Chapter 8 [IV.]—What Augustin Wrote to Simplicianus, the Successor of Ambrose, Bishop of Milan.

You see plainly what was at that time my opinion concerning faith and works, although I was labouring in commending God’s grace; and in this opinion I see that those brethren of ours now are, because they have not been as careful to make progress with me in my writings as they were in reading them. For if they had been so careful, they would have found that question solved in accordance with the truth of the divine Scriptures in the first book of the two which I wrote in the very beginning of my episcopate to Simplicianus, of blessed memory, Bishop of the Church of Milan, and successor to St. Ambrose. Unless, perchance, they may not have known these books; in which case, take care that they do know them. Of this first of those two books, I first spoke in the second book of the Retractations; and what I said is as follows: “Of the books, I say, on which, as a bishop, I have laboured, the first two are addressed to Simplicianus, president of the Church of Milan, who succeeded the most blessed Ambrose, concerning divers questions, two of which I gathered into the first book from the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans. The former of them is about what is written: ‘What shall we say, then? Is the law sin? By no means;’29    Rom. vii. 7. as far as the passage where he says, ‘Who shall deliver me from the body of this death? The grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord.’30    Rom. vii. 24. And therein I have expounded those words of the apostle: ‘The law is spiritual; but I am carnal,’31    Rom. vii. 14. and others in which the flesh is declared to be in conflict against the Spirit in such a way as if a man were there described as still under law, and not yet established under grace. For, long afterwards, I perceived that those words might even be (and probably were) the utterance of a spiritual man. The latter question in this book is gathered from that passage where the apostle says, ‘And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one act of intercourse, even by our father Isaac,’32    Rom. ix. 10. as far as that place where he says, ‘Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we should be as Sodoma, and should have been like unto Gomorrah.’33    Rom. ix. 29. In the solution of this question I laboured indeed on behalf of the free choice of the human will, but God’s grace overcame, and I could only reach that point where the apostle is perceived to have said with the most evident truth, ‘For who maketh thee to differ? and what hast thou that thou hast not received? Now, if thou hast received it, why dost thou glory as if thou receivedst it not?’34    1 Cor. iv. 7. And this the martyr Cyprian was also desirous of setting forth when he compressed the whole of it in that title: ‘That we must boast in nothing, since nothing is our own.’”35    Cypr. Test. Book iii. ch. 4; see The Ante-Nicene Fathers, p 528. Augustin’s Retractations, II. i. 1. This is why I previously said that it was chiefly by this apostolic testimony that I myself had been convinced, when I thought otherwise concerning this matter; and this God revealed to me as I sought to solve this question when I was writing, as I said, to the Bishop Simplicianus. This testimony, therefore, of the apostle, when for the sake of repressing man’s conceit he said, “For what hast thou which thou hast not received?”36    1 Cor. iv. 7. does not allow any believer to say, I have faith which I received not. All the arrogance of this answer is absolutely repressed by these apostolic words. Moreover, it cannot even be said, “Although I have not a perfected faith, yet I have its beginning, whereby I first of all believed in Christ.” Because here also is answered: “But what hast thou that thou hast not received? Now, if thou hast received it, why dost thou glory as if thou receivedst it not?”

CAPUT IV.

8. Videtis certe quid tunc de fide atque operibus sentiebam, quamvis de commendanda gratia Dei laborarem: in qua sententia istos fratres nostros esse nunc video; quia non sicut legere libros meos, ita etiam in eis curaverunt proficere mecum. 0966 Nam si curassent, invenissent istam quaestionem secundum veritatem divinarum Scripturarum solutam in primo libro duorum, quos ad beatae memoriae Simplicianum scripsi episcopum Mediolanensis Ecclesiae, sancti Ambrosii successorem, in ipso exordio episcopatus mei. Nisi forte non eos noverunt: quod si ita est, facite ut noverint. De hoc primo duorum illorum libro in secundo Retractationum primum locutus sum; qui sermo meus ita se habet: «Librorum,» inquam, «quos elaboravi episcopus, primi duo sunt ad Simplicianum Ecclesiae Mediolanensis antistitem, qui beatissimo successit Ambrosio, de diversis quaestionibus, quarum duas ex Epistola Pauli apostoli ad Romanos in primum librum contuli. Harum prior est de eo quod scriptum est, Quid ergo dicemus? Lex peccatum est? Absit; usque ad illud ubi ait, Quis me liberabit de corpore mortis hujus? Gratia Dei per Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum (Rom. VII, 7-25). In qua illa Apostoli verba, Lex spiritualis est, ego autem carnalis sum (Ibid., 14): et caetera, quibus caro contra spiritum confligere ostenditur, eo modo exposui, tanquam homo describatur adhuc sub lege, nondum sub gratia constitutus. Longe enim postea, etiam spiritualis hominis (et hoc probabilius) esse posse illa verba cognovi. Posterior in hoc libero quaestio est ab eo loco ubi ait, Non solum autem, sed et Rebecca ex uno concubitu habens Isaac patris nostri: usque ad illud ubi ait, Nisi Dominus Sabaoth reliquisset nobis semen, sicut Sodoma facti essemus, et sicut Gomorrha similes fuissemus (Id. IX, 10-29). In cujus quaestionis solutione laboratum est quidem pro libro arbitrio voluntatis humanae; sed vicit Dei gratia: nec nisi ad illud potuit perveniri, ut liquidissima veritate dixisse intelligatur Apostolus, Quis enim te discernit? Quid autem habes quod non accepisti? Si autem accepisti, quid gloriaris quasi non acceperis (I Cor. IV, 7)? Quod volens etiam martyr Cyprianus ostendere, hoc totum ipso titulo definivit, dicens: In nullo gloriandum, quando nostrum nihil sit» (Retract. lib. 2, cap. 1, n. 1). Ecce quare dixi superius, hoc apostolico praecipue testimonio etiam me ipsum fuisse convictum: cum de hac re aliter saperem; quam mihi Deus in hac quaestione solvenda, cum ad episcopum Simplicianum, sicut dixi, scriberem, revelavit . Hoc igitur Apostoli testimonium, ubi ad reprimendam hominis inflationem dixit, Quid enim habes quod non accepisti? non sinit quemquam fidelium dicere, Habeo fidem quam non accepi. Reprimitur omnino his apostolicis verbis tota hujus responsionis elatio. Sed ne hoc quidem potest dici: Quamvis non habeam perfectam fidem, habeo tamen ejus initium, quo in Christum primitus credidi. Quia et hic respondetur: Quid autem habes quod non accepisti? Si autem et accepisti, quid gloriaris quasi non acceperis (I Cor. IV, 7)?