On the Resurrection of the Flesh.

 Chapter I.—The Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Body Brought to Light by the Gospel. The Faintest Glimpses of Something Like It Occasionally Met wi

 Chapter II.—The Jewish Sadducees a Link Between the Pagan Philosophers and the Heretics on This Doctrine. Its Fundamental Importance Asserted. The Sou

 Chapter III.—Some Truths Held Even by the Heathen. They Were, However, More Often Wrong Both in Religious Opinions and in Moral Practice.  The Heathen

 Chapter IV.—Heathens and Heretics Alike in Their Vilification of the Flesh and Its Functions, the Ordinary Cavils Against the Final Restitution of So

 Chapter V.—Some Considerations in Reply Eulogistic of the Flesh. It Was Created by God. The Body of Man Was, in Fact, Previous to His Soul.

 Chapter VI.—Not the Lowliness of the Material, But the Dignity and Skill of the Maker, Must Be Remembered, in Gauging the Excellence of the Flesh. Chr

 Chapter VII.—The Earthy Material of Which Flesh is Created Wonderfully Improved by God’s Manipulation. By the Addition of the Soul in Man’s Constituti

 Chapter VIII.—Christianity, by Its Provision for the Flesh, Has Put on It the Greatest Honour.  The Privileges of Our Religion in Closest Connection w

 Chapter IX.—God’s Love for the Flesh of Man, as Developed in the Grace of Christ Towards It. The Flesh the Best Means of Displaying the Bounty and Pow

 Chapter X.—Holy Scripture Magnifies the Flesh, as to Its Nature and Its Prospects.

 Chapter XI.—The Power of God Fully Competent to Effect the Resurrection of the Flesh.

 Chapter XII.—Some Analogies in Nature Which Corroborate the Resurrection of the Flesh.

 Chapter XIII.—From Our Author’s View of a Verse in the Ninety-Second Psalm, the Phœnix is Made a Symbol of the Resurrection of Our Bodies.

 Chapter XIV.—A Sufficient Cause for the Resurrection of the Flesh Occurs in the Future Judgment of Man. It Will Take Cognisance of the Works of the Bo

 Chapter XV.—As the Flesh is a Partaker with the Soul in All Human Conduct, So Will It Be in the Recompense of Eternity.

 Chapter XVI.—The Heretics Called the Flesh “The Vessel of the Soul,” In Order to Destroy the Responsibility of the Body. Their Cavil Turns Upon Themse

 Chapter XVII.—The Flesh Will Be Associated with the Soul in Enduring the Penal Sentences of the Final Judgment.

 Chapter XVIII.—Scripture Phrases and Passages Clearly Assert “The Resurrection of the Dead.”  The Force of This Very Phrase Explained as Indicating th

 Chapter XIX.—The Sophistical Sense Put by Heretics on the Phrase “Resurrection of the Dead,” As If It Meant the Moral Change of a New Life.

 Chapter XX.—Figurative Senses Have Their Foundation in Literal Fact. Besides, the Allegorical Style is by No Means the Only One Found in the Prophetic

 Chapter XXI.—No Mere Metaphor in the Phrase Resurrection of the Dead. In Proportion to the Importance of Eternal Truths, is the Clearness of Their Scr

 Chapter XXII.—The Scriptures Forbid Our Supposing Either that the Resurrection is Already Past, or that It Takes Place Immediately at Death. Our Hopes

 Chapter XXIII.—Sundry Passages of St. Paul, Which Speak of a Spiritual Resurrection, Compatible with the Future Resurrection of the Body, Which is Eve

 Chapter XXIV.—Other Passages Quoted from St. Paul, Which Categorically Assert the Resurrection of the Flesh at the Final Judgment.

 Chapter XXV.—St. John, in the Apocalypse, Equally Explicit in Asserting the Same Great Doctrine.

 Chapter XXVI.—Even the Metaphorical Descriptions of This Subject in the Scriptures Point to the Bodily Resurrection, the Only Sense Which Secures Thei

 Chapter XXVII.—Certain Metaphorical Terms Explained of the Resurrection of the Flesh.

 Chapter XXVIII.—Prophetic Things and Actions, as Well as Words, Attest This Great Doctrine.

 Chapter XXIX.—Ezekiel’s Vision of the Dry Bones Quoted.

