S. AURELII AUGUSTINI HIPPONENSIS EPISCOPI DE ANIMA ET EJUS ORIGINE LIBRI QUATUOR .
LIBER SECUNDUS. AD PETRUM PRESBYTERUM.
LIBER TERTIUS. AD VINCENTIUM VICTOREM.
Chapter 8 [VIII.]—Victor’s Erroneous Opinion, that the Soul Deserved to Become Sinful.
Vainly supposing, then, that he was able to solve this question from the foreknowledge of God, he keeps floundering on, and says: “If the soul deserved to be sinful which could not have been sinful, yet neither did it remain in sin, because, as prefigured in Christ, it was not bound to be in sin, even as it was unable to be.” Now what can he mean when he says, “which could not have been sinful,” or “was unable to be in sin,” except, as I suppose, this, if it did not come into the flesh? For, of course, it could not have been sinful through original sin, or have been at all involved in original sin, except through the flesh, if it is not derived from the parent. We see it, then, liberated from sin through grace, but we do not see how it deserved to be involved in sin. What, then, is the meaning of these words of his, “If the soul deserved to be sinful, yet neither did it remain in sin”? For if I were to ask him, why it did not remain in sin, he would very properly answer, Because the grace of Christ delivered it therefrom. Since, then, he tells us how it came to pass that an infant’s soul was liberated from its sinfulness, let him further tell us how it happened that it deserved to be sinful.
CAPUT VIII
8. Hanc ergo quaestionem frustra se putans de praescientia Dei posse dissolvere, adhuc se involvit, et dicit: «Anima si peccatrix esse meruit, quae peccatrix esse non potuit, tamen neque in peccato remansit, quia in Christo praefigurata in peccato esse non debuit, sicut esse non potuit.» Quid est quod dicit, «peccatrix esse non potuit,» vel «in peccato 0479 esse non potuit,» nisi, credo, si non veniret in carnem? Neque enim potuit originali peccato esse peccatrix, aut quoquo modo in originali peccato esse, nisi per carnem, si de parente non trahitur. Videmus ergo eam per gratiam liberari a peccato: sed non videmus unde meruerit haerere peccato. Quid est ergo quod dicit: «Si peccatrix esse meruit, non tamen in peccato remansit?» Si enim ab illo quaeram, cur non in peccato remanserit, rectissime respondebit quod eam Christi gratia liberaverit. Sicut ergo dicit unde anima parvuli fuerit liberata peccatrix, sic etiam dicat unde meruerit esse peccatrix.