Chap. XXIV.—The Overthrowing of the Arguments Above Urged by Way of Objection.

Come, let us now consider whether a teacher sent from heaven can fail to be perfect. I do not as yet speak of Him whom they deny to have come from God. Let us suppose that some one were to be sent from heaven to instruct the life of men in the first principles of virtue, and to form them to righteousness. No one can doubt but that this teacher, who is sent from heaven, would be as perfect in the knowledge of all things as in virtue, lest there should be no difference between a heavenly and an earthly teacher. For in the case of a man his instruction can by no means be from within and of himself.797    Propria.   For the mind, shut in by earthly organs, and hindered by a corrupt798    Tabe corporis.   body, of itself can neither comprehend nor receive the truth, unless it is taught from another source.799    Thus our Lord tells us that flesh and blood cannot reveal to us mysteries.   And if it had this power in the greatest degree, yet it would be unable to attain to the highest virtue, and to resist all vices, the materials of which are contained in our bodily800    Visceribus.   organs. Hence it comes to pass, that an earthly teacher cannot be perfect. But a teacher from heaven, to whom His divine nature gives knowledge, and His immortality gives virtue, must of necessity in His teaching also, as in other things, be perfect and complete. But this cannot by any means happen, unless He should take to Himself a mortal body. And the reason why it cannot happen is manifest. For if He should come to men as God, not to mention that mortal eyes cannot look upon and endure the glory of His majesty in His own person, assuredly God will not be able to teach virtue; for, inasmuch as He is without a body, He will not practice the things which He will teach, and through this His teaching will not be perfect. Otherwise, if it is the greatest virtue patiently to endure pain for the sake of righteousness and duty, if it is virtue not to fear death itself when threatened, and when inflicted to undergo it with fortitude; it follows that the perfect teacher ought both to teach these things by precept, and to confirm them by practice. For he who gives precepts for the life, ought to remove every method801    Omnium excusationum vias. [Here is the defect of Cicero’s philosophy. See William Wilberforce, Practical Christianity, p. 25, ed. London, 1815.]   of excuse, that he may impose upon men the necessity of obedience, not by any constraint, but by a sense of shame, and yet may leave them liberty, that a reward may be appointed for those who obey, because it was in their power not to obey if they so wished; and a punishment for those who do not obey, because it was in their power to obey if they so wished. How then can excuse be removed, unless the teacher should practice what he teaches, and as it were go before802    Prævius.   and hold out his hand to one who is about to follow? But how can one practice what he teaches, unless he is like him whom he teaches? For if he be subject to no passion, a man may thus answer him who is the teacher: It is my wish not to sin, but I am overpowered; for I am clothed with frail and weak flesh: it is this which covets, which is angry, which fears pain and death. And thus I am led on against my will;803    Thus St. Paul complains, Rom. vii. 15: “What I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I;” and ver. 21, “I find then a law that when I would do good, evil is present with me.” But (viii. 3) he says, “What the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, condemned sin in the flesh.”   and I sin, not because it is my wish, but because I am compelled. I myself perceive that I sin; but the necessity imposed by my frailty, which I am unable to resist, impels me. What will that teacher of righteousness say in reply to these things? How will he refute and convict a man who shall allege the frailty of the flesh as an excuse for his faults, unless he himself also shall be clothed with flesh, so that he may show that even the flesh is capable of virtue? For obstinacy cannot be refuted except by example. For the things which you teach cannot have any weight unless you shall be the first to practice them; because the nature of men is inclined to faults, and wishes to sin not only with indulgence, but also with a reasonable plea.804    Cum ratione.   