Chapter 24 [XV.]—Whether or No the Soul is Derived by Natural Descent (Ex Traduce), His Cited Passages Fail to Show.

Forasmuch, then, as the passages of Scripture which he mentions by no means show what he endeavours to enforce (since, indeed, they express nothing at all on the immediate question before us), what can be the meaning of these words of his: “We firmly maintain that the soul comes from the breath of God, not from natural generation, because it is given from God”? As if, forsooth, the body could be given from another, than from Him by whom it is created, “Of whom are all things, through whom are all things, in whom are all things;”32    Rom. xi. 36. not that they are of His nature, but of His workmanship. “Nor is it from nothing,” says he, “because it comes forth from God.” Whether this be so, is (we must say) not the question to be here entertained. At the same time, we do not hesitate to affirm, that the proposition which he advances, that the soul comes to man neither out of descent nor out of nothing, is certainly not true: this, I say, we affirm to be without doubt not true. For it is one of two things: if the soul is not derived by natural descent from the parent, it comes out of nothing. To pretend that it is derived from God in such wise as to be a portion of His nature, is simply sacrilegious blasphemy. But we solicit and seek up to the present time some plain passages of Scripture bearing on the point, whether the soul does not come by parental descent; but we do not want such passages as he has adduced, which yield no illustration of the question now before us.

CAPUT XV.

24. Cum igitur Scripturarum testimonia quae commemorat, nequaquam doceant id quod persuadere conatur (quod enim ad hanc quaestionem attinet, omnino non exprimunt); quid est quod dicit, Animam ex flatu Dei constanter asserimus, non ex traduce, quia ex Deo datur? Quasi corpus ex alio detur, quam ex illo a quo creatur, ex quo omnia, per quem omnia, in quo omnia (Rom. XI, 36): quamvis non ex ejus natura, sed ex ejus opificio. Neque ex nihilo, inquit, quia ex Deo proficiscitur. Hoc plane non adhuc quaerendum monemus, utrum ita sit: sed prorsus verum non esse quod dicit, id est, quod anima nec ex traduce sit, nec ex nihilo; hoc, inquam, verum non esse sine dubitatione firmamus. Unum est enim e duobus, si ex traduce non est, ex nihilo est; ne ita sit ex Deo, ut naturae sit Dei, quod omnino sacrilegum est credere. Sed adhuc utrum non sit ex traduce, certa testimonia flagitamus aut quaerimus: non qualia iste posuit, quibus hoc quod quaerimus non ostenditur.