To Turbantius — fragments in Against Julian — Book 5
Julian of Eclanum (c. 386–c. 455) was bishop of Eclanum in southern Italy until 418, when he was deposed and exiled for refusing to condemn Pelagius. The most learned Pelagian controversialist, he pursued Augustine across a decade of pamphlet war.
None of Julian's works survives directly; what remains is preserved in the long quotations of Augustine, who answered him book by book. Reconstructed from those hostile pages, Julian emerges as a formidable defender of free will, marriage, and the goodness of creation.
This volume gathers the surviving arguments: the six books To Florus with the earlier fragments and letter material, each with its source locator.
© 2026 SaneApps. This translation is free to share and adapt, even commercially, as long as you credit SaneApps. Draft translation, prepared with AI assistance and not yet independently reviewed. Verify against the original before citing.
Augustine reports that Julian’s introduction discussed hostility endured for the truth, and the small…§§5.1.1–5.3.8
5.1.1Augustine reports that Julian’s introduction discussed hostility endured for the truth, and the small number of supposedly discerning people whose approval his party welcomed.
5.1.2Knowledge of the holy writings is difficult and suited to few learned people.
The aim is to establish that God, the creator of humanity and of the universe, is just, truthful, and good, and that he continually adds to his gifts to human beings.
There is one best reason for good studies: that God should be honored.
5.1.3Your position is so disgraceful and empty: it tries to attribute injustice to God, the creation of human beings to the devil, substance to sin, and consciousness without knowledge to infants.
5.1.4Simple people, who are occupied with other business and have acquired no learning, have nevertheless taken care to enter Christ’s Church through faith alone. They should not be easily frightened by obscure questions. Believing God to be the true creator of human beings, they should also hold without doubt that he is good, truthful, and just. Maintaining this understanding of the Trinity, they should embrace and praise whatever they hear agreeing with this judgment. No force of argument should tear this from them; they should reject every authority and association trying to persuade them of the contrary.
5.2.5‘They made garments for themselves’ (Genesis 3:7).
‘Garments’ can be understood as clothing for the whole body, which belongs to the duty of modesty.
5.2.6Painters and poets have always had equal freedom to dare anything. [Horace, Art of Poetry 9–10.]
They felt nothing indecent or new there.
5.2.7If preference is given to the translation using perizomata—that is, coverings tied around the waist—I will say their sides were covered rather than their thighs.
5.3.8Augustine reports that Julian argued flesh’s disobedience should instead be praised if it is punishment for sin, calling it ‘an avenger of wickedness, and in this God’s servant.’
Latin · §§5.1.1–5.3.8
§5.1.1
de invidia quam vos sustinere pro veritate iactatis, et de paucitate velut prudentium quibus vos placere gaudetis
§5.1.2
difficilis paucisque conveniens eruditis sanctarum cognitio Litterarum
ut Deus hominum, sicut universi conditor, et iustus et verax ac pius, idem donorum suorum in homines cumulator probetur; quia una est - ut fateris - optima causa studiorum bonorum, ut honoretur Deus
§5.1.3
Sententia - inquis - vestra tam deformis et vana est, quae et Deo iniquitatem, et diabolo condicionem hominum, et peccato substantiam, et conscientiam sine scientia parvulis conatur adscribere
§5.1.4
simplices, qui, aliis occupati negotiis, nihil de eruditione ceperunt, sola tamen fide ad Ecclesiam Christi pervenire curarunt, ne facile obscuris quaestionibus terreantur, sed credentes Deum verum conditorem esse hominum, indubitanter quoque teneant quia pius est, quia verax, quia iustus; atque hanc aestimationem de illa Trinitate servantes, quidquid audierint huic convenire sententiae, amplexentur atque collaudent: nec hoc eis ulla vis argumentationis evellat, sed detestentur omnem auctoritatem atque omnem societatem contraria persuadere nitentem
§5.2.5
Cur ergo ex illis membris confusio post peccatum, nisi quia exstitit illic indecens motus?
totius corporis indumentum intellegi posse, quod ad pudoris refertur officium
§5.2.6
Nihil illic indecens novumque senserunt
§5.2.7
Si illi interpretationi quae perizomata, id est, praecinctoria posuit, favetur, latera magis dicam tecta fuisse quam femora
§5.3.8
carnis inoboedientiam inoboedienti homini dignissime retributam; quia iniustum erat ut obtemperaretur a servo suo, id est a corpore suo, ei qui non obtemperaverat Domino suo
hanc inoboedientiam carnis potius esse laudabilem, si poena peccati est
velut ultricem sceleris, et in hoc Dei ministram
If lust is punishment for sin, chastity must be cast aside, lest chastity, rebelling against God, be said…§§5.3.9–5.4.18
5.3.9If lust is punishment for sin, chastity must be cast aside, lest chastity, rebelling against God, be said to weaken the sentence he imposed.
