentiam 'carnalem’ proprie dictam seu appetitum
sexualem, sed consistit in tota illa interiore discordia et deordinatione, quam
homo lapsus in se experitur.”
“ De pecc. meritis, 2, 7, 9 (CSEL 60, 80; PML 44, 157) : “profecto enim
qui de die in diem adhuc renovatur, nondum totus est renovatus ; et in quantum nondum est renovatus, in tantum adhuc in vetustate est.”
” Contra Jul., 2, 8, 23 (PML 44, 689) : “Justificatio porro in hac vita nobis
secundum tria ista confertur ; prius lavacro regenerationis, quo remittuntur
cuncta peccata: deinde, congressione cum vitiis, a quorum reatu absoluti
sumus: tertio, dum nostra exauditur oratio, qua dicimus, Dimitte nobis
debita nostra (Matth. VI, 12) ; quoniam quamlibet fortiter contra vitia
dimicemus, homines sumus ; Dei autem gratia sic nos in hoc corruptibili
corpore adjuvat dimicantes; ut non desit propter quod exaudiat veniam
postulantes.”
aL. Brigué, “Les Dispositions à la Communion chez Saint Augustin,”
Rech. Sc. Rei., XXIX (1939), 400. “L’Eucharistie n’est pas seulement le
symbole de l’union du fidèle au Christ, son maître; elle est aussi le signe
d’une autre réalité: l’union du chrétien a l’Êglise. . . . L’Eucharistie est le
signe visible d’une réalité invisible: le corps du Christ. Or le corps ‘his­
torique’ du Christ, celui qui est né et qui a souffert, est inséparable de son
corps ‘mystique.’ Le Sauveur n’a pas seulement vécu, il y a dix-neuf siècles,

|
J

j

j

I

Created Means of Sanctification

95

the Christians become members of Christ21 and share in His life,23
pour sauver l’humanité et remonter ensuite, définitivement glorifié, vers son
Père. Le Christ total, c’est l’Êglise parfaitement unie à son chef, englobant
tous les fidèles qui vivent de sa vie et doivent croître dans la foi et l’amour
jusqu’au jour où le corps entier ait atteint, avec eux et par eux, la perfection
à laquelle, il tend. L’Eucharistie, qui est le sacrement du corps ‘historique’
du Christ, est donc en même temps le sacrement de son corps 'mystique/
car elle représente parfaitement l’unité de l’Êglise, ‘formée de la multitude
des frères, comme le pain est formé d’un grand nombre de grains, et le vin
de plusieurs grappes/ ” Cf. H. de Lubac, “Corpus Mysticum,” Rech. Sc. Rei.,
XXIX (1939), 262. “Dans la pensée de toute Γ antiquité chrétienne, mais
particulièrement dans la pensée de saint Augustin, Eucharistie et Église sont
liées. Il en va de même chez les écrivans latins des septième, huitième et
neuvième siècles. Pour eux comme pour Augustin, l'Eucharistie est rapportée
à l’Êglise comme la cause à l’effet, comme le moyen à la fin, en meme temps
que comme le signe à la réalité.”
** Serin. 57, 7, 7 (FAIL 38, 389): “Ergo Eucharistia panis noster quo­
tidianus est. . . . Virtus enim ipsa quae ibi intelligitur, unitas est, ut redacti
in corpus ejus, effecti membra ejus, simus quod accipimus.” Cf. de Lubac,
op. cit., p. 263. “Aussi bien que saint Augustin ... il sait que pour demeurer
dans ce corps du Christ qu’est la sainte Église, il faut participer en toute
vérité, par le sacrement, à un premier corps du Christ.”
33 De pecc. meritis, 1, 24, 34 (CSEL 60, 33-34; PML 44, 128-129) : "Op- ,
time punici Christiani baptismum ipsum nihil aliud quam salutem et sacra­
mentum corporis Christi, nihil aliud quam vitam vocant, unde, nisi ex antiqua,
ut existimo, et apostolica traditione, qua ecclesiae Christi insitum tenent
praeter baptismum et participationem mensae dominicae non solum ad regnum
dei, sed nec ad salutem et vitam aeternam posse quemquam hominum per­
venire? hoc enim et scriptura testatur secundum ea quae supra diximus,
nam quid aliud tenent qui baptismum nomine salutis appellant, nisi quod
dictum est: salvos nos fecit per lavacrum regenerationis et quod Petrus ait:
sic et vos simili forma baptisma salvos facit? quid aliud etiam qui sacra­
mentum mensae dominicae vitam vocant, nisi quod dictum est: ego sum
panis vivus, qui de caelo descendi, et: panis, quem ego dedero, caro mea
est pro saeculi vita, et: si non manducaveritis carnem filii hominis et san­
guinem biberitis, non habebitis vitam in vobis?” In Jo, Ev., Tr. 26, 13
(PML 35, 1613) : “Inde est quod exponens nobis apostolus Paulus hunc
panem, Unus panis, inquit, unum corpus multi sumus (I Cor. X, 17). O
Sacramentum pietatis 1 o signum unitatis 1 o vinculum charitatisl Qui vult
vivere, habet ubi vivat, habet unde vivat. Accedat, credat; incorporetur, ut
vivificetur.”

96

Created Means of Sanctification

The member lives in Christ, and Christ lives in the member.28
This life, of course, is grace, and though the same as that given
in baptism, it must be considered as being a deeper and more pro­
found sharing in divine life.21
Thus participation in the eucharistie Christ builds the Chris­
tian community into the Body of Christ, and in this form it is
presented to the heavenly Father by the hands of the divine High
Priest.28 One may conclude that just as Christ offered His physical
body on the Cross for the sanctification of all men, so now in the
* In Jo. Ev., Tr. 27, 1 (PML 35, 1616) ; “est enim de corpore Domini,
quod dicebat se dare ad manducandum propter aeternam vitam. Exposuit
autem modum attributionis hujus et doni sui, quomodo daret carnem suam
manducare, dicens, Qui manducat carnem meant, et bibit sanguinem ineunt
in me manet, et ego in illo (Joan. VI, 57). Signum quia manducant et
bibit hoc est, si manet et manetur, si habitat et inhabitatur, si haeret ut non
deseratur. Hoc ergo nos docuit et admonuit mysticis verbis, ut simus in
ejus corpore sub ipso capite in membris ejus, edentes carnem ejus, non
reliquentes unitatem ejus.”
M Ibid., Tr. 26, 19 (PML 35, 1615): “sicut participatione Filii per uni­
tatem corporis ejus et sanguinis, quod illa manducatio potatioque significat,
nos efficimur meliores.” Cf. Brigué, op. cit., p. 401. “Que l’Eucharistie une
.fois reçue fortifie cette union commencée en baptême, que notre incorpora­
tion au Christ total devienne, grâce à elle, plus profonde et plus intime."
*De civ. Del, 10, 6 (CSEL 40 I, 456; PML 41, 284) ; “Hoc est sacrifi­
cium Christianorum: multi unum corpus in Christo. Quod etiam sacramento
altaris fidelibus noto frequentat ecclesia, ubi ei demonstratur, quod in ea
re, quam offert ipsa offeratur.” Cf. K, Adam, Christ Our Brother, trans.
Dom Justin McCann (London: Sheed and Ward. 1932), pp. 73-74. “The
communion with the flesh and blood of Christ which we celebrate in the
liturgy is a real communion with Christ our Head, and, therefore, a real
communion with all His members. ‘For we, being many, are one bread, one
body, all that partake of one bread.’ This aspect of the Eucharist is em­
phasized by St. Paul, and especially by such Fathers as St. Ignatius of
Antioch, St. Cyprian and St. Augustine. Their constant teaching is that by
means of this one heavenly Bread the supernatural unity of the many in
Christ is established and realized. The Mass is never an individual act, but
always essentially a community act; and this not merely in the sense that
the whole community should take part in it but also and emphatically in
the sense that participation in the one Bread gives the community its true
cohesion and unity, and builds it up into the supernatural organism of the
Body of Christ, in which form it is presented to the Father by the hand
of the divine High Priest.”

Created Means of Sanctification

97

pure oblation of the Eucharist, He offers Himself and in Himself
His members to achieve the same result29
CHARITY

From the study on baptism it is evident that Augustine con­
siders sanctity as involving an initial remission of sin and an in­
fusion of life together with a daily subjugation of concupiscence.
The first two elements really express the purpose of Christ's In­
carnation and death. Since through charity the member participates
in Christ’s passion,80 then charity sanctifies man by destroying
sin81 and renewing his former spiritual life.82 The third element,
the combat against concupiscence, is necessary because Christ
through His passion has not restored fallen man to Adam's state
SL Tarchier, Le Sacrament de ΓEucharistie d'après Saint Augustin·
(Lyon, 1904), pp. 25-26. “L’Eucharistie.est donc, pour saint Augustin, dans
le plan providentiel, l’aboutissant de l’incarnation. Le Verbe s’est fait chair
pour que nous puissions, par l’intermédiaire de son humanité, nous assimiler
sa divinité, et le moyen qu’il a choisi pour réaliser cette union est le sacre­
ment de vie, dans lequel il nous donne en nourriture son corps et son sang.”
Cf. Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, New English Translation Provided by the
Vatican (Washington, D. C. : NCWC, 1943), p. 31. “And as the Divine
Redeemer, when dying on the Cross, offered Himself to the Eternal Father
as Head of the whole human race, so ‘in this clean oblation
*
He offers to
the heavenly Father not only Himself as Head of the Church, but in Him­
self His mystical members also.”
** Serm. 169, 12, 15 (PML 38, 923) : “Ut prosit tibi communicatio pas­
sionum Christi, charitas adsit.”
Ά De mor. eccl„ 1, 30, 64 (PML 32, 1337) : “tantus charitatis ardor in­
nascitur, et tantum divini amoris consurgit incendium, ut exustis omnibus
vitiis, et homine purgato atque sanctificato.” De Perf. iust. hominis, 3, 8
(CSEL 42, 8; PML 44, 295) : "tunc ergo erit plena iustitia, quando plena
sanitas ; tunc plena sanitas, quando plena caritas.” Cf. H. Rondet, "L’An­
thropologie Religieuse De Saint Augustin,” Rech. Sc. Rei., XXIX (1939),
181. "La charité est la santé de notre âme, car elle est le principe qui donne
la santé au corps du Christ.”
83De Gen. contra Man., 2, 23, 36 (PML 34, 215): “sine dubitatione intelligimus ad arborem vitae non solum per flammeam frameam versatilem,
id est per tolerantiam temporalium molestiarum, sed etiam per plenitudinem
scientiae, id est per charitatem veniri.” Contra Adamint., 13 (CSEL 25 I,
146; PML 42, 148) : “consumit enim veterem vitam divinus amor et innovat
hominem,”,

