Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 1
1.1 Who Faustus was. Faustus’s object in writing the polemical treatise that forms the basis of Augustin’s reply. Augustin’s remarks thereon PL 42, 207
1. Faustus was an African by race, a citizen of Mileum; he was eloquent and clever, but had adopted the shocking tenets of the Manichæan heresy. He is mentioned in my Confessions, where there is an account of my acquaintance with him. This man published a certain volume against the true Christian faith and the Catholic truth. A copy reached us, and was read by the brethren, who called for an answer from me, as part of the service of love which I owe to them. Now, therefore, in the name and with the help of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, I undertake the task, that all my readers may know that acuteness of mind and elegance of style are of no use to a man unless the Lord directs his steps. In the mysterious equity of divine mercy, God often bestows His help on the slow and the feeble; while from the want of this help, the most acute and eloquent run into error only with greater rapidity and willfulness. I will give the opinions of Faustus as if stated by himself, and mine as if in reply to him.
Faustus quidam fuit, gente Afer, civitate Milevitanus, eloquio suavis, ingenio callidus, secta manichaeus, ac per hoc nefando errore perversus. Noveram ipse hominem, quemadmodum eum commemoravi in libris Confessionum mearum . Hic quoddam volumen edidit adversus rectam christianam fidem, et catholicam veritatem. Quod cum venisset in manus nostras, lectumque esset a fratribus; desideraverunt, et jure charitatis per quam eis servimus flagitaverunt, ut ei responderemus. Hoc aggrediar nunc in nomine atque adjutorio Domini et Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi, ut omnes qui haec legent, intelligant quam nihil sit acutum ingenium et lingua expolita, nisi a Domino gressus hominis dirigantur . Quod multis etiam tardioribus et invalidioribus occulta aequitate divinae misericordiae praestitum est, cum multi acerrimi et facundissimi, deserti adjutorio Dei, ad hoc velociter et pertinaciter currerent, ut a veritatis via longius aberrarent. Commodum autem arbitror, sub ejus nomine verba ejus ponere, et sub meo responsionem meam.
1.2 PL 42, 207
2. Faustus said: As the learned Adimantus, the only teacher since the sainted Manichæus deserving of our attention, has plentifully exposed and thoroughly refuted the errors of Judaism and of semi-Christianity, I think it not amiss that you should be supplied in writing with brief and pointed replies to the captious objections of our adversaries, that when, like children of the wily serpent, they try to bewilder you with their quibbles, you may be prepared to give intelligent answers. In this way they will be kept to the subject, instead of wandering from one thing to another. And I have placed our opinions and those of our opponent over against one another, as plainly and briefly as possible, so as not to perplex the reader with a long and intricate discourse.
FAUSTUS dixit: Satis superque in lucem jam traductis erroribus, ac Judaicae superstitionis simul et semichristianorum abunde detecta fallacia, a doctissimo scilicet et solo nobis post beatum patrem nostrum Manichaeum studendo Adimanto; non ab re visum est, fratres charissimi, haec quoque brevia vobis et concinna responsa, propter callidas et astutas conferentium nobiscum propositiones, scribere, quo cum iidem vos ex more parentis sui serpentis captiosis circumvenire quaestiunculis voluerint, et ipsi ad respondendum vigilanter eis sitis instructi. Ita enim fiet ut ad ea ipsa quae proposuerint religati, ulterius huc atque illuc vagari non possint. Ac ne profusa confusave oratione legentium inundarentur ingenia, tam breviter quam distincte ex adverso sibi, ipsorum atque nostrorum verba constitui.
1.3 PL 42, 208
3. Augustin replies: You warn against semi-Christians, which you say we are; but we warn against pseudo-Christians, which we have shown you to be. Semi-Christianity may be imperfect without being false. So, then, if the faith of those whom you try to mislead is imperfect, would it not be better to supply what is lacking than to rob them of what they have? It was to imperfect Christians that the apostle wrote, "joying and beholding your conversation," and "the deficiency in your faith in Christ." The apostle had in view a spiritual structure, as he says elsewhere, "Ye are God’s building;" and in this structure he found both a reason for joy and a reason for exertion. He rejoiced to see part already finished; and the necessity of bringing the edifice to perfection called for exertion. Imperfect Christians as we are, you pursue us with the desire to pervert what you call our semi-Christianity by false doctrine; while even those who are so deficient in faith as to be unable to reply to all your sophisms, are wise enough at least to know that they must not have anything at all to do with you. You look for semi-Christians to deceive: we wish to prove you pseudo-Christians, that Christians may learn something from your refutation, and that the less advanced may learn to avoid you. Do you call us children of the serpent? You have surely forgotten how often you have found fault with the prohibition in Paradise, and have praised the serpent for opening Adam’s eyes. You have the better claim to the title which you give us. The serpent owns you as well when you blame him as when you praise him.
————————————
AUGUSTINUS respondit: Tu semichristianos cavendos putas, quod nos esse dicis: nos autem pseudochristianos cavemus, quod vos esse ostendimus. Nam quod semis est, ex quadam parte imperfectum, ex nulla tamen falsum est. Quid ergo? si aliquid deest fidei eorum quos circumvenire conamini, numquid ideo id quod eis adest destruendum, ac non potius id quod deest astruendum est? Sicut ad quosdam imperfectos loquens Apostolus ait: Gaudens et videns vestram conversationem, et id quod deest fidei vestrae in Christo . Cernebat utique quamdam fabricam spiritualem, sicut alibi dicit, Dei aedificatio estis : et in ea cernebat utrumque; et unde gauderet, et unde satageret. Gaudebat ex eo quod jam aedificatum videbat; satagebat ex eo quod usque ad culmen perfectionis adhuc aedificandum esse sentiebat. Itaque nos revera catholicos nondum perfectos, sed quodam modo, ut dixisti, semichristianos quos fallatis et seducatis vestra perversitate, insectamini. Sed si qui adhuc etiam tales sunt, si vos pseudochristianos esse intellexerint, quamvis captiosis quaestionum vestrarum propositionibus, propter id quod eorum fidei deest, respondere non possint; non tamen sequendos, sed devitandos vos esse cognoscunt. Sicut ergo vestra intentio est semichristianos quos decipiatis inquirere, sic nostra intentio est pseudochristianos vos ostendere: ut non solum christiani peritiores vos convincendo prodant, sed et imperitiores vos cavendo proficiant. Cur autem serpentem patrem nostrum dixisti? An excidit tibi quemadmodum soleatis vituperare Deum qui homini praeceptum in paradiso dedit , et laudare serpentem quod ei per suum consilium oculos aperuit ? Puto justum esse ut serpentem illum diabolum a vobis laudatum, tu potius agnoscas parentem tuum. Nam ille te filium etiam modo vituperatus agnoscit.