It is befitting that a master and teacher of virtue should most closely resemble man, that by overpowering sin he may teach man that sin may be overpowered by him. But if he is immortal, he can by no means propose an example to man. For there will stand forth some one persevering in his opinion, and will say: You indeed do not sin, because you are free from this body; you do not covet, because nothing is needed by an immortal; but I have need of many things for the support of this life. You do not fear death, because it can have no power against you. You despise pain, because you can suffer no violence. But I, a mortal, fear both, because they bring upon me the severest tortures, which the weakness of the flesh cannot endure. A teacher of virtue therefore ought to have taken away this excuse from men, that no one may ascribe it to necessity that he sins, rather than to his own fault. Therefore, that a teacher may be perfect, no objection ought to be brought forward by him who is to be taught, so that if he should happen to say, You enjoin impossibilities; the teacher may answer, See, I myself do them. But I am clothed with flesh, and it is the property of flesh to sin.805    This is urged as an excuse by him to whom the precept is addressed. In this and the following sentences there is a dialogue between the teacher and the taught.   I too bear the same flesh, and yet sin does not bear rule in me. It is difficult for me to despise riches, because otherwise I am unable to live in this body. See, I too have a body, and yet I contend against every desire. I am not able to bear pain or death for righteousness, because I am frail. See, pain and death have power over me also; and I overcome those very things which you fear, that I may make you victorious over pain and death. I go before you through those things which you allege that it is impossible to endure: if you are not able to follow me giving directions, follow me going before you. In this way all excuse is taken away, and you must confess that man is unjust through his own fault, since he does not follow a teacher of virtue, who is at the same time a guide. You see, therefore, how much more perfect is a teacher who is mortal, because he is able to be a guide to one who is mortal, than one who is immortal, for he is unable to teach patient endurance who is not subject to passions. Nor, however, does this extend so far that I prefer man to God; but to show that man cannot be a perfect teacher unless he is also God, that he may by his heavenly authority impose upon men the necessity of obedience; nor God, unless he is clothed with a mortal body, that by carrying out his precepts to their completion806    Præcepta sua factis adimplendo.   in actions, he may bind others by the necessity of obedience. It plainly therefore appears, that he who is a guide of life and teacher of righteousness must have a body, and that his teaching cannot otherwise be full and perfect, unless it has a root and foundation, and remains firm and fixed among men; and that he himself must undergo weakness of flesh and body, and display in himself807    Virtutem in se recipere.   the virtue of which he is a teacher, that he may teach it at the same time both by words and deeds. Also, he must be subject to death and all sufferings, since the duties of virtue are occupied with the enduring of suffering, and the undergoing death; all which, as I have said, a perfect teacher ought to endure, that he may teach the possibility of their being endured.  

CAPUT XXIV. Eversio argumentorum supra objectorum.

Age, nunc consideremus, an doctor e coelo missus 0520C possit non esse perfectus. Nondum de hoc loquor, 0521A quem venisse a Deo negant. Fingamus aliquem de coelo esse mittendum, qui vitam hominum rudimentis virtutis instituat, et ad justitiam formet. Nemini dubium potest esse, quin is doctor, qui coelitus mittitur, tam scientia sit rerum omnium quam virtute perfectus; ne nihil inter coelestem terrenumque differat. Nam in homine interna et propria doctrina esse nullo pacto potest. Nec enim mens terrenis visceribus inclusa, et tabe corporis impedita, aut comprehendere per se potest, aut capere veritatem, nisi aliunde doceatur. 