98

Created Means of Sanctification

of original justice, and it increases initial sanctification. Here
charity also plays an all important part since it is the foundation
of man’s reaction against concupiscence,” and is, as it were, the
root supporting salvation.34
While delineating this three-fold activity of charity, Augustine
does not center the sanctifying quality of thc
virtue
*
in any par­
ticular element, but he places it rather in their corporate effect of
establishing unity between God and His creatures. After all, the
reason for love is the union of the lovers,35 and divine love brings
this about by eliminating all alienating factors,3® so that the crea­
ture once again is born of God,8T becomes a son of the Most
High,38 and a co-heir with Jesus Christ.38
** De grat. Christi, 1, 26, 27 (CSEL 42, 147-148; PML 44, 374) : “quid
autem boni faceremus, nisi diligeremus? aut quomodo bonum non facimus,
si diligamus?” Ibid., I, 18, 19 (CSEL 42, 140; PML 44, 370) : “et apostolus
Paulus, cum dicit radicem malorum omnium esse cupiditatem, admonet utique
intellegi radicem bonorum omnium caritatem.”
·* In epist. Jo. ad Parthos, Tr. 2, 9 (PML 35, 1994) : “Firmamentum
salutis est, habere, radicem charitatis, habere virtutem pietatis, non formam
solum.”
“J. Burnaby, Amor Dei (London, 1938), p. 96. “The raison d’etre of all
human love is that realised union of lover and beloved in which desire gives
place to pure delight, because need has been met by the good appropriate
to it.”
* Burnaby, op. cit., p. 179. “The superiority of his understanding of Chris­
tianity lies in the sureness of his conviction, first, that ‘cleaving to God’
must be the personal union of love, and second, that this union is neither
the cause nor effect of a transformation ^of man’s nature, but is itself that
transformation.” Cf. G. Combes, La Charité d’après Saint Augustin (Paris,
1934), pp. 122-123. “Et, peu à peu, selon la grande loi de l’amour, qui efface
toute différence entre ceux qui s’aiment, nous devenons semblables à Lui.”
nDe grat. Christi, 1, 21, 22 (CSEL 42, 141-142; PML 44, 370) : “Caritas
autem, quae virtus est, ex deo nobis est, non ex nobis scriptura teste, quae
dicit : caritas ex deo est, et omnis qui diligit ex deo natus est et cognovit
deum, quia deus caritas est.”
epist. Jo. ad Parthos, Tr. 2, 14 (PML 35, 1997) : “Terram diligis?
terra eris. Deum diligis? quid dicam? deus eris? Non audeo dicere ex me,
Scripturas audiamus: Ego dixi, Dii estis, et filii Altissimi omnes (Psal.
LXXXI, 6).”
* Ibid., Tr. 2, 9 (PML 35, 1994) ; “Vis habere dilectionem Patris, ut sis
cohaeres Filii? Noli diligere mundum.”

Created Means of Sanctification

99

The explanation of this virtue’s power to sanctify through
union with God rests on the fact that charity is the very nature of
God40 and the source of union and sanctity in the Trinity.41 This
charity is communicated to man by the Holy Spirit42 and through
it the members of Christ’s Body are united to the Head.45 Just as
charity sanctifies the Persons in the Trinity by identifying them
with the divine essence, so now it sanctifies the members of
Christ’s Body by joining them to God in the person of their Head.
That is what Augustine means when he states that the charity of
God in Christ sanctifies.44 Here, however, a distinction must be
made. Because God’s substantial and uncreated charity is not com­
municated to man but only a participation of it,45 this charity in
M Contra litt. PetU., 3, 5, 6 (CSEL 52, 167; PML 43, 351): “et deus
caritas est.”
** De ag. chr., 16, 18 (CSEL 41, 119; PML 40, 300) ; “et ipsam caritatem
et sanctitatem, qua generator et generatus ineffabiliter sibi copulantur.”
a De grat. Christi, 1, 26, 27 (CSEL 42, 148; PML 44, 374) : “ac per hoc
gratiam dei, qua caritas dei diffunditur in cordibus nostris per spiritum
sanctum qui datus est nobis.”
“In epist. Jo. ad Parthos, Tr. 1, 9 (PML 35, 1985) : "Qui ergo didi se
in ipso manere, debet sicut ipse ambulavit et ipse ambulare. Quomodo, fra­
tres? Quid nos monet? Qui dicit se in ipso manere, id est in Christo, debet
sicut ille ambulavit et ipse ambulare. ... In qua via? . . . Fixus in cruce
erat, et in ipsa via ambulabat: ipsa est via charitatis, Pater, ignosce illis,
quia nesciunt quid faciunt.”
** De mor. Eccl., 1, 12, 21 (PML 32, 1320): “Sed rursus cavere debet,
ne ab ipsius Dei charitate, qua sanctificatur ut beatissimus maneat. . . . Non
igitur separat nos alia creatura, siquidem et nos ipsi creatura sumus, a
charitate Dei, quae est in Christo Jesu Domino nostro."
* De Trin., 15, 7, 12 (PML 42, 1065-1066) : “Itemque in hoc magna
distantia est, quod sive mentem dicamus in homine, ej usque notitiam, et
dilectionem, sive memoriam, intelligentiam, voluntatem, nihil mentis memini­
mus nisi per memoriam, nec intelligimus nisi per intelligentiam, nec amamus
nisi per voluntatem. . . . Spiritus etiam sanctus quia sapientia est procedens
de sapientia, non Patrem habet memoriam, et Filium intelligentiam, et se
dilectionem; neque enim sapientia esset, si alius ei meminisset, eique alius
intelligeret, ac tantummodo sibi ipse diligeret: sed ipse habet haec tria, et
ea sic habet, ut haec ipsa sit.” Cf. Combes, op. cit., p. 54. “Cette dif­
fusion fait nôtre la Charité de Dieu. Mais ne nous y trompons pas, elle
prend la mesure de notre humanité. Ce n’est pas la charité substantielle et
subsistante de la Sainte Trinité, mais une communication de ses ardeurs et
de sa flamme. Incréée en Dieu, elle est créée en nous. Toutes proportions

100

Created Means of Sanctification

Christ’s Body does not produce in the member a sanctity equiva­
lent to God's but one in keeping with man’s own nature. It nat­
urally follows that the menTber’s unity with God and consequently
his sanctity depends on the proportion of love possessed.4*
Besides this action of charity in uniting the individual members
of Christ’s Body to the Head, it also joins the members to each
other.47 Consequently in addition to individual sanctity in Christ’s
Body there is also corporate sanctity. In this sense charity makes
men members of Christ’s Body,48 in which God Himself dwells.49
Because the members are joined to this Body by charity, no mat­
ter how small, they are saints. That is why Augustine uses the
name saint as a synonym for Christian.60
gardées cependant entre la créature et le Créateur, elle retient les traits
lointains de la charité divine. Elle n’est pas un image, ni un reflet, ni un
symbole, mais une participation réelle et vivante.” Cf. Burnaby, op. cit., p.
99. “the love of God which is shed abroad in our hearts is no mere
human affection : in the last analysis, in the deepest sense, it is God’s own
love which is ours by His gift. But its object remains to the end God not
man—or rather, man only as 'in God.’ ”
“Contra duas epist. Pclag., 3, 7, 21 (CSEL 60, 511; PML 44, 604):
“porro si in hac vita pio nemine dubitante quanto amplius diligimus deum,
tanto sumus utique iustiores.” In Ps. 99, 5 (PML 37, 1273) : “Inquantum
autem in te charitas crescit, efficiens te et revocans te ad similitudinem Dei.”
41 In Jo. Ev., Tr. 65, 2 (PML 35, 1809) : “Ad hoc ergo nos dilexit, ut et
nos diligamus invicem; hoc nobis conferens diligendo nos, ut mutua dilec­
tione constringamur inter nos, et tam dulci vinculo connexis membris corpus
tanti capitis simus.”
“Contra Crescon., 2, 15, 18 (CSEL 52, 377; PML 43, 477) : “ad spiritus
sancti donum, quo caritas dei diffunditur in cordibus nostris, nullus istorum
nisi mutatus accedit, ita omnino mutandus, ut non sit alienus, sed sit caelestis
particeps pacis, sanctae socius unitatis, plenus individuae caritatis, civis
angelicae civitatis.”
44 In Ps. 98, 4 (PML 37, 1261): “Homines enim amantes se invicem, et
amantes Deum suum qui in illis habitat, faciunt civitatem Deo. Quia lege
quadam civitas continetur; lex ipsa eorum, charitas est; et ipsa charitas,
Deus est: aperte enim scriptum est, Deus charitas est (I Joan. IV, 8). Qui
ergo plenus est charitate, plenus est Deo ; et multi pleni charitate, civitatem
faciunt Deo.”
M De gestis Pelagii, 1 (CSEL 42, 52; PML 44, 320) : “et de hoc opere
nostro sanctitas tua atque omnis qui legerit.” Ibid., 1, 2 (CSEL 42, 52 ;
PML 44, 320) : “quod me de sanctis fratribus et coëpiscopis nostris.”
Contra Jul., 2, 10, 34 (PML 44, 697) : “sed sanctos et in sancta Ecclesia
illustres antistites Dei.”