5.3.10‘God handed them over to a depraved mind, to do what is unfitting’ (Romans 1:28).
When he attacked the crimes of the ungodly, he heightened them by using the language of punishments. Showing how deeply his heart, the dwelling of every virtue, recoiled from their shamefulness, he said that such people seemed to him not so much guilty as condemned.
How should we understand God’s handing people over? He hands them over by abandoning them.
‘They exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible humanity, birds, four-footed animals, and reptiles. Therefore God handed them over in the desire of their heart to uncleanness’ (Romans 1:23–24).
5.3.11They were already burning with desires for shameful deeds.
How, then, should we think they fell into such acts through the power of God handing them over?
5.3.13When they are said to have been handed over to their own desires, we should understand that they were left alone through God’s patience, not forced into sins through his power.
5.4.14The apostle says: ‘God’s kindness leads you to repentance’ (Romans 2:4).
5.4.15God hands people over so that evils occur only by showing patient goodness while they occur.
5.4.16Lust is just and should be publicly praised if, by refusing to obey him, it punished the person who did not obey God.
Nothing can be considered more praiseworthy if it avenged the injustice of the offense, vindicated the wrong done to God, and had so little partnership in sin that it assumed the office of avenger.
5.4.18‘Their foolish heart was filled with darkness’ (Romans 1:21).
We should note that he calls foolishness the cause of all evils.
Latin · §§5.3.9–5.4.18
§5.3.9
Si libido poena peccati est, abiciendam esse pudicitiam, ne rebellis in Deum castitas illatam ab eo dicatur enervare sententiam
§5.3.10
esse nonnulla peccata quae poenae sint etiam peccatorum
Tradidit illos Deus in reprobum sensum, ut faciant quae non conveniunt
Cum inveheretur - inquis - in impiorum crimina, poenarum ea nominibus aggravavit, quantumque pectori suo virtutum omnium domicilio turpitudo horreret ostendens, non tam reos quam damnatos sibi tales ait videri
Quomodo intellegendus sit tradere Deus
eum tradere deserendo
§5.3.11
Iam enim flagitiorum
desideriis aestuabant
Quomodo ergo per potentiam tradentis Dei putandi sunt in talia facta cecidisse?
§5.3.13
Cum desideriis suis traditi dicuntur, relicti per divinam patientiam intelligendi sunt, non per potentiam in peccata compulsi
§5.4.14
Ait - inquis - Apostolus: Bonitas Dei ad paenitentiam te adducit
§5.4.15
Deus non tradit ut mala fiant, nisi patientem bonitatem praebendo cum fiunt
§5.4.16
iustam - dicis - esse libidinem et laudis praeconio praedicandam, si eum qui Deo non oboedivit, non illi oboediendo punivit
Iniustum enim erat ut obtemperaretur a servo suo, hoc est a corpore suo, ei qui non obtemperaverat Domino suo
Quia nihil ea potest laudabilius aestimari, si iniquitatem ulta commissi est, si vindicavit iniuriam Dei, et quia ita consortium peccati non habuit, ut officium vindicantis assumeret
§5.4.18
Notandum esse, quoniam insipientiam causam dicat omnium malorum
Augustine reports that Julian charged him with contradicting himself: after saying that bodily…§§5.5.19–5.7.26
5.5.19Augustine reports that Julian charged him with contradicting himself: after saying that bodily disobedience was the punishment returned to a disobedient human, Augustine immediately named other bodily members that serve the will at its command.
5.5.20When it comes to sowing children, the members created for this work serve precisely at the will’s direction. Unless impediments arise from weakness or excess, they obey the mind’s command.
This kind of movement belongs among the many things in our body that, through their own order and hidden arrangement, require the will’s consent, not its command.
Like hunger, thirst, and digestion, they require the will’s consent, not its command.
I feel ashamed and am prevented by horror from speaking about such things, but compelled by necessity.
5.5.21The members do not follow in the direction we want if we will something their physical structure does not permit.
