To Florus 1.108
He immediately adds that they are slaves of righteousness in the same way that they had previously been slaves of sin. You may now, if you wish, call them free from sin when they serve righteousness, just as he called them free from righteousness when they served wrongdoing. Most foolishly, then, you wanted to bring an accusation against the apostle's straightforward language. He did not, as you think, very carefully indicate the point you imagine; rather, you are very sleepily examining what he said. You argue that he preferred to say “freed” rather than “free” so that we would understand that freedom of choice enables evil but cannot bring about good. Yet the very order of his words resists you. If he had thought as you do, that freedom produced only sin, he should have said, “You were free for sin”, not “You were free for righteousness” (Romans 6:20), so that a person would be called free with respect to what that freedom accomplished. If we are to weigh even the force of grammatical cases, he said that they were free “for this righteousness”, not free “from this righteousness”. His phrasing would therefore help us more consistently, if we too wished to press such slight matters. Far be it from us! We understand the apostle's meaning and are content with the service of words straightforwardly spoken.
The Teacher of the Nations meant nothing other than: “You were free; you did not serve righteousness. You have been freed; you have received forgiveness of sins.” Freedom of choice remains, through which they could obey sin before and righteousness afterward.
Latin
Denique statim addit, ita eos servos esse iustitiae, sicut fuerant servi ante peccati. Per quod potes eos iam tu, si placet, liberos dicere peccato, cum serviunt iustitiae; sicut ab illo dicti sunt a iustitia liberi, cum servirent delicto. Ineptissime itaque simplicitati apostolicae voluisti calumniam commovere. Neque enim ille, ut putas, vigilantissime hoc quod aestimas intimavit; sed tu somniculosissime quod ille protulit intueris. Argumentaris quippe, ideo illum liberatos dicere maluisse, quam liberos, ut intellegeremus arbitrii libertate male quidem posse, bene autem fieri non posse. Verum ipse tibi verborum eius ordo renititur. Nam si hoc, quod tu, putasset, quia libertate solum peccaretur, debuit dicere: Liberi fuistis peccato; non: Liberi fuistis iustitiae [n288] , ut ille diceretur esse liber, cui operabatur ipsa libertas. Si enim placet etiam casuum pensare momenta, huic illos iustitiae dixit esse liberos, non ab hac iustitia liberos. Consequentius ergo hac elocutione nos adiuvaremur, si etiam tam leves res premere vellemus. Sed absit hoc: sensum intellegimus Apostoli, et elocutionum simpliciter prolatarum officio contenti sumus. Nihil aliud dixit Magister Gentium, nisi: Liberi fuistis, non servistis, iustitiae; liberati estis, peccatorum veniam suscepistis, manente arbitrii libertate; per quam potuerunt et ante peccato, et postea oboedire iustitiae.
About this text
Julian’s six preserved books to Florus, quoted section by section in Augustine’s unfinished reply. Augustine’s refutations are omitted. Latin of Julian’s words is on each section.
Julian’s own books do not survive as a separate manuscript. English follows his words as Augustine quotes them in the Unfinished Work Against Julian. Augustine’s replies are omitted. We do not restore a Julian text independent of Augustine.
Witnesses
- Copy-text Augustine, Unfinished Work Against Julian (Latin · Julian’s words as quoted, Books 1–6)
- Checked print Augustinus.it Latin of the Unfinished Work (Latin · Same work)
- Checked print Migne PL 45 (Latin · Hard cases)
This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.