Created Means of Sanctification

101

The communion of saints.—Due to this corporate conception
of charity’s sanctifying action the role of the communion of saints
becomes evident. The love of the members for each other is nec­
essarily entwined not only with their love for the Head but also
with their love for God. In a word, all Christianity becomes a
single Christ loving Himself.81 Christ is still present and one with
His Body on earth, and the Body is in heaven with Him through
charity.82 In a sense the individual souls of the members are
merged through charity into one soul, so that in the union of the
faithful in the Body of Christ there is one soul and one heart.6’
51 In epist. Jo. ad Parthos, Tr. 10, 3 (PML 35, 2055) : “filios Dei dixit,
qui Filium Dei paulo ante dicebat ; quia filii Dei corpus sunt unici Filii Dei,
et cum ille caput, nos membra, unus est Filius Dei. Ergo qui diligit filios
Dei, Filium Dei diligit: et qui diligit Filium Dei, Patrem diligit: nec
potest quisquam diligere Patrem, nisi diligat Filium; et qui diligit Filium,
diligit et filios Dei. Quos filios Dei? Membra Filii Dei. Et diligendo fit et
ipse membrum, et fit per dilectionem in compage corporis Christi ; et erit
unus Christus amans seipsum. Cum enim se invicem, amant membra, corpus
se amat. Et si patitur unum membrum, compatiuntur omnia membra; et si
glorificatur unum membrum, congaudent omnia membra. Et quid secutus ait?
Pos autem estis corpus Christi et membra (I Cor. XII, 26, 27)."
83In Ps. 122, 1 (PML 37. 1630) : “quia si per charitatem ipse nobiscum
in terra est, per eamdem charitatem et nos cum eo in coelo sumus. Sed
diximus quemadmodum nobiscum ipse in terra sit; vocem ejus diximus de
coelo sonantis, Saule, Saule, quid me persequeris! cum eum Saulus omnino
non tangeret, sed nec videret: quomodo autem ostenditur quia et nos cum
illo in coelo sumus? Eodem ipso Paulo apostolo dicente: Si consurrexistis
cum Christo, quae sursum sunt quaerite, ubi Christus est in dextera Dei
sedens; quae sursum sunt sapile, non quae super terram. Mortui enim estis,
et vita vestra abscondita est cum Christo in Deo (Coloss. III, 1-3), Ergo
et ille adhuc deorsum est, et nos jam sursum sumus : ille deorsum est com­
passione char itatis, nos sursum sumus spe char itatis. Spe enim salvi facti
sumus (Rom. VIII, 24). Sed quia spes nostra certa est ; quamvis futurum
sit, sic de nobis dicitur, quasi jam factum sit.”
Epist. 243, 4 (CSEL 57, 571-572; PML 33, 1056):.“hoc etiam quisque
de anima sua cogitet, ut etiam in ipsa privatim affectum oderit, qui procul
dubio temporalis est, diligat autem in ea communionem societatemque illam,
qua dictum est: Erat illis in deum anima et cor unum, sic enim anima tua
non est propria sed omnium fratrum, quorum etiam animae tuae sunt vel
potius quorum animae cum tua non animae sed anima una est, Christi unica,
quae de manu canis ut eruatur, cantat in psalmis.” Cf. W. Simpson, St.

102

Created Means of Sanctification

Because of this intimate union between Head and members
there is a spiritual communion in sanctification54 which is best ex­
pressed by Christ’s priesthood and the participation of the Body
in it. As eternal High Priest Christ is in heaven still prolonging
the sanctification of His Body by His intercession. Through union
with this Body the member partici pates in the intercession of the
heavenly Priest. It is also in view of this single Priest interceding
for and sanctifying His Body that the mutual aid of the members
in sanctifying one another must be tunderstood.55 One member
Augustine and African Church Divisions (London, 1910), p. 72. “But what
is unity? At times it means external intercommunion; at other times it de­
notes the deeper conception of inward identity."
Scrm. 212, 1 (PML 38, 1058): “Et vestra societas est commercium
spiritualium, ut similes sitis negotiatoribus bonam margaritam quaerentibus
(Matth. XIII, 45). Haec est charitas, quae diffunditur in cordibus vestris
per Spiritum sanctum, qui dabitur vobis (Rom. V, 5).”
“Contra epist. Farm., 2, 8, 10 (CSEL 51, 61-62; PML 43, 60) : “Homi­
nes enim omnes christiani invicem se commendant orationibus suis, pro quo
autem nullus interpellat, sed ipse pro omnibus, hic unus verusque mediator
est, cuius typus quoniam praefigurabatur in sacerdote veteris testamenti,
nullus et illic invenitur orasse pro sacerdote. Paulus autem apostolus, quam­
quam sub capite praecipium membrum, sed tamen quia membrum est cor­
poris Christi et noverat non per figuram in interiora veli ad sancta sanctorum,
sed per expressam et redditam veritatem in interiora caeli ad sanctitatem
non imaginariam sed aeternam pro nobis intrasse maximum et verissimum
sacerdotem, ecclesiae se orationibus etiam ipse commendat nec mediatorem
se facit inter populum et deum, ut pro se orent invicem omnia membra cor­
poris Christi, quoniam pro invicem sollicita sunt membra et, si patitur unum
membrum, compatiuntur omnia membra et, si glorificatur unum membrum,
congaudent omnia membra; ac si oratio pro invicem membrorum omnium
adhuc in terra laborantium ascendet ad caput quod praecessit in caelum, in
quo est propitiatio pro peccatis nostris." Cf. Adam, op. cit., pp. 53-54. “Ac­
cording to the conception of early Christianity, as that has remained domi­
nant in the Roman Church, the saints are members of the Body of Christ.
Certainly they are its most distinguished and valuable members, whose
intercession has especial power with Christ; but they remain always its
members. Whatever they do they do it only through Him; and they form
along with the rest of the faithful a single society of the redeemed, a single
fellowship living in Christ. Their intercession is not different in kind from
the intercession of any member of the Church. They belong to the Church,
even if, being its most distinguished and holiest members, their intercession
is of more effect with God than the intercession of other members. And so

Created Means of Sanctification

103

helps the sanctification of another through good works and
prayer,50 and even those members whose sanctification is com­
pleted and who reign gloriously with the Head in heaven con­
tribute a sanctifying influence through the superabundance of
their merits.6’
GRACE

There is no better portrayal of the Augustinian system of grace
than that contained in the word life. To understand such a conthe Church, turning to Christ for grace, takes the saints with her in her
prayer. The saints were and are dependent upon Christ and live through
Him alone. When the Church takes them with her in her prayer, her in­
tention simply is that their intercession should strengthen the prayer which
the Ecclesia orans, the whole praying Church, makes with them to Christ.”
™Serm. 207, 3 (PML 38, 1044) : “Certe sicut nos apti efficimur ad oran­
dum eleemosynis et jejuniis, sic et ipsa nostra oratio facit eleemosynas, cum
dirigitur atque profunditur, non pro amicis tantum, verum etiam pro ini­
micis.” Epist. 20, 2 (CSEL 34 I, 48; PML 33, 87): “uberiores etiam, si
non solum te commendes orationibus nostris, sed etiam pro nobis orare non
praetermittas, gratior enim deo est pro fratre deprecatio, ubi sacrificium
caritatis offertur.” Cf. É. Mersch, “Sainteté de chrétiens Sainteté de mem­
bres,” Now. Rev. Théo., LVIII (1931), p. 19. “Tandis que, devant l’oeuvre
immense, où Dieu veut sanctifier tous les hommes, et tous ensemble, et tous
les uns par les autres, et tous, même, par toutes les démarches de tous les
autres, qui pourrait se croire à la hauteur?”
™ Serm. 280, 6, 6 (PML 38, 1283): “Gloria capiti, unde consulitur et
superioribus manibus, et infimis pedibus. Sicut ille unus animam suam pro
nobis posuit: ita et imitati surit martyres, et animas suas pro fratribus
posuerunt, atque ut ista populorum tanquam germinum copiosissima fertilitas
sugeret, terram suo sanguine irrigaverunt. Fructus laboris ergo illorum etiam
nos sumus. Miramur eos, miserantur nos. Gratulamur eis, precantur pro
nobis.” In Ps., 105, 21 (PML 37, 1412) : "Si dimittis illis peccatum, dimitte;
sin autem, dele me de libro tuo (Exod. XXXII, 31, 32). Ubi demonstratum
est intercessio sanctorum quantum pro aliis valeat apud Deum. Securus enim
Moyses de justitia Dei, qua eum delere; non posset, impetravit misericordiam,
ne illos quos juste posset, deleret.” In Ps. 85, 24 (PML 37, 1099) : “Domi­
nus enim noster Jesus Christus adhuc interpellat pro nobis (Rorn', VIII, 34) :
omnes Martyres qui cum illo sunt, interpellant pro nobis. Non transeunt
interpellationes ipsorum, nisi cum transierit gemitus noster : cum autem
transierit gemitus noster, omnes in una voce, in uno populo, in una patria
consolabimur, millia millium conjuncta psallentibus Angelis, choris coelestium
Potestatum in una civitate viventium.”