5.5.22Even the genitals obey the mind’s command.
They are not moved at the mind’s command, but instead await consent.
5.5.23Augustine reports that Julian regarded desire as more commendable because other bodily parts serve to excite it: eyes seeing in order to desire, and other members in kisses and embraces.
When drunken young men, excited also by flute music as often happens, were breaking down a chaste woman’s door, Pythagoras is said to have told the flute player to play a solemn spondaic rhythm. When she did, the slowness of the measures and gravity of the song quieted their raging insolence. [Cicero, On His Own Counsels, a lost work.]
It receives consent rather than commands.
It is excited by other stimuli, or broken and quieted by music.
5.6.24How fittingly Jeremiah, with the chorus of prophets and all the saints, would cry out: ‘Who will give water to my head and a fountain of tears to my eyes?’ (Jeremiah 9:1).
Glorious struggles.
The wickedness of a declining age.
The ruin of morals.
The destruction of modesty.
They say with the Manichaeans that a necessity of evil exists in their flesh.
5.7.25Augustine reports Julian interpreted his claim that desire is ‘indecent because disobedient’ as meaning that desire ‘is subject neither to body nor mind, but remains always untamed through a savage force.’
Glorious struggles.
5.7.26The Paternian heretics, also called Venustians, are like the Manichaeans. They say the devil made the human body from the loins to the feet, while God placed the upper parts upon it as though upon a base. They add that human effort requires only keeping the soul clean, which they say lives in the stomach and head. If the pubic region is smeared with the filth of every shameful act, they say this is no concern of theirs. Thus, to serve lust disgracefully themselves, they always assign it a title of independent power.
Latin · §§5.5.19–5.7.26
§5.5.19
inoboedienti homini poenam inoboedientiam sui corporis redditam, continuo alia membra corporis nominatim expresserim, dicens, quod ad nutum nostrae serviant voluntati
§5.5.20
Cum ventum fuerit ut filii seminentur, ad voluntatis prorsus nutum membra in hoc opus creata famulari; et nisi eorum impedimenta, aut de infirmitate, aut de immoderatione proveniant, servire animi imperio
hoc genus motus in his habendum putasti, quae multa in nostro corpore ordine suo ac dispensatione secreta, voluntatis non imperium, sed consensum requirunt
ad voluntatis prorsus nutum ista
membra famulantur, atque imperio animi serviunt
sicut fames et sitis et digestio, non voluntatis imperium, sed consensum requirunt
verecundari te - dicis - et de rebus loqui talibus horrore prohiberi, sed necessitate compelli
§5.5.21
Ut alia membra moveantur positum in potestate est
quando ab impedimentis corpus liberum habemus et sanum
nec in eam partem sequi membra quam volumus, si ita velimus ut habitus ipse non patitur
ut ad opera sibi congrua moveantur
§5.5.22
etiam genitalia servire animi imperio
Non moveri haec ad animi imperium, sed potius exspectare consensum
§5.5.23
Commendatiorem fieri putas, quod ei serviunt, ut ardentius excitetur, etiam ceterae corporis partes, sive oculi videntes ad concupiscendum, sive alia membra in osculis et amplexibus
consentitur ei potius quam imperatur
aliis concitatur stimulis, vel modulamine frangitur et sedatur
§5.6.24
O quam digne Ieremias cum prophetarum choro et sanctorum omnium exclamaret: Quis dabit capiti meo aquam, et oculis meis fontem lacrimarum? [n66]
gloriosa certamina
augetis
occidui temporis pravitatem
estis ruina morum
pudoris interitus
cum Manichaeis dicunt, inesse carni suae mali necessitatem
§5.7.25
Hunc itaque motum ideo indecentem, quia inoboedientem, cum illi primi homines in sua carne sensissent, et in sua nuditate erubuissent, foliis ficulneis eadem membra texerunt: ut saltem arbitrio verecundantium velaretur, quod non arbitrio volentium movebatur; et quoniam pudebat quod indecenter libebat, operiendo fieret quod decebat
motum
ideo indecentem, quia inoboedientem
non eam corpori, non animo esse subiectam, sed fera virtute semper indomitam
gloriosa certamina
§5.7.26
Sed Paterniani - inquis - iidemque Venustiani haeretici [n71] similes Manichaeis, dicunt a lumbis usque ad pedes diabolum fecisse corpus hominis, superiores vero partes Deum velut supra basem aliquam collocasse: adduntque nihil ab hominis studio requiri, quam ut anima quam in stomacho et capite habitare dicunt, munda servetur: pubem vero si omnium flagitiorum sordibus oblinatur, aiunt ad suam non pertinere curam. Ita semper - inquis - ut ipsi libidini turpiter serviant, titulum ei propriae potestatis affigunt. Cuius cognatione sententiae
Arbitrio verecundantium velabatur, quod non arbitrio volentium movebatur; et quod non serviens voluntati, suo iure corpus libido succendat
If you admit desire’s evil cannot be conquered, you will profess yourself an advocate of shamefulness. But…§§5.7.27–5.9.35
5.7.27If you admit desire’s evil cannot be conquered, you will profess yourself an advocate of shamefulness. But if you say you called this evil natural, yet capable of being conquered—that is, avoided—
People can avoid every sin when they can conquer the evil of desire. If lust is a natural evil and is conquered by love of virtue, all the more can the vices arising solely from the will be overcome.