 Chapter XXX.—This Vision Interpreted by Tertullian of the Resurrection of the Bodies of the Dead.  A Chronological Error of Our Author, Who Supposes t

 Chapter XXXI.—Other Passages Out of the Prophets Applied to the Resurrection of the Flesh.

 Chapter XXXII.—Even Unburied Bodies Will Be Raised Again. Whatever Befalls Them God Will Restore Them Again. Jonah’s Case Quoted in Illustration of Go

 Chapter XXXIII.—So Much for the Prophetic Scriptures.  In the Gospels, Christ’s Parables, as Explained by Himself, Have a Clear Reference to the Resur

 Chapter XXXIV.—Christ Plainly Testifies to the Resurrection of the Entire Man. Not in His Soul Only, Without the Body.

 Chapter XXXV.—Explanation of What is Meant by the Body, Which is to Be Raised Again. Not the Corporeality of the Soul.

 Chapter XXXVI.—Christ’s Refutation of the Sadducees, and Affirmation of Catholic Doctrine.

 Chapter XXXVII.—Christ’s Assertion About the Unprofitableness of the Flesh Explained Consistently with Our Doctrine.

 Chapter XXXVIII.—Christ, by Raising the Dead, Attested in a Practical Way the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Flesh.

 Chapter XXXIX.—Additional Evidence Afforded to Us in the Acts of the Apostles.

 Chapter XL.—Sundry Passages of St. Paul Which Attest Our Doctrine Rescued from the Perversions of Heresy.

 Chapter XLI.—The Dissolution of Our Tabernacle Consistent with the Resurrection of Our Bodies.

 Chapter XLII.—Death Changes, Without Destroying, Our Mortal Bodies.  Remains of the Giants.

 Chapter XLIII.—No Disparagement of Our Doctrine in St. Paul’s Phrase, Which Calls Our Residence in the Flesh Absence from the Lord.

 Chapter XLIV.—Sundry Other Passages of St. Paul Explained in a Sentence Confirmatory of Our Doctrine.

 Chapter XLV.—The Old Man and the New Man of St. Paul Explained.

 Chapter XLVI.—It is the Works of the Flesh, Not the Substance of the Flesh, Which St. Paul Always Condemns.

 Chapter XLVII.—St. Paul, All Through, Promises Eternal Life to the Body.

 Chapter XLVIII.—Sundry Passages in the Great Chapter of the Resurrection of the Dead Explained in Defence of Our Doctrine.

 Chapter XLIX.—The Same Subject Continued. What Does the Apostle Exclude from the Dead?  Certainly Not the Substance of the Flesh.

 Chapter L.—In What Sense Flesh and Blood are Excluded from the Kingdom of God.

 Chapter LI.—The Session of Jesus in His Incarnate Nature at the Right Hand of God a Guarantee of the Resurrection of Our Flesh.

 Chapter LII.—From St. Paul’s Analogy of the Seed We Learn that the Body Which Died Will Rise Again, Garnished with the Appliances of Eternal Life.

 Chapter LIII.—Not the Soul, But the Natural Body Which Died, is that Which is to Rise Again. The Resurrection of Lazarus Commented on. Christ’s Resurr

 Chapter LIV.—Death Swallowed Up of Life. Meaning of This Phrase in Relation to the Resurrection of the Body.

 Chapter LV.—The Change of a Thing’s Condition is Not the Destruction of Its Substance. The Application of This Principle to Our Subject.

 Chapter LVI.—The Procedure of the Last Judgment, and Its Awards, Only Possible on the Identity of the Risen Body with Our Present Flesh.

 Chapter LVII.—Our Bodies, However Mutilated Before or After Death, Shall Recover Their Perfect Integrity in the Resurrection. Illustration of the Enfr

 Chapter LVIII.—From This Perfection of Our Restored Bodies Will Flow the Consciousness of Undisturbed Joy and Peace.

 Chapter LIX.—Our Flesh in the Resurrection Capable, Without Losing Its Essential Identity, of Bearing the Changed Conditions of Eternal Life, or of De

 Chapter LX.—All the Characteristics of Our Bodies—Sex, Various Limbs, Etc.—Will Be Retained, Whatever Change of Functions These May Have, of Which Poi

 Chapter LXI.—The Details of Our Bodily Sex, and of the Functions of Our Various Members. Apology for the Necessity Which Heresy Imposes of Hunting Up

 Chapter LXII.—Our Destined Likeness to the Angels in the Glorious Life of the Resurrection.