I
f

104

Created Means of Sanctification

cept of grace one must first consider the solidarity of the human
race both in Adam and in Christ. In his original state man was
made in God’s image, but through sin he lost this gift and in
its place received an active principle of evil, the vetus homo. This
is true of the whole human race which forms with Adam a unity
based on participation in a common physical life. Through Christ
the vetus homo is destroyed, and those redeemed in Him are joined
to Him through the reception of a new spiritual life.58
How Christ’s destruction of sin is related to His infusion of a
new life or grace in man is evident from the fact that just as in
the physical sphere there is no middle path between death and
life, so in the spiritual sphere being dead to sin is equivalent to
being alive in Christ Jesus.69 Thus whether Christ is portrayed as
destroying sin or as a source of divine life for each soul,60 His
action is really the saine for in remitting sin He is really reconcil­
ing man to God.81
This destruction of sin and infusion of a new life was accom­
plished de jure on Calvary,82 but de facto each man participates
in the salutary character of the Cross through the grace of in“ Contra Adimant., 5 (CSEL 25 I, 125; PML 42, 136) : “et ut manifeste
intellegatur non secundum vetustatem peccati, quae corrumpitur, sed secun­
dum spiritalem conformationem factum esse hominem ad imaginem dei, item
apostolus monet, ut exuti consuetudine peccatorum, id est vetere homine,
induamus novam vitam Christi, quem novum hominem appellat, et ut doceat
hoc nos aliquando amisisse, renovationem illam vocat, nam ita loquitur:
expoliantes vos veterem hominem cum actibus eius induite novum, qui re­
novatur in agnitionem dei secundum imaginem eius.” Serm. 30, 4, 5 (PML
38, 190) : “Unus et unus: unus homo per quem ruina, alius homo per quem
structura ; per illum ruina, per hunc structura.”
M Contra Jul., 6, 3, 7 (PML 44, 824) : “Sic et vos existimate vos mor­
tuos esse peccato, vivere autem Deo in Christo Jesu.”
00 De nat. et gratia, 23, 25 (CSEL 60, 251; PML 44, 259) : “ut autem
redeat ad iustitiam, opus habet medico, quoniam sanus non est, opus habet
vivificatore, quia mortuus est.”
61 De pecc., meritis, 1, 26, 39 (CSEL 60, 37; PML 44, 131): “ac sic
fieret mediator dei et hominum, per quem post inimicitias impietatis nostrae
illius gratiae pace finitas reconciliaremur deo.”
“Op. imp. contra Jut., 2, 172 (PML 45, 1215): “proinde separat eos et
a justificatione quae fit in Christi sanguine, cujus fundendi causa, quando
eum bibendum commendavit, nulla nisi in remissionem dicta est peccatorum.”

Created Means of Sanctification

105

corporation in Christ’s Body received at baptism.63 In this Body
Christ the Head is life itself.64 His life is the same as that of His
Father65 and is a foretaste of the eternal life in heaven.66 This
life of Christ is not something static, incommunicable, and re­
maining in the Head alone, but Augustine compares it to a foun­
tain gushing forth,67 communicating its fulness to men.68 Because
the members belong to the Body of such a Head, they share
in His life.69 The proportion of divine life communicated de­
pends upon the degree of union existing between the Head and
members.70
1

P

j

_

?
:

!

i

“De pecc. mentis, 1, 39, 70 (CSEL 60, 70; PML 44, 150) : "In parvulis
certe gratia dei per baptismum eius, qui venit in similitudine carnis peccati,
id agitur, ut evacuetur caro peccati." De nupt. et concup., 2, 2, 4 (CSEL
42, 256; PML 44, 439) : "omnes enim ad ecclesiam non propter aliud cum
parvulis currunt, nisi ut in eis originale peccatum generatione primae nati­
vitatis adtractum regeneratione secundae nativitatis expietur.”
“De doct. christ., 1, 34, 38 (PML 34, 33): "Ego sum via, et veritas,
et vita (Joan. XIV, 6).”
“In Jo. Ev., Tr. 22, 9 (PML 35, 1579) : “Cum autem de Patre loquereris,
Sicut Pater habet vitam in semetipso : rursus, cum de te loquereris, dixisti,
sic et Filio dedit habere vitam in semetipso. Sicut habet, sic dedit habere.
Ubi habet? In semetipso. Ubi dédît habere? In semetipso. Paulus ubi habet?
Non in semetipso, sed in Christo. Tu fidelis ubi habes? Non in temetipso,
sed in Christo. . . . Christus autem in semetipso habet vitam sicut Pater,
quia Verbum Dei. . . . Quid est enim, t‘n semetipso? Ut ipsa vita ipse esset.”
“ Serm. 297, 5, 8 (PML 38, 1363): "Vita sub Deo, vita cum Deo, vita
de Deo, vita ipse Deus, Talis nobis aeterna promittitur.”
07 In Ps. 35, 15 (PML 36. 352): "Quis est fons vitae, nisi Christus?
Venit ad te in carne, ut irroraret fauces tuas sitientes : satiabit sperantem,
qui irroravit sitientem. Quoniam apud te fons vitae, in lumine tuo videbi~
mus lumen.”
“Zm Jo. Ev., Tr. 13, 8 (PML 35, 1496): "Si autem omnes homines de
plenitudine ejus accipiunt, ille est fons, illi bibentes. . . . fons fluit ut reficiat;
ita Dominus Jesus.”
* De grat. Christi (De pecc. ortg.), 2, 26, 31 (CSEL 42, 191 ; PML 44,
401) : "ideo autem vivificari in Christo, quoniam ad corpus pertinent Christi.”
™Epist. 120, 4, 19 (CSEL 34 II, 720-721; PML 33, 461): "Ea porro
iustitia, quae vivit in se ipsa, procul dubio deus est atque incommutabiliter
vivit, sicut autem, cum sit in se ipsa vita, etiam nobis fit vita, cum eius
efficimur utcumque participes, ita, cum in se ipsa sit iustitia, etiam nobis
fit iustitia, cum ei cohaerendo juste vivimus, et tanto magis minusve iusti
sumus, quanto illi magis minusve cohaeremus.”

106

Created Means of Sanctification

As in the case of baptism and charity a third element must also
be considered—the struggle against concupiscence. Here Augus­
tine introduces the distinction between habitual grace and actual
grace. The initial sanctification or life acquired through union of
the member with Christ the Head is increased when man aided
by actual grace overcomes his concupiscence. This aid afforded by
actual grace consists in an enlightening of the mind,71 an inspira­
tion of the will J2 and in an efficacious grace bringing about the
production of a good action/8 If in this combat man should again
be soiled by mortal sin, grace will destroy this sin and return life
to the soul.74
Consequences of the new life.—Several consequences follow
from the renewal of the interior man by the life of grace. Through
it the members receive the image of God.7S Just as Christ the
Head has the image of God, so do the members of His Body. It
is not the same image which Christ has, it is true, but it is like it
and in keeping with the nature of man.75
71 De pecc. meritis, 2, 6, 7 (CSEL 60, 77; PML 44, 155) : “atque ita dei
gratia non solum ostendat quid faciendum sit, sed adiuvet etiam, ut possit
fieri quod ostenderit.”
™ De spir. et lift., 12, 20 (CSEL 60, 173; PML 44, 212) : “sed quod ipsa
voluntas nostra, sine qua operari bonum non possumus, adiuvetur et erigatur
inpertito spiritu gratiae.”
”De grat. Christi, 1, 45, 49 (CSEL 42, 161 ; PML 44, 382) : *'ecce que­
madmodum deus adiuvando adest 'voluntatibus et actionibus nostris! ecce
quemadmodum et velle et operari operatur in nobis !”
74 Op. imp. contra Jul., 2, 212 (PML 45, 1232) : “Quoniam si post Bap­
tismum quisque peccaverit, non eadem sunt peccata; sed per eamdem gratiam
peccantibus remittuntur. . . . Gratia ergo ... in justificationem mittit, quos
a damnatione liberat.”
m De mor. eccl., 1, 13, 22 (PML 32, 1321) : “Nemo venit ad Patrem, nisi
per me {Joan. XIV, 6). Huic haeremus per sanctificationem. Sanctificati
enim plena et integra charitate flagramus, qua sola efficitur ut a Deo non
avertamur, eique potius quam huic mundo conformemur : Praedestinavit enim,
ut ait idem Apostolus, conformes nos fieri imaginis Filii ejus (Rom. VIII,
29).”
epist. Jo. ad Parthos., Tr. 4, 9 (PML 35, 2010-2011) : "Filioli, nemo
vos seducat. Qui facit justitiam, justus est, sicut et ille justus est. Numquid
quando audivimus quia justi sumus, sicut et ille, aequales nos debemus putare
Deo? Debetis nosse quid est, sicut: jamdudum enim dixit, Castificat semetipsum, sicut ipse castus est. Jam ergo par et aequalis est castitas nostra
i

Created Means of Sanctification

107

If through Christ the members participate in the divine life,
then it follows that through Him they also become sons of God,77
and God is their Father.78 This is not a natural relationship based
on physical generation but one of adoption through grace.78 It im­
plies more than is contained in the mere notion of juridical adop­
tion, for it demands a change in man’s nature so that in a certain
sense he is no longer a man but a god.80 The divine purpose in so
castitati Dei, et justitia nostra justitiae Dei? Quis hoc dicat! Sed, sicut,
non semper ad aequalitatem dici solet. Quomodo, verbi gratia, visa basilica
ista ampla, si velit facere aliquis minorem, sed tamen proportione ad men­
suras ejus, ut verbi gratia, si lata est ista simplum, et longa duplum; faciat
et ille latam simplum, et longam duplum: videtur sic fecisse sicut est ista.
Sed ista habet, verbi gratia, centum cubitos, illa triginta : et sic est, et impar
est. Videtis quia non semper, sicut, ad parilitatem et aequalitatem refertur.
Verbi gratia, videte quantum sit inter faciem hominis, et imaginem de
speculo: facies in imagine, facies in corpore; imago in imitatione, corpus
in veritate. Et quid dicimus? Nam sicut hic oculi, ita et ibi: sicut hic aures,
ita et ibi aures sunt. Dispar est res; sed, sicut, ad similitudinem dicitur.
Habemus ergo et nos imaginem Dei ; sed non illam quam habet Filius
aequalis Patri ; tamen et nos pro modulo nostro si non sicut ille essemus,
ex nulla parte similes diceremur. Ergo castificat nos sicut et ipse castus
est; sed ille castus aeternitate, nos casti fide: justi sumus sicut et ipse justus
est ; sed ipse in ipsa incommutabili perpetuitate, nos justi credendo in quem
non videmus, ut aliquando videamus. Et cum perfecta fuerit justitia nostra,
cum facti aequales Angelis fuerimus ; nec tunc illi aequabitur.”
77 De pecc. meritis, 2, 24, 38 (CSEL 60, 110; PML 44, 174) : “nos enim
ipsius gratia facti erimus filii dei.”
78 Contra duas epist. Pelag., 3, 3, 4 (CSEL 60, 489; PML 44, 590) : “si
enim filii dei non essent, non eis diceret: pater vester, qui in caelis est.”
Contra Faust., 3, 3 (CSEL 25 I, 264; PML 42, 215): “unicum enim
filium deus habet, quem genuit de substantia sua. . . . nos autem non de
substantia sua genuit; creatura enim sumus, quam non genuit, sed fecit.”
^Serm. 166, 4, 4 (PML 38. 909) : “Ut enim non sis homo, ad hoc vocatus
es ab illo qui propter te factus est homo. . . . Deus enim deum te vult facere:
non natura, sicut est ille quem genuit, sed dono suo et adoptione.” Cf.
Combes, op. cit., p. 123. “Nous ne devenons ‘Dieu’ que par métaphore.
Mais l’union d'amour produit ce miracle de conformer notre âme a l’EspritSaint et de nous incorporer, dans toute la mesure qui nous est possible, ses
perfections divines.” Cf. Pius XII, op. cit., p. 30. “But let all agree un­
compromisingly on this, if they would not err from truth and from the
orthodox teaching of the Church: to reject every kind of mystic union by
which the faithful of Christ should in any way pass beyond the sphere of

