Chapter XII.—The True Functions of the Soul. Christ Assumed It in His Perfect Human Nature, Not to Reveal and Explain It, But to Save It. Its Resurrection with the Body Assured by Christ.

Well, now, let it be granted that the soul is made apparent by the flesh,166    Ostensa sit. on the assumption that it was evidently necessary167    Si constiterit. that it should be made apparent in some way or other, that is, as being incognizable to itself and to us: there is still an absurd distinction in this hypothesis, which implies that we are ourselves separate from our soul, when all that we are is soul. Indeed,168    Denique. without the soul we are nothing; there is not even the name of a human being, only that of a carcase. If, then, we are ignorant of the soul, it is in fact the soul that is ignorant of itself. Thus the only remaining question left for us to look into is, whether the soul was in this matter so ignorant of itself that it became known in any way it could.169    Quoquo modo. The soul, in my opinion,170    Opinor. is sensual.171    Sensualis: endowed with sense. Nothing, therefore, pertaining to the soul is unconnected with sense,172    Nihil animale sine sensu. nothing pertaining to sense is unconnected with the soul.173    Nihil sensuale sine anima. And if I may use the expression for the sake of emphasis, I would say, “Animœ anima sensus est”—“Sense is the soul’s very soul.”  Now, since it is the soul that imparts the faculty of perception174    We should have been glad of a shorter phrase for sentire (“to use sense”), had the whole course of the passage permitted it. to all (that have sense), and since it is itself that perceives the very senses, not to say properties, of them all, how is it likely that it did not itself receive sense as its own natural constitution? Whence is it to know what is necessary for itself under given circumstances, from the very necessity of natural causes, if it knows not its own property, and what is necessary for it? To recognise this indeed is within the competence of every soul; it has, I mean, a practical knowledge of itself, without which knowledge of itself no soul could possibly have exercised its own functions.175    Se ministrare. I suppose, too, that it is especially suitable that man, the only rational animal, should have been furnished with such a soul as would make him the rational animal, itself being pre-eminently rational. Now, how can that soul which makes man a rational animal be itself rational if it be itself ignorant of its rationality, being ignorant of its own very self? So far, however, is it from being ignorant, that it knows its own Author, its own Master, and its own condition. Before it learns anything about God, it names the name of God. Before it acquires any knowledge of His judgment, it professes to commend itself to God. There is nothing one oftener hears of than that there is no hope after death; and yet what imprecations or deprecations does not the soul use according as the man dies after a well or ill spent life! These reflections are more fully pursued in a short treatise which we have written, “On the Testimony of the Soul.”176    See especially chap. iv. supra. Besides, if the soul was ignorant of itself from the beginning, there is nothing it could177    Debuerat. have learnt of Christ except its own quality.178    Nisi qualis esset. It was not its own form that it learnt of Christ, but its salvation. For this cause did the Son of God descend and take on Him a soul, not that the soul might discover itself in Christ, but Christ in itself. For its salvation is endangered, not by its being ignorant of itself, but of the word of God. “The life,” says He, “was manifested,”179    1 John i. 2. not the soul. And again, “I am come to save the soul.” He did not say, “to explain”180    Ostendere; see Luke ix. 56. it. We could not know, of course,181    Nimirum. that the soul, although an invisible essence, is born and dies, unless it were exhibited corporeally. We certainly were ignorant that it was to rise again with the flesh. This is the truth which it will be found was manifested by Christ. But even this He did not manifest in Himself in a different way than in some Lazarus, whose flesh was no more composed of soul182    Animalis. than his soul was of flesh.183    Carnalis. What further knowledge, therefore, have we received of the structure184    Dispositione. of the soul which we were ignorant of before?  What invisible part was there belonging to it which wanted to be made visible by the flesh?

CAPUT XII.

0775A

Ostensa sit nunc anima per carnem, si constiterit illam ostendendam quoquo modo fuisse, id est incognitam sibi et nobis. Quamquam in hoc vana distinctio est; quasi nos seorsum ab anima simus, cum totum, quod sumus, anima sit. Denique sine anima nihil sumus, ne hominis quidem, sed cadaveris nomen. Si ergo ignoramus animam, ipsa se ignorat. Itaque superest hoc solummodo inspicere, an se anima hic ignorarit, ut nota quoquo modo fieret. Opinor, sensualis est animae natura. Adeo, nihil animale sine sensu; nihil sensuale sine anima. Et ut impressius dixerim, animae anima sensus est. Igitur cum omnibus anima sentire praestet, et ipsa sentiat omnium etiam sensus, nedum qualitates, 0775B qui verisimile est, ut ipsa sensum sui ab initio sortita non sit? Unde illi, scire quod interdum sibi sit necessarium, ex naturalium necessitate, si non scit suam qualitatem, cui quid necessarium est? Hoc quidem in omni anima recognoscere est; notitiam sui dico; sine qua notitia sui nulla anima se ministrare potuisset. Puto autem magis hominem, animal solum rationale, compotem et animam esse sortitum, quae illum facit animal rationale, ipsa in primis rationalis. Porro, quomodo rationalis, quae efficit hominem rationale animal, si ipsa rationem suam nescit, ignorans semetipsam? Sed adeo non ignorat, ut auctorem, et arbitrum, et statum suum norit. Nihil adhuc de Deo discens, Deum nominat: nihil adhuc de judicio ejus admittens, 0775C Deo commendare se dicit . Nihil magis audiens, quam spem nullam esse post mortem, et bene et male defuncto cuique imprecatur. Plenius haec prosequitur libellus quem scripsimus de Testimonio animae. Alioquin, si anima semetipsam ignorans erat ab initio, nihil a Christo cognovisse debuerat, nisi qualis esset. Nunc autem non effigiem suam discit a Christo, sed salutem. Propterea 0776A Filius Dei descendit, et animam subiit; non ut ipsa se anima cognosceret in Christo, sed ut Christum in semetipsa; non enim se ignorando de salute periclitatur, sed Dei Verbum. Vita, inquit, (I Joan. I, 2) manifestata est; non anima, etc.: Veni, inquit (Luc. IX, 56), animam salvam facere: non dixit, ostendere. Ignorabamus nimirum animam, licet invisibilem, nasci et mori, nisi corporaliter exhiberetur. Ignoravimus plane resurrecturam cum carne. Hoc erit quod Christus manifestavit. Sed et hoc non aliter in se, quam in Lazaro aliquo, cujus caro non erat animalis, ita nec anima carnalis. Quid ergo amplius innotuit nobis de animae ignoratae retro dispositione? Quid invisibile ejus fuit, quod visibilitatem per carnem desideraret?