 Chapter LXIII.—Conclusion. The Resurrection of the Flesh in Its Absolute Identity and Perfection. Belief of This Had Become Weak. Hopes for Its Refres

Chapter XVI.—The Heretics Called the Flesh “The Vessel of the Soul,” In Order to Destroy the Responsibility of the Body. Their Cavil Turns Upon Themselves and Shows the Flesh to Be a Sharer in Human Actions.

When, however, we attribute to the soul authority, and to the flesh submission, we must see to it that (our opponents) do not turn our position by another argument, by insisting on so placing the flesh in the service of the soul, that it be not (considered as) its servant, lest they should be compelled, if it were so regarded, to admit its companionship (to the soul). For they would argue that servants and companions possess a discretion in discharging the functions of their respective office, and a power over their will in both relations: in short, (they would claim to be) men themselves, and therefore (would expect) to share the credit with their principals, to whom they voluntarily yielded their assistance; whereas the flesh had no discretion, no sentiment in itself, but possessing no power of its own of willing or refusing, it, in fact, appears to stand to the soul in the stead of a vessel as an instrument rather than a servant. The soul alone, therefore, will have to be judged (at the last day) pre-eminently as to how it has employed the vessel of the flesh; the vessel itself, of course, not being amenable to a judicial award: for who condemns the cup if any man has mixed poison in it? or who sentences the sword to the beasts, if a man has perpetrated with it the atrocities of a brigand? Well, now, we will grant that the flesh is innocent, in so far as bad actions will not be charged upon it: what, then, is there to hinder its being saved on the score of its innocence? For although it is free from all imputation of good works, as it is of evil ones, yet it is more consistent with the divine goodness to deliver the innocent. A beneficent man, indeed, is bound to do so: it suits then the character of the Most Bountiful to bestow even gratuitously such a favour. And yet, as to the cup, I will not take the poisoned one, into which some certain death is injected, but one which has been infected with the breath of a lascivious woman,90    “Frictricis” is Oehler’s reading. or of Cybele’s priest, or of a gladiator, or of a hangman: then I want to know whether you would pass a milder condemnation on it than on the kisses of such persons? One indeed which is soiled with our own filth, or one which is not mingled to our own mind we are apt to dash to pieces, and then to increase our anger with our servant. As for the sword, which is drunk with the blood of the brigand’s victims, who would not banish it entirely from his house, much more from his bed-room, or from his pillow, from the presumption that he would be sure to dream of nothing but the apparitions of the souls which were pursuing and disquieting him for lying down with the blade which shed their own blood? Take, however, the cup which has no reproach on it, and which deserves the credit of a faithful ministration, it will be adorned by its drinking-master with chaplets, or be honoured with a handful of flowers. The sword also which has received honourable stains in war, and has been thus engaged in a better manslaughter, will secure its own praise by consecration. It is quite possible, then, to pass decisive sentences even on vessels and on instruments, that so they too may participate in the merits of their proprietors and employers. Thus much do I say from a desire to meet even this argument, although there is a failure in the example, owing to the diversity in the nature of the objects. For every vessel or every instrument becomes useful from without, consisting as it does of material perfectly extraneous to the substance of the human owner or employer; whereas the flesh, being conceived, formed, and generated along with the soul from its earliest existence in the womb, is mixed up with it likewise in all its operations.  For although it is called “a vessel” by the apostle, such as he enjoins to be treated “with honour,”91    1 Thess. iv. 4. it is yet designated by the same apostle as “the outward man,”92    2 Cor. iv. 16.—that clay, of course, which at the first was inscribed with the title of a man, not of a cup or a sword, or any paltry vessel.  Now it is called a “vessel” in consideration of its capacity, whereby it receives and contains the soul; but “man,” from its community of nature, which renders it in all operations a servant and not an instrument. Accordingly, in the judgment it will be held to be a servant (even though it may have no independent discretion of its own), on the ground of its being an integral portion of that which possesses such discretion, and is not a mere chattel.  And although the apostle is well aware that the flesh does nothing of itself which is not also imputed to the soul, he yet deems the flesh to be “sinful;”93    Rom. viii. 3. lest it should be supposed to be free from all responsibility by the mere fact of its seeming to be impelled by the soul.  So, again, when he is ascribing certain praiseworthy actions to the flesh, he says, “Therefore glorify and exalt God in your body,”94    1 Cor. vi. 20.—being certain that such efforts are actuated by the soul; but still he ascribes them to the flesh, because it is to it that he also promises the recompense. Besides, neither rebuke, (on the one hand), would have been suitable to it, if free from blame; nor, (on the other hand), would exhortation, if it were incapable of glory. Indeed, both rebuke and exhortation would be alike idle towards the flesh, if it were an improper object for that recompence which is certainly received in the resurrection.