108

Created Means of Sanctification

adopting men was to form a fraternal society in which Christ
would be the first born of many brothers.81 Thus Christ and all
the saints are brothers by divine grace.82
DIVINE INHABITATION

The role of baptism, the Holy Spirit, charity, and grace in sanc­
tification has not yet been fully described. Another element pro­
duced by them remains for consideration—divine inhabitation. This
inhabitation may be viewed either as it affects the Church corporately or the members individually. The Church is a temple
blessed by the presence of an indwelling God.83 Through baptism
each member in his own right is also a temple in which God
dwells,84 and just as God’s dwelling place is called heaven, so the
mefnber blessed by His presence becomes a heaven or a scdes
Dei66
In determining the cause of this divine inhabitation Augustine
says that men are made temples by grace.88 Yet he qualifies this by
creatures and wrongly enter the divine, were it only to the extent of ap­
propriating to themselves as their own but one single attribute of the eternal
Godhead.”
Ά Contra Secund., 5 (CSEL 25 II, 912; PML 42, 581) : “ut sit ipse pri­
mogenitus in multis fratribus, quos ei pater ad fraternam societatem non
aequalitate substantiae, sed adoptione gratiae generavit.”
40 Contra Faust., 22, 40 (CSEL 25 I, 633; PML 42, 425) : “secundum hoc
enim sponsus et sponsa vel vir et uxor Christus et ecclesia dicuntur, qua
vero cognatione sint fratres Christus et omnes sancti gratia divina, non
consanguinitate terrena.”
a Epist. 187, 10, 33 (CSEL 57, 111; PML 33, 845): “proinde in com­
pagem corporis Christi tamquam in vivam structuram templi dei, quae est
eius ecclesia, nati homines non ex operibus iustitiae, quae facturi sunt, sed
renascendo per gratiam transferuntur tamquam de massa ruinae ad aedificii
firmamentum, praeter hos eniin aedificium, quod beatificandum construitur
ad aeternam habitationem dei.”
84 Epist. 187, 10, 32 (CSEL 57, 110; PML 33, 844): “tamen illa sanctifi­
catio, qua efficimur et singuli templa dei et in unum omnes templum dei,
non est nisi renatorum.”
χ In Ps. 98, 3 (PML 37, 1260) : “Si ergo et tu habendo plenitudinem
scientiae, et habendo charitatem, utique sedes Dei factus es, coelum factus
es.”
*Serm. 163, 1, 1 (PML 38, 899) : “ita etiam terrarum loca quae prius
contra Dei gratiam fuerunt, nunc Dei gratiae dedicantur. Nos enim, sicut
dicit Apostolus, templum Dei vivi sumus.”

Created Means of Sanctification

109

pointing out that God dwells in His temple through the grace of
His love;87 that God has built this temple through the grace of
His goodness ;88 that it is constructed through charity ;80 that
through charity the Trinity dwells in man.00 These statements
show that at the very least there is an indissoluble concomitance
between the Holy Spirit, charity, and grace.
This divine indwelling in man has a counterpart in the dwelling
of man in God. God is love, and he who abides in love abides in
God, and God in htm (I John 4:16).01 Christ lives in the man who
is His Temple. The man who is a temple of God lives in Christ
through charity and the Holy Spirit.®2
87Epist. 187, 5, 16 (CSEL 57, 94; PML 33, 838): “propter hanc enim
habitationem, ubi procul dubio gratia dilectionis eius agnoscitur.”
88 Epist. 187, 6, 19 (CSEL 57, 98; PML 33, 839): “in quibus habitat,
habeant eum pro suae capacitatis diversitate alii amplius alii minus, quos ipse
sibi dilectissimum templum gratia suae bonitatis aedificati”
89In Ps. 10, 7 (PML 36, 135-136) : “In hoc templo sancto suo Dominus
est : quod constat multis membris suis, sua quaeque officia gerentibus, in
unam aedificationem charitate constructis.”
™ De Trin., 15, 18, 32 (PML 42, 1083) : “Dilectio igitur quae ex Deo
est et Deus est, proprie Spiritus sanctus est, per quem diffunditur in cordi­
bus nostris Dei charitas, per quam nos tota inhabitat Trinitas.” Cf. Pius XII,
op. cit., pp. 30-31. “It must also be borne in mind that there is a question
here of a hidden mystery, which during this earthly exile can only be dimly
seen through a veil, and which no human words can express. The Divine
Persons are said to indwell inasmuch as they are present to beings endowed
with intelligence in a way that lies beyond human comprehension, and in a
unique and very intimate manner, which transcends all created nature, these
creatures enter into relationship with Them through knowledge and love.”
m Contra lift. Petit., 3, 5, 6 (CSEL 52, 167; PML 43, 351) : “et deus cari­
tas est, et qui manet in caritate in deo manet et deus in illo manet.”
63In. Jo. Ev., Tr. 27, 6 (PML 35, 1618) : “Diximus enim, fratres, hoc
Dominum commendasse in manducatione carnis suae et potatione sanguinis
sui, ut in illo maneamus, et ipse in nobis. Manemus autem iti illo, cum
sumus membra ejus : manet autem ipse in nobis, cum sumus templum ejus.
Ut autem simus membra ejus, unitas nos compaginat. Ut compaginet unitas,
quae facit nisi charitas? Et charitas Dei unde? Apostolum interroga: Chari­
tas, inquit, Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris per Spiritum sanciunt, qui datus
est nobis (Rom., V, 5).” Cf. Pius XII, op. cit., p. 29. “Christ is in us
through His Spirit, whom He gives to us and through whom He acts within
us in such a way that all divine activity of the Holy Spirit within our souls
must also be attributed to Christ.”

110

Created Means of Sanctification

Divine inhabitation is not the same as God’s immensity. Only
those are temples of God in whom the Spirit of God dwells.®8 This
dwelling is not the same in all the members. In some God is pres­
ent more fully than in others, and thus there is a difference of
holiness between temple and temple.94 The reason for this is that
though the temple was erected in baptism, it was not completed.95
The subsequent life of the member determines the proportion of
the divine indwelling. If the member leads a sinful life, he with­
draws from God and is not as near to the divine Visitor as is one
leading a virtuous life.86 Thus each member possesses God in pro­
portion to his capacity,97 and this in turn determines the degree in
which he belongs to Christ’s Body.98 But this difference in inhabi­
tation does not affect God. He is whole in Himself and wholly
present in the member.99 In addition, God’s presence in the whole
Epist. 187, 5, 16 (CSEL 57, 93; PML 33, 837): “cum deus ubique
sit totus, non tamen in omnibus habitat, non enim omnibus dici potest, quod
ait apostolus, vel quod iam dixi vel etiam illud : Nescitis, quia templum deî
estis et spiritus dei habitat in vobis?”
* Epist. 187, 5, 17 (CSEL 57, 94-95; PML 33. 838): “Cum igitur, qui
ubique est, non in omnibus habitet, etiam in quibus habitat, non aequaliter
habitat. ... et unde in omnibus sanctis sunt aliis alii sanctiores, nisi abundan­
tius habendo habitatorem deum?”
“ Contra Jul., 6, 14, 42 (PML 44, 846) : “Habent ergo jam baptizati quid
agant in se ipsis, hoc est, in Dei templo, quod aedificatur hoc tempore, ut
dedicetur in fine.”
M Epist. 187, 5, 17 (CSEL 57, 95; PML 33, 838) : “sed non solum un­
iversitati creaturae verum etiam cuilibet parti eius totus pariter adest, hiqué
ab eo longe esse dicuntur, qui peccando dissimillimi facti sunt, et hi ei
propinquare, qui eius similitudinem pie vivendo recipiunt, sicut recte dicun­
tur oculi tanto esse ab hac luce longius, quanto fuerint caeciores.”
w Epist. 187, 6, 19 (CSEL 57, 98; PML 33, 839) : “in quibus habitat,
habeant eum pro suae capacitatis diversitate alii amplius alii minus.”
wEpist. 187, 5, 16 (CSEL 57, 94; PML 33, 838): “ut templum eius
potius in oratione commemoremus, quod et nos ipsi esse debemus et, in
quantum sumus, in tantum ad eius societatem et adoptionis familiam per­
tinemus.”
wEpist. 187, 6, 18 (CSEL 57, 97; PML 33, 839) ; “at vero deus non, si
minus capitur ab illo, cui praesens est, ideo ipse minor est. totus enim in se
ipso est nec, in quibus est, ita est, ut indigeat eis, tamquam non possit esse
nisi in eis. sicut autem nec ab illo abest, in quo non habitat, et totus adest,
quamvis eum ille non habeat, ita et illi, in quo habitat, totus est praesens,
quamvis non ex tota eum capiat.”