0521A Et si maxime possit, summam tamen virtutem capere nequeat, et omnibus vitiis resistere, quorum materia in visceribus continetur. Eo fit, ut terrenus doctor perfectus esse non possit. At vero coelestis, cui scientiam divinitas, virtutem immortalitas 0521B tribuit, in docendo quoque, sicut in caeteteris, perfectus et consummatus sit necesse est. At id omnino fieri non potest, nisi mortale sibi corpus assumat. Cur autem fieri non possit, ratio clara est. Nam si veniat ad homines, ut Deus, ut omittam, quod mortales oculi claritatem majestatis ejus conspicere ac sustinere non possunt, ipse certe Deus virtutem docere non poterit, quia expers corporis non faciet, quae docebit, ac per hoc doctrina ejus perfecta non erit. Alioqui si summa virtus est, dolorem patienter pro justitia officioque perferre, si virtus est, mortem ipsam et intentatam non metuere, et illatam fortiter sustinere; debet ergo doctor ille perfectus, et docere ista praecipiendo, et confirmare faciendo; quia qui dat praecepta vivendi, amputare debet omnium excusationum 0521C vias, ut imponat hominibus parendi necessitatem, non vi aliqua, sed pudore, et tamen libertatem relinquat, ut et praemium sit constitutum parentibus, quia poterant non parere, si vellent, et non parentibus poena, quia poterant parere, si vellent. Quomodo ergo poterit amputari excusatio, nisi ut qui docet, faciat quae docet, et si quasi praevius, et manum porrigat seculuro? quemadmodum autem potest facere quae docet, si non sit similis ei quem docet? Nam si nulli subjectus sit passioni, potest ei 0522A docenti homo sic respondere: Volo equidem non peccare; sed vincor; indutus sum enim carne fragili, et imbecilla; haec est, quae concupiscit, quae irascitur, quae dolet, quae mori timet. Itaque ducor invitus, et pecco, non quia volo, sed quia cogor. Sentio me et ipse peccare: sed necessitas fragilitatis impellit, cui repugnare non possum. Quid ad haec respondebit praeceptor ille justitiae? quomodo confutabit ac redarguet hominem, qui delictis suis excusationem carnis obtendet, nisi et ipse carne fuerit indutus, ut ostendat, etiam carnem posse capere virtutem? Contumacia enim redargui non potest, nisi exemplo. Nam habere non possunt, quae doceas, firmitatem, nisi ea prior feceris; quia natura hominum proclivis in vitia, videri vult non modo cum venia, sed etiam cum ratione 0522B peccare. Oportet magistrum doctoremque virtutis homini simillimum fieri, ut vincendo peccatum, doceat hominem vinci ab eo posse peccatum. Si vero sit immortalis, exemplum proponere homini nullo modo potest. Existet enim constans aliquis, ac dicet: Tu quidem non peccas, quia liber es ab hoc corpore; non concupiscis, quia immortali nihil est necessarium. Mihi vero multis rebus opus est, ut tuear hanc vitam. Mortem non times, quia valere in te non potest. Dolorem contemnis, quia nullam vim pati potes. At ego mortalis utrumque timeo, quia cruciatus mihi gravissimos inferunt, quos tolerare carnis infirmitas non potest. Doctor itaque virtutis etiam hanc excusationem debuit hominibus auferre; ne quis, quod peccat, necessitati potius adscribat, quam culpae 0522C suae. Ergo ut perfectus esse possit, nihil ei debet opponi ab eo qui docendus est; ut si forte dixerit: Impossbilia praecipis; respondeat: Ecce ipse facio. At ego carne indutus sum, cujus est peccare proprium. Et ego eamdem carnem gero; et tamen peccatum in me non dominatur. Mihi opes contemnere difficile est, quia vivi aliter non potest in hoc corpore. Ecce et mihi corpus est; et tamen pugno contra omnem cupiditatem. Non possum pro justitia nec dolorem ferre, nec mortem, quia fragilis sum. Ecce 0523A et in me dolor ac mors habet potestatem, et ea ipsa quae times vinco, ut victorem te faciam doloris ac mortis. Prior vado per ea, quae sustineri non posse praetendis; si praecipientem sequi non potes, sequere antecedentem. Sublata est hoc modo omnis excusatio; et fateri hominem necesse est, sua culpa injustum esse qui doctorem virtutis, et eumdem ducem non sequatur. Vides ergo quanto perfectior sit mortalis doctor, quia dux esse mortali potest, quam immortalis, quia patientiam docere non potest, qui subjectus passionibus non est. Nec hoc tamen eo pertinet, ut hominem Deo praeferam: sed ut ostendam, neque hominem perfecta doctrina esse posse, nisi sit idem Deus, ut auctoritate coelesti necessitatem parendi hominibus imponat; neque Deum, nisi mortali 0523B corpore induatur, ut praecepta sua factis adimplendo, caeteros parendi necessitate constringat. Liquido ergo apparet, eum, qui vitae dux 0523B et justitiae sit magister, corporalem esse oportere; nec aliter fieri posse, ut sit illius plena et perfecta doctrina, nisi habeat radicem ac fundamentum, stabilisque apud homines ac fixa permaneat: ipsum autem subire carnis ac corporis imbecillitatem, virtutemque in se recipere, cujus doctor est, ut eam simul, et verbis doceat, et factis. Item subjectum esse morti, et passionibus cunctis; quoniam et in passione toleranda, et in morte subeunda virtutis officia versantur: quae omnia, ut dixi, consummatus doctor perferre debet, ut doceat posse perferri.