CAPUT XVI.

Sed cum imperium animae, obsequium carni distribuimus, prospiciendum est, ne et hoc alia argumentatione subvertant, ut velint carnem sic in officio animae collocare, non quasi ministram, ne ex hoc sociam cogantur agnoscere. Dicent enim ministros et 0814C socios habere arbitrium ministrandi atque sociandi, et potestatem suae voluntatis in utrumque, homines scilicet et ipsos; idcirco cum auctoribus merita communicare, quibus operam sponte accommodant ; carnem autem, nihil sapientem; nihil sentientem per semetipsam, non velle, non nolle de suo habentem, vice potius vasculi apparere animae, ut instrumentum, non ut ministerium. Itaque animae solius judicium praesidere, qualiter usa sit vasculo carnis; vasculum vero ipsum non esse sententiae obnoxium: quia nec calicem 0815A damnari, si quis eum veneno temperarit; nec gladium ad bestias pronuntiari, si quis eo latrocinium fuerit operatus. Jam ergo innocens caro, ex ea parte qua non reputabuntur illi operae malae: et nihil prohibet innocentiae nomine salvam eam fieri. Licet enim nec bonae operae reputentur illi, sicut nec malae ; divinae tamen benignitati magis competit innocentes liberare: beneficis enim debet; optimi est autem, etiam quod non debetur offerre. Et tamen calicem, non dico venenarium, in quem mors aliqua ructarit , sed fictricis , vel archigalli , vel gladiatoris, aut carnificis spiritu infectum, quaero an minus damnes, quam oscula ipsorum? Nostris quoque sordibus nubilum, vel non pro animo temperatum, elidere solemus, quo magis puero 0815B irascamur: gladium vero latrociniis ebrium quis non a domo tota, nedum a cubiculo, nedum a capitis sui officio relegabit , praesumens scilicet, nihil aliud se quam inludia animarum somniaturum, urgentium et inquietantium sanguinis sui concubinum? Atenim et calix bene sibi conscius, et de diligentia ministerii commendatus, de coronis quoque potatoris sui inornabitur , aut aspergine florum honorabitur: et gladius bene de bello cruentus, et melior homicida, laudem suam consecratione pensabit. Est ergo et in vascula et in instrumenta sententiam figere, ut dominorum et auctorum meritis et ipsa communicent; ut huic quoque argumentationi satisfecerim, licet ab exemplo vacet diversitas rerum. Omne enim vas vel instrumentum aliunde in usus venit, extranea omnino materia 0815C a substantia hominis; caro autem ab exordio 0816A uteri consata , conformata, congenita animae, etiam in omni operatione miscetur illi. Nam etsi vas vocatur apud Apostolum, quam jubet in honore tractari , eadem tamen ab eodem homo exterior appellatur: ille scilicet limus, qui prior titulo hominis incisus est, non calicis, aut gladii, aut vasculi ullius. Vas enim capacitatis nomine dicta est, qua animam capit et continet; homo vero, de communione naturae, quae eam non instrumentum in operationibus praestat, sed ministerium. Ita et ministerium tenebitur judicio, etsi de suo nihil sapiat; quia portio est ejus quae sapit, non supellex. Hoc et Apostolus sciens, nihil carnem agere per semetipsam, quod non animae deputetur, nihilominus peccatricem judicat carnem, ne eo 0816B quod ab anima videtur impelli, judicio liberata credatur. Sic et cum aliquas laudis operas carni indicit (I Cor. XV): Glorificate, inquit, ettollite Deum in corpore vestro, certus et hos conatus ab anima agi; idcirco tamen et carni eos mandat, quia et illi fructum repromittit . Alioquin nec exprobratio competisset in alienam culpae, nec adhortatio in extraneam gloriae: et exprobratio enim, et exhortatio vacarent erga carnem, si vacaret et merces, quae in resurrectione captatur.