Created Means of Sanctification

111

Church is not greater than His presence in the members. Christ’s
Body is one temple formed from the insertion of many individual
temples into a single edifice. In inhabiting each and every temple
God dwells also in the unity of them all.100
Since Augustine attributes divine inhabitation whereby man be­
comes a temple of God to spiritual factors such as the Holy Spirit,
charity, and grace, one must conclude that he is concerned with
the internal sanctification of man. Yet it is the physical body itself
which is the temple, and Augustine speaks of this as an exterior
sanctification given as a pledge of the future resurrection of the
body.101 In other words Augustine’s view of sanctification entails
the complete recovery of man’s original state even to the resur­
rection of the body.102 Just as through His resurrection Christ re­
stored physical life to His body and glorified it, so physical life
will be restored to His members aftèr their resurrection.
SPECIAL PROBLEMS

Up to the present time the discussion has centered on those who
were made members of Christ’s Body through the reception of
baptism. Now a problem presents itself. Can those who have never
w De civ. Dei, 10, 3 (CSEL 40 I, 449; PML 41, 280): “Huius enim
templum simul omnes et singuli ■ templa sumus, quia et omnium concordiam
et singulos inhabitare dignatur ; non in omnibus quam in singulis maior,
quoniam nec mole distenditur nec partitione minuitur.”
i<flDe nupt. et concup., 1, 18, 20 (PML 44, 425) ; “sed ex quo sumus filii
Dei, interior de die in diem renovatur (Il Cor. IV, 16). Quamvis et ipse
exterior per lavacrum regenerationis sanctificatus sit, et spem futurae incorruptionis acceperit, propter quod et templum Dei merito dicitur : Corpora
vestra, inquit Apostolus, templum in vobis Spiritus sancti est, quem habetis
a Deo: et non estis vestri; empti enim estis pretio magno. Glorificate ergo
ei-portate Deum.in corpore vestro (I Cor. VI, 19, 20). Hoc totum non solum
propter praesentem sanctificationem, sed maxime propter illam spem dictum
est, de qua idem alio loco dicit: Sed et nos ipsi primitias spiritus habentes,
et ipsi in nobismetipsis ingemiscimus, adoptionem exspectantes, redemptionem
corporis nostri.” In Ps. 70, Sernt, 2, 10 (PML 36, 900) : “Si autem qui
suscitavit Christum a mortuis habitat in vobis, qui suscitavit Jesum Chris­
tum a mortuis vivificabit et mortalia corpora vestra, per inhabitantem
Spiritum ejus in vobis.”
1MEnchiridion, 108, 28 (PML 40, 283) : “reconciliari nos oportebat Deo
usque ad camis resurrectionem in vitam aeternam.”

112

Created Means of Sanctification

received baptism share in the sanctity of Christ’s Body? Augus­
tine answers this question by distinguishing between those who
precede Christ and those who follow Him. He considers incorpora­
tion into Christ's Body as being effected by either of two ways,
each of which is adapted to a particular time. Before the actual
coming of Christ this means was a real belief or faith in the In­
carnation, passion, and death of the Saviour.103 Through such a
faith the just of the Old Testament received the Holy Spirit and
charity.104 Consequently their faith was a living faith, and the
grace they received was the same as the sanctifying grace of the
New Testament.105

ί

Contra dues epist. Pelag., 3, 4, 11 (CSEL 60, 497 ; PML 44, 59S) : “hi
pertinent ad testamentum novum, filii promissionis, regenerati deo patre et
libera matre, huius generis fuerunt antiqui omnes iusti et ipse Moyses testa­
menti minister veteris, heres novi, quia ex fide qua nos vivimus una eademque vixerunt incarnationem passionem resurrectionemque Christi credentes
futuram.” Serm. 341, 9, 11 (PML 39, 1499-1500): “Membra Christi et
corpus sumus omnes simul ; non qui hoc loco tantum sumus, sed et per uni­
versam terram ; nec qui tantum hoc tempore, sed quid dicam ? Ex Abel
justo usque in finem saeculi quamdiu generant et generantur homines, quis­
quis justorum per hanc vitam transitum facit, quidquid nunc, id est, non in
hoc loco, sed in hac vita, quidquid post nascentium futurum est, totum hoc
unum corpus Christi.”
101 De spir. et Utt., 26, 46 (CSEL 60, 201; PML 44, 229) : “et propterea
in domo veri Ishrael, in quo dolus non est, participes sunt testamenti novi,
quia dat deus leges in mentem ipsorum et in cordibus eorum scribit eas
digito suo, spiritu sancto, quo ibi diffunditur caritas, quae legis est plenitudo."
De grat, Christi (De pecc. orig.), 2, 24, 28 (CSEL 42, 187 ; PML 44, 399) :
“et ipsorum enim corda eadem mundabantur mediatoris fide et diffundebatur
in eis caritas per spiritum sanctum.”
Contra duas epist. Pelag., 3, 4, 8 (CSEL 60, 494; PML 44, 593):
“filii sunt promissionis et gratiae secundum Isaac filium liberae non ex lege,
sed ex promissione heredes dei, coheredes autem Christi.” Cf. F. Cavallera,
“La Doctrine de Saint Augustin sur l’Esprit-Saint à propos du De Trini­
tate.” Rech. Théol. Ant. et Méd., III (1931). 10-11. “De même pour la
grâce: deux points surtout sont à signaler: l’un que c’est par la révélation,
telle qu’elle est consignée dans ΓAncien Testament que les justes, appelés
par Dieu à la connaissance du mystère, ont conçu la foi au Christ indispen­
sable pour être sauvés; l’autre que la grâce reçue, la ‘charité
*
justifiante
était de même nature que la grâce du Nouveau Testament. Dans les deux cas
c’est le même et unique Esprit qui ‘diffusait’ dans les âmes la charité. Il y a
seulement cette différence que, sous ΓAncien Testament, petit était le nombre
des privilégiés appelés à la foi et à la charité.”

Created Means of Sanctification

113

With regard to those born after the coming of Christ who never
received baptism Augustine’s opinion progresses from leniency to
severity. At various periods of his life he held that baptism could
be supplied by other means, notably by martyrdom, faith, and con­
trition.10® At the end of his life, however, the saint retracted such
an opinion and insisted on the absolute necessity of baptism as a
means of sanctification.107 Such rigorism would exclude this class
of people from the sanctification of Christ’s Body.
Allied to this necessity of baptism is Augustine’s refusal to con­
cede to the sacrament any salutary efficacy independent of the
Church.108 Outside the Church baptism imprints a character,109
™De bapt., 4, 22, 29 (CSEL 51, 257; PML 43, 173): “Baptismi sane
vicem aliquando implere passionem de latrone illo, cui non baptizato dictum
est : hodie mecum eris in paradiso, non leve documentum idem beatus
Cyprianus adsumit. quod etiam adque etiam considerans invenio non tantum
passionem pro nomine Christi id quod ex baptismo deerat posse supplere,
sed etiam fidem conversionemque cordis, si forte ad celebrandum mysterium
baptismi in angustiis temporum succurri non potest.”
1(" Retract., 2, 44 (CSEL 36, 153; PML 32, 638): “in quarto libro, cum
dicerem vicem baptismi posse habere passionem, non satis idoneum posui illius
latronis exemplum, quia utrum non fuerit baptizatus incertum est.” De anima
et ejus origine, 1, 9, 11 (PML 44, 480) : “Unde et latro ille, non ante cru­
cem Domini sectator, sed in cruce confessor, de quo nonnunquam prae­
judicium captatur, sive tentatur, contra Baptismatis sacramentum, a Cypriano
sancto inter martyres computatur. . . . Inventa est in eo mensura martyris,
qui tunc in Christum credidit, quando defecerunt qui futuri erant martyres.
Et hoc quidem oculis Domini clarum fuit, qui non baptizato, tanquam mar­
tyrii sanguine abluto, tantam felicitatem statim contulit (Luc. XXIII, 43).
Sed etiam nostrum quis non consideret, quanta fide, quanta spe, quanta
charitate mortem pro Christo vivente suscipere potuit, qui vitam in moriente
quaesivit. Huc accedit, quia non incredibiliter dicitur, latronem qui tunc
credidit, juxta Dominum crucifixum, aqua illa quae de vulnere lateris ejus
emicuit, tanquam sacratissimo baptismo fuisse perfusum.” De pecc. meritis,
1, 23, 33 (CSEL 60, 32; PML 44, 128): “in cuius regnum non intrabit
nisi qui renatus ex aqua et spiritu.”
“■ P. Pourrat, Theology of the Sacraments, Authorized translation from
the third French edition (2 ed. ; St. Louis, 1914), p. 148. “Augustine did
not ascribe to Baptism an efficacy altogether independent of the Church,
and therefore did not keep clear altogether of St. Cyprian’s views.”
wDe bapt., 6, 1, 1 (CSEL 51, 298; PML 43, 197): “per quos postea
plenarii concilii auctoritate originalis consuetudo firmata est, etiam ovem,
quae foris errabat et dominicum characterem a fallacibus depraedatoribus
suis foris acceperat.”

114

Created Means of Sanctification

but it cannot communicate to the recipient the Holy Spirit or
charity.110 The reasoning behind such a statement was Augustine’s
teaching that in so far as the Holy Spirit is the soul of Christ’s
Body His sanctifying action is limited to that Body.111 Thus any­
one receiving baptism outside the Church cannot be sanctified by
the sacrament.
The question naturally arises as to the possibility of heretics
and schismatics being in good faith. The solution conceivably may
lie in just what element of heresy and schism Augustine considers
sufficient to
exclude
*
a person from membership in Christ’s Body.
With regard to heresy it would seem that besides false doctrine112

110 Contra Crescon., 2, 12, IS (CSEL 52, 374; PML 43, 476): “unde
merito creduntur hi, qui extra ecclesiam baptismum ecclesiae perceperunt,
non habere spiritum sanctum, nisi cum ipsi ecclesiae in vinculo pacis per
conexionem caritatis adhaerescunt.” Contra litt. Petii., 2, 108, 247 (CSEL
52, 159; PML 43, 345): “sic approbamus in haereticis baptismum non
haereticorum sed Christi, sicut in fornicatoribus, immundis, luxuriosis, idololatris. . . . omnes enim isti, inter quos et haeretici positi sunt . . . regnum
dei non possidebunt et ideo ad sinistram partem cum diabolo pertinebunt,
nec ideo putandi sunt esse in Christi corpore, quod est ecclesia, quia sacra­
mentorum eius corporaliter participes fiunt, illa enim et in talibus sancta
sunt et eis indigne tractantibus et sumentibus ad maius iudicium valebunt,
ipsi autem non sunt in illa ecclesiae compage, quae in membris Christi per
conexum et contactum crescit in incrementum dei.”
™Epist. 185, 10, 46 (CSEL 57, 40; PML 33, 813): “sed multo magis
isti eum non acceperunt, ubi a corporis compage divisi, quod solum corpus
vivificat spiritus sanctus.” In Jo. Ev., Tr. 27, 6 (PML 35, 1618) : “Ergo
Spiritus est qui vivificat: spiritus enim facit viva membra. ... Si enim
separatur a corpore Christi, non est membrum ejus; si non est membrum
ejus, non vegetatur Spiritu ejus.” Sertn. 268, 2 (PML 38, 1232-1233) :
“Jam vero si membrum praecidatur de corpore, numquid sequitur spiritus?
Et tamen membrum agnoscitur quid est ; digitus est, manus est, brachium
est, auris est: praeter corpus habet formam, sed non habet vitam. Sic et
homo ab Ecclesia separatus. Quaeris ab illo sacramentum, invenis ; quaeris
Baptismum, invenis: quaeris symbolum, invenis. Forma est: nisi intus spiritu
vegeteris, frustra foris de forma gloriaris.”
De util. credendi, 1, 1 (CSEL 25 I, 3 ; PML 42, 65): “quandoquidem
haereticus est, ut mea fert opinio, qui alicuius temporalis commodi et maxime
gloriae principatusque sui gratia falsas ac novas opiniones vel gignit vel
sequitur.”

