To Florus · §4.25 · Julian of Eclanum

To Florus 4.25

Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.

If you say that the name “desire” (1 John 2:16) includes even that measure in which it experiences the lawful pleasure of natural things, so that the desire of the flesh seems condemned in its entirety, then profess that the sense of sight, the world itself, and everything in the world were created by the devil. For all are equally said not to be from God. If you agree to that, you will certainly not become a Manichaean, since you already are one. You will simply show it by your confession, as you long ago showed it by your arguments. But if, frightened at having your error exposed, you say that under the names “desire of the flesh,” “desire of the eyes,” and “world” the apostle did not condemn the things themselves—which are harmless when they remain within permitted limits, and become blameworthy when they run into forbidden territory—then the point I argued in my first work will be clear: neither the kind, nor the form, nor the proper measure of natural desire is blameworthy, but only its excess. Therefore have the decency to leave this apostolic testimony alone from now on. If you pollute it with even a passing mention, you will be shown to have gained no defense at all, while being publicly exposed (compare 1 John 2:16).

Latin source witness

Latin

Si dixeris, nomine concupiscentiae, etiam illum ipsum modum, quo licita rerum naturalium afficitur voluptate, ut concupiscentia carnis in universum reprobata videatur; ergo et sensum oculorum, et mundum ipsum, et quidquid in mundo est, a diabolo conditum profitere; quia omnia pariter ex Deo non esse dicuntur. Quod certe si annueris, non efficieris Manichaeus; es enim etiam nunc; sed hoc te esse, ut argumentis tuis olim, ita quoque professione monstrabis. Si autem nudatum errorem pavescens, dixeris Apostolum nomine concupiscentiae carnis et oculorum concupiscentiae, et nomine mundi, non res ipsas, quae cum intra concessos fines tenentur, innocuae sunt; cum autem in illicita procurrunt, fiunt reprehensibiles, adnotasse; clarebit, quod in primo opere egimus, concupiscentiae naturalis non genus, non speciem, non modum, sed excessum tantum in culpam venire. Atque ideo hoc testimonium Apostoli in reliquum pudenter caveto, ne illud si vel levi commemoratione pollueris, defensus quidem nihil, propalam vero proditus approberis.