To Florus 2.24
There I replied: ‘With due respect to your teaching authority, you are evading the issue. But understand that the truth has taken away your freedom to wander. Look: we too agree that sin is the work of an evil will, or the devil’s work. But through what is this sin found in an infant? Through the will? Yet there has been no will in the infant. Through the body’s form? But God gave that. Through the soul’s arrival? But the soul, newly created by God, owes nothing to bodily seed. Through marriage? But marriage belongs to the parents’ activity, and you previously said that they did not sin in this act. If that concession was insincere, as your subsequent argument indicates, marriage itself must be cursed for causing the evil. Yet marriage has no substance of its own: its name designates people’s activity. The parents, then, whose union caused sin, rightly deserve condemnation. There can therefore no longer be any doubt that married people are consigned to eternal punishment, since their activity enabled the devil to gain dominion over human beings. If you concede this, you lose everything you previously seemed to maintain: namely, your statement that a human being is God’s work. For the offspring’s origin lies in the union of bodies. Therefore, if evil comes into human beings through their origin, and the devil’s right over human beings comes through evil, it necessarily follows that the devil is the maker of human beings, since the origin of those born comes from him’ (quoted in Augustine, Marriage and Desire 2.44–49). After this I repeated his words: ‘For just as sin, whether derived from this source or that, is the devil’s work, so a human being, whether born from this source or that, is God’s work.’ At once I challenged him as follows: ‘When I think of that frightened statement of yours that marriage is not evil, I cannot consider these other remarks without laughing. If you believe that human beings are made by God and that married people are innocent, see how impossible it is to maintain that original sin is derived from them. Certainly the one born does not sin, the one who fathered the child does not sin, and the one who created the child does not sin. Through what cracks, amid so many defenses of innocence, do you imagine sin has entered?’
Latin
Respondi ergo ibi: Tu quidem (pace magisterii tui dixerim) tergiversaris, sed intellege quod ademerit tibi veritas licentiam pervagandi. Ecce enim et nos acquiescimus, quia peccatum opus est malae voluntatis, vel opus est diaboli; sed per quid hoc peccatum invenitur in parvulo? Per voluntatem? At nulla in eo fuit. Per formam corporis? Sed hanc Deus tribuit. Per ingressum animae? Sed nihil debet semini corporali, quae nova a Deo conditur. Per nuptias? Sed hae pertinent ad opus parentum, quos in hoc actu non peccasse praemiseras; quod si non vere id concesseras, sicut processus tui sermonis indicat, ipsae sunt exsecrandae, quae causam fecerunt mali. Verum illae substantiam propriam non habent; sed nomine suo personarum opus indicant; parentes igitur, qui conventu suo causam fecere peccato, iure damnabiles. Ambigi ergo iam non potest, coniuges aeterno supplicio mancipari, quorum labore actum est, ut ad dominatum exercendum in homines diabolus perveniret. Quod si concesseris; illud totum quod antea tenuisse videbaris, amittes, id est, quod hominem Dei opus dixeras. Necessario quippe sequitur, quia per commixtionem corporum origo progenitis est, si per originem malum in hominibus, per malum ius diaboli in homines, diabolum esse auctorem hominum, a quo est origo nascentium [n24] . Post quae ipsius denuo verba repetivi: Nam sicut peccatum, sive hinc, sive inde trahatur, opus est diaboli; sic homo, sive hinc, sive inde nascatur, opus est Dei. Ac protinus insurrexi hoc modo: Cum illam vocem timoris tui cogito, qua dicis nuptias malum non esse, istos alios sermones tuos sine risu considerare non possum. Si enim credis a Deo homines fieri, et esse coniuges innocentes, vide quam stare non possit, trahi ex his originale peccatum. Certe non peccat iste qui nascitur, non peccat ille qui genuit, non peccat ille qui condidit; per quas rimas, inter tot praesidia innocentiae, peccatum fingis ingressum?
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.