Created Means of Sanctification

115

a certain contumacy is required.113 Consequently Augustine ex­
cludes from the stigma of heresy those who are in good faith114
and those who though born in heresy are willing to abandon it
when proved wrong.115 The saint makes no direct statement about
schismatics being in good faith, but through a consideration of the
above teaching on heretics it may be at least implied that such an
*
idea was not entirely foreign to his mind. Thus one might be
tempted to interpret Augustine’s thought as implying the possi­
bility of sanctity in the case'of such heretics and schismatics. How­
ever, Augustine either only extenuates their guilt116 or allows a
remission of sins followed by their reviviscence upon remaining in
heresy.117 It would be difficult to see how he could associate these
Gen. ad. lift., 7, 9 (CSEL 28 I, 208; PML 34, 360) : “neque enim
non omnes haeretici scripturas catholicas legunt nec ob aliud sunt haeretici,
nisi quod eas non bene intellegentes suas falsas opiniones contra earum
veritatem pervicaciter adserunt.”
”4 Contra Mendae., 3, 4 (CSEL 41, 475; PML 40, 521): “a regula
quippe catholica non recedit, qui haereticum catholica dogmata mendaciter
profitentem catholicum credit, ac per hoc non est ei perniciosum, quia in
hominis mente, de qua latente non potest iudicare, non in dei fallitur fide,
quam debet insitam custodire.”
^Épîst. 43, 1, 1 (CSEL 34 II, 85; PML 33, 160) : “sed qui sententiam
suam quamvis falsam atque perversam nulla pertinaci animositate defendunt,
praesertim quam non audacia praesumptionis suae pepererunt, sed a seductis
atque in errorem lapsis parentibus acceperunt, quaerunt autem cauta solli­
citudine veritatem corrigi parati, cum invenerint, nequaquam sunt inter
haereticos deputandi.”
bapt., 1, 5, 6 (CSEL 51, 152; PML 43, 113) : “illi vero qui per
ignorantiam ibi baptizabantur, arbitrantes ipsam esse ecclesiam Christi, in
istorum quidem conparatione minus peccant, sacrilegio tamen schismatis
vulnerantur non ideo non graviter, quod alii gravius, cum enim dictum est
quibusdam : tolerabilius erit Sodomis in die iudicii quam vobis, non ideo
dictum est quia Sodomitae non torquebuntur, sed quia illi gravius torque­
buntur.”
nTDe bapt., 3, 13, 18 (CSEL 51, 208; PML 43, 146) : “si fit illic remissio
debitorum per baptismi sanctitatem, rursus debita redeunt per haeresis aut
schismatis obstinationem, et ideo necessarium habent huiusmodi homines ve­
nire ad catholicam pacem, ut haeretici et schismatici esse iam desinant et
eorum quae in illos redierant peccatorum purgationem in unitatis vinculo
caritate operante mereantur.”

116

Created Means of Sanctification

people with sanctification except in the case of extreme necessity
when it is impossible to receive baptism in the Catholic Church.118
This does not mean that the Holy Spirit has no influence out­
side Christ’s Body. The Spirit is present everywhere through His
immensity,110 Through this presence He bestows on men outside
the Church those actual graces which consists in an intellectual
illumination and a movement of the will. In this His intention is
to unite all men in Christ?20 In this manner men are brought to
receive baptism, the Holy Spirit Himself, charity, and grace, and
consequently divine sanctification.
r,ii Ibid., 6, 5, 7 (CSEL 51, 302; PML 43, 200): “ille autem, cui tradit,
potest salubriter accipere, si ipse non separatus accipiat, sicut plerisque ac­
cidit, ut catholico animo et corde ab unitate pacis non alienato aliqua neces­
sitate mortis urgentis in aliquem haereticum innuerent et ab eo Christi
baptismum sine illius perversitate perciperent et sive defuncti sive liberati
nequaquam aput eos remanerent, ad quos numquam corde transierant.”
mEpist. 187, 5, 16 (CSEL 57, 93; PML 33, 837): “cum deus ubique sit
totus, non tamen in omnibus habitat.”
Serτη. 27ϋ, 6 (PML 38, 1243) : “Congregatur enim unitas corporis
Christi ex omnibus linguis, per omnes scilicet gentes toto terrarum orbe
diffusas. . . . Quia ergo Spiritus sanctis ex multis in unum colligit nos.”
Epist. 194, 4, 18 (CSEL 57, 190; PML 33, 880) : “aliter adiuvat nondum
inhabitans aliter inhabitans ; nam nondum inhabitans adiuvat, ut sint fideles,
inhabitans adiuvat iam fideles.”

BIBLIOGRAPHY
A Monument to St. Augustine. London: Sheed and Ward, 1930.
Adam, K. Christ Our Brother. Translated by Dom Justin McCann. London:
Sheed and Ward, 1932.
-------- . St. Augustine, the Odyssey of His Soul, Translated by Dom Justin
McCann. London: Sheed and Ward, 1932.
Alfaric, P. L'Evolution Intellectuelle de Saint Augustin. Vol. I. Paris:
Émile Nourry, 1918.
-------- ·. Les Écritures Manichéennes. Two vols. Paris; É. Nourry, 1918. ■
Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologica. Edited by De Rubeis, Billuart, and
others. Turin: Marietti, 1937.
Bardy, G. '"Manichéisme,” Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique, IX (1927),
1841-1895.
Bareille, G. “Donatisme,” Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique, IV (1911),
1701-1728.
Batiffol, P. Le Catholicisme de Saint Augustin. 3d ed. Paris: Librairie
Victor Lecoffre, 1920.
Bernard, P. “Communion des Saints,” Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique,
III (1911), 429-454.
Blachère, F. “Saint Augustin et les Théophanies,” Revue Augustinîenne, I
(1902), 595-613.
Bord, J. “L’Autorité de Saint Cyprien dans la Controverse Baptismale,
Jugée d’après Saint Augustin,” Revue d’Hîstoîre Ecclésiastique,
XVIII (1922), 445-468.
Boutet, J. “L’Unité des Chrétiens dans le Christ,” La Vie Spirituelle, LU
(1937), 78-83; LIII (1937), 76-89.
Bovy, L. Grâce et Liberté chez Saint Augustin. Montreal; Aux ateliers des
Frères des écoles chrétiennes, 1938.
Boyer, C. “Augustin,” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Ascétique et Mystique,
I (1937),’ 1101-1130.
-------- . “La Preuve de Dieu Augustinîenne,” Archives de Philosophie, VII
(1930), 105-141.
-------- . Saint Augustin. Paris: J. Gabalda et Fils, 1932.
Brigué, L. “Les Dispositions à la Communion chez Saint Augustin,” Re­
cherches de Science Religieuse, XXIX (1939), 385-428.
Burkitt, F. The Religion of the Manichees. Cambridge : University Press,
1925.
Burnaby, J. Amor Dei, A Study of the Religion of St. Augustine. London:
The Hulsean Lectures for 1938.
Capelle, B. “Le Progrès de la connaissance Religieuse d’après S. Augustin,”
Recherches de Théologie Ancienne et Médiévale, II (1930), 410-419.

117

118

Bibliography

Caron, A. “La Science du Christ dans Saint Augustin et Saint Thomas,”
Angelicum, VII (1930),'487-514.
Cavallera, F. “La Doctrine de Saint Augustin sur ΓEsprit-Saint à propos
du “De Trinitate,” Recherches de Théologie Ancienne et Médiévale,
II (1930), 365-387; III (1931), 5;19.
Cayré, F. “La Cité de Dieu,” Revue Thomiste, XXXV (1930). 487-507.
-------- . La Contemplation Augustinienne. Paris : André Blot, 1927.
-------- . Les Sources de ΓAmour Divin. Paris : Desclée de Brouwer & Cie,
1934.
Collegii Salmanticensis Cursus Theologicus, XIV. Paris: Palmé, 1879.
Combès, G. La Charité d’après Saint Augustin. Paris : Desclée de Brouwer,
1934.
Commer, E. “De Ecclesia,” Divus Thomas, VII (Freiburg, 1929), 315-321.
Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum. 18 vols. Vienna, 1887-1923.
de Lubac, H. “Corpus Mysticum, Étude sur lOrigine et les Premiers Sens
de l’Expression,” Recherches de Science Religieuse, XXIX (1939),
257-302; XXX (1940), 191-226.
del Rio, M. “El Cristo Mîstico Y La Comunion De Los Santos, Segun San
Augustin,” Religion Y Cultura, XV (1931), 402-460.
Derambure, J. “La Grâce Sanctifiante, est-elle dans le Christ l’unique prin­
cipe de sanctification?” Revue Augustinienne, XVI (1910), 657-679.
Dowd, C. The Visible Sanctity of the Church as a Note and a Motive of
Credibility. Washington, D. C. : C. U. A. Press, 1941.
Duquesnoy, F. “Une Preuve de l’Existence de Dieu,” Annales de Philosophie
Chrétienne, XXV (1891), 286-302 ; 331-346.
Fenton, J. “The Use of the Terms Body and Soul with reference to the
Catholic Church,” The American Ecclesiastical Review, January 1944,
pp. 48-57.
Froget, B. De {’Habitation du Saint Esprit dans les Ames Justes. 4th ed.
Paris : P. Lethielleux, 1900.
Gardeil, A. “Dons du Saint Esprit,” Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique,
IV (1911), 1763-1764.
-------- . “Le ‘Mens’ d’après S. Augustin et S. Thomas d’Aquin,” Revue des
Sciences Philosophiques et Théologiques, XIII (1924), 145-161.
Garrigou-Lagrange, R. De Revelatione. 2 vols. Rome; F. Ferrari, 1931.
-------- . "La Volonté Salvifique chez Saint Augustin,” Revue Thomiste,
XXXV (1930), 473-486.
-------- . “Les Dons du Saint-Esprit chez saint Augustin,” La Vie Spirituelle,
XXIV (1930), 95-111.
Gaudel, A. “Péché Originel,” Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique, XII
(1933), 275-606.
Gendreau, A. Sancti Augustini Doctrina de Baptismo. Baltimore: St. Mary’s,
1939.
Gilson, É. Introduction a l’Êtude de Saint Augustin. Paris: Librairie Philo­
sophique J. Vrin, 1931.

Bibliography

l

I

1

I

I

I

119

Goodier, A. “The Mystical Body,” The Month, CLIX (1932), 289-297.
Heddé, R., et Amann, E. “Pélagianisme,” Dictionanire de Théologie Catho­
lique, XII (1933), 675-715.
Henninger, J. -S'. Augustinus et Doctrina de Duplici Justitia. Modling prope
Vindobonam: Domus missionum ad Sanctum Gabrielem, 1935.
Heston, E. “The Dogmatic Preaching of the Fathers,” The Ecclesiastical
Review, December, 1940, pp. 502-512.
Hugon, E. Le Mystère de l’incarnation. Paris: Pierre Téqui, 1913.
Jacquin, M. “La Question de la Prédestination,” Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique, V (1904), 265-283; 725-754.
Janssens, A. “De Valore Soteriologico Resurrectionis Christi,” Ephemerides
Theologicae Lovanienses, IX (1932), 225-233.
Jolivet, R. Le Problème du Mal, d’après Saint Augustin. Paris: Beauchesne
et ses fils, 1936.
Lanfrancus. De Corpore et Sanguine Domini. Paris: Migne, Patrologiae
Cursus Completus, CL (1854), 407-442.
Leeming, B. “Augustine, Ambrosiaster and the Massa Perditionis,” Gregorianum, XI (1930), 58-91.
Mabe, J. “La Sanctification d’après Saint Cyrille d’Alexandrie,” Revue
d’Hisioire Ecclésiastique, X (1909), 30-40; 469-492.
Marmion, C. Christ, the Life of the Soul. 4th ed. St. Louis : Herder and Co.,
1935.
Martin, J. Saint Augustin. Paris: Félix Alcan, 1901.
Masson, E. “Le Mal,” Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique, IX (1927),
1679-1704.
McKugo, T. De Relatione Inter Caritatem Augustinianam et Gratiam Ac­
tualem. Mundelein ; Apud Aedes Seminarii Sanctae Mariae ad Lacum,
1936.
Merklen, P. “L’âme humaine image de Dieu,” Revue Augustinienne, I
(1902), 569-580.
-------- . “L’homme image de Dieu,” Revue Augustinienne, I (1902), 73-83.
-------- . “L’image de Dieu,” Revue Augustinienne, I (1902), 9-22.
Mersch, É. “Deux Traits de la Doctrine Spirituelle de Saint Augustin,”
Nouvelle Revue Théologique, LVII (1930), 391-410.
-------- . Le Corps Mystique du Christ. Vol. II, 2d ed. Bruxelles, 1936.
-------- . “Sainteté de chrétiens Sainteté de membres,” Nouvelle Revue Théo­
logique, LVIII (1931), 5-20.
Migne. Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series latina. Vols. XXXII-XLVII.
Paris, 1845-1849.
Mohan, J. De Nominibus Christi Divi Augustini Chrîstologicam et Soteriologicam Exponentibus. Mundelein; Apud Aedes Seminarii Sanctae
Mariae ad Lacum, 1936.
Ne veut, E. “Formules Augustiniennes. La définition du péché,” Divus
Thomas, XXXIII (Piacenza, 1930), 617-622.

120 ·

Bibliography

- ------- . “La Théologie Sacramentaire de Saint Augustin,” Divus Thomas,
XXXIV (Piacenza, 1931), 3-27.
—----- . “Rôle de Saint Augustin dans les Controverses Pélagiennes,” Divus
Thomas, XXXIII (Piacenza, 1930), 29-59.
.
Ohleyer, L. The Pauline Formula “Induere Christum’* with special reference
to the works of St. John Chrysostom. Washington, D. C. : C. U. A.
Press, 1921.
Palmieri, A. “Esprit-Saint,” Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique, V (1913),
750-752; 801-804.
Pastore, A. “Π principio d'amore di S. Agostino, nel problema del rapporto
fra la libertà umana e la grazia,” Rivista Di Filosofia, XXI (1930),
345-368.
Pelluzza, F. “Causalità della Grazia Efficace Nel Pensiero Di S Agostino,”
Rivista Di Filosofia Neo-Scolastica, XXIII A (1931), 167-181.
Penido, Μ. T. “Cur Non Spiritus Sanctus A Patre Deo Genitus,” Revue
Thomiste, XXXV (1930), 508-527.
Petavius, D. Dogmata Theologica. Vol. VI. Paris: Vives, 1867.
Pignatelli, M. "Le’Ascesa A Dio Nelle Confessioni Di S. Agostino,” Ri­
vista Di Filosofia Neo-Scolastica, XXIV (1932), 241-247.
Pius XI. Caritate Christi compulsi. Vatican Press Translation. Washington,
D. C. : NCWC, 1932.
-------- . Divini Redemptoris. Vatican Press Translation. Washington, D. C. :
NCWC, 1937.
---------. Mortalium animos. Translated by R. A. McGowan. Washington,
D. C. : NCWC, 1928.
-------- , Quadragesimo Anno. Washington, D. C. : NCWC, 1931.
-------- . Saint Augustine. Washington D. C. : NCWC, 1922.
Pius XII. Mystici Corporis. New English Translation Provided by the
Vatican, Washington, D. C. : NCWC, 1943.
Plus, R. God Within Us. Translated by Edith Cowell. New York: P. J.
Kenedy and Sons, 1929.
Pope, H. The Teaching of St. Augustine on Prayer and the Contemplative
Life. London: Burns, Oates and Washbourne, Ltd., 1935.
Portalié, E. “Augustin,” Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique, I (1909),
2268-2472.
Pourrat, P. Christian Spirituality, Vol. I. Translated by H. H. Mitchell and
S. P. Jacques. London: Burns, Oates and Washbourne, Ltd., 1922.
Pourrat, P. Theology of the Sacraments. Authorized translation from the
third French edition. 2d ed. St. Louis : B. Herder, 1914.
Prat, F. The Theology of Saint Paul. Translated from the tenth French
edition by John L. Stoddard. 2 vols. Vol. I. New York: Benziger
Brothers, 1926; Vol. II, 1927.
Przywara, E. An Augustine Synthesis. New York: Sheed and Ward, 1936.

Bibliography

121

Redding, J. The Influence of St. Augustine on the Doctrine of the 11 Coun­
cil of Orange Concerning Original Sin. Washington, D. C. : C. U. A.
Press, 1939.
Rivière, J. “La Rédemption chez Saint Augustin,” Revue des Sciences Re­
ligieuses, VII (1927), 429-451.
-------- . Le Dogme de la Rédemption. Paris : Victor Lecoffre, 1905.
-------- . “Nature et Grâce, Sur une citation de Tertullien dans saint Au­
gustin,” Revue des Sciences Religieuses, II (1922), 45-49.
-------- . “Notre Vie dans le Christ selon Saint Augustin,” La Vie Spirituelle,
XXIV (1930), 112-134.
-------- . “Tendicula crucis,” Revue des Sciences Religieuses, II (1922), 316319.
Rondet, H. “L’Anthropologie Religieuse de Saint Augustin,” Recherches de
Science Religieuse, XXIX (1939), 163-196.
Senault, J. Man Becomes Guilty. Translated by Henry, Earle of Monmouth.
London: M. M. G., Bedell, and T. C., 1650.
Simpson, W. SV. Augustine and African Church Divisions. London: Long­
mans, Green and Co., 1910.
Tarchier, L. Le Sacrement de ΓEucharistie d’après Saint Augustin. Lyon:
A. Rey et Cie, 1904.
Theodulfus, Aurelian, De Spiritu Sancto. Paris: Migne, Patrologiae Cursus
Completus, CV (1851), 239-276.
Tixeront, J. Histoire des Dogmes. Vol. IL 4th ed. Paris : J. Gabalda et Cie^ssaj1912.
Tolley, W. P. The Idea of God in the Philosophy of St. AugustbtâqM^^''^
York: Columbia University Doctoral Thesis, 1930.
ff./ti EpEHDV
Tonna-Barthet, A. De Vita Christiana Libri VII. Roma: Typis Pojygioms"

Vaticanis, 1927.
Turmel, J. “Le Dogme du Péché Originel dans Saint Augustin,"
d’Histoire et de Littérature Religieuse, VII (1902), 128-146;
Van Crombrugghe, C. “La Doctrine Christologique et Sotériologique de St
Augustin,” Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique, V (1904), 237-257 ; 477504.
Verpeaux, L. Le Rôle Personnel du Saint-Esprit dans la Sanctification des
Ames. Lyon: Thèse de Doctorat en Théologie présentée à la Faculté
Catholique de Lyon, 1910, pp. 45-53.
Zeiller, J. “La Conception de l’Église aux Quatres Premiers Siècles,”
Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique, XXIX (1933), 571-585; 827-848.