5.7.29The opinion that the genitals could have served at the will’s direction in paradise is feeble and soft.
Augustine also attributes to Julian’s party the position that a human being can be without sin if he wishes.
5.7.30Augustine reports that Julian accused him of inviting people to pleasurable illicit acts by reciting the apostle: ‘I know that good does not dwell in me, that is, in my flesh’ (Romans 7:18).
5.8.31It is impossible for a good thing not to share its praise with that without which it cannot exist.
5.8.32Augustine reports Julian accused him of regularly calling fleshly pleasure ‘unconquerable.’
5.8.33The more modest parts.
Augustine reports Julian appealed again to the philosopher Balbus’s explanation that the bodily sites of digestion are removed from the senses.
5.8.34Augustine reports Julian understood his comparison involving lameness and reaching a destination as making ‘the destination’ the human being born from marital intercourse.
5.9.35O the depth of the riches of God’s wisdom and knowledge (Romans 11:33)! Besides the future repayment of deeds, he willed free choice in large part to fulfill the form of judgment. Most justly, the good person and the evil person are each entrusted to themselves, so that the good person may enjoy himself and the evil person suffer himself.
Latin · §§5.7.27–5.9.35
§5.7.27
Si connivero - sicut dicis - invictum esse libidinis malum, profitebor me esse turpitudinis advocatum: si autem dixero, malum me quidem hoc naturale dixisse, sed quod vinci possit, id est, possit caveri
Possunt enim homines - inquis - omne vitare peccatum, cum possunt vincere concupiscentiae malum. Si enim libido naturale malum est, et vincitur amore virtutis; multo magis - dicis - illa omnia vitia superari, quae de sola voluntate contingunt
Profiteri te turpitudinis advocatum, si libidinem negaveris esse vincendam
§5.7.29
enervem et mollem esse - dicis - opinionem, qua creditur in paradiso ad nutum voluntatis genitalia potuisse servire
§5.7.30
quod invitemus ad dulcia furta, quibus Apostolum recitamus dicentem: Scio quia non habitat in me, hoc est in carne mea, bonum [n79]
§5.8.31
Quod enim illi postea propagatione fecerunt, hoc est connubii bonum; quod vero prius confusione texerunt, hoc est concupiscentiae malum
fieri non posse ut quod bonum est non habeat communem, cum eo laudem, sine quo esse non potest
fieri non potest ut quod bonum est non habeat communem cum eo laudem, sine quo esse non potest
§5.8.32
Invictam
voluptatem carnis, sicut, solere me
§5.8.33
De confusione, autem, illorum hominum pudendisque coopertis frustra te - commemoras - aliquid Apostolo attestante monstrasse
verecundiora
§5.8.34
de claudicatione et perventione
perventionem accipi volui hominem qui nascitur de concubitu coniugali
§5.9.35
Non coniugalem, hoc est licitum honestumque concubitum, fuisse prohibitum, sed ut operis huius causa sit voluntas propaginis, non carnis voluptas; et quod sine libidine fieri non potest, sic tamen fiat, ut non propter libidinem fiat
O altitudo divitiarum sapientiae et scientiae Dei! [n90] qui extra futuram operum retributionem ex multa parte liberum arbitrium formam voluit implere iudicii. Iustissime eum sibi bonus homo - inquis - malusque committitur, ut et bonus se fruatur, et malus se ipse patiatur
There can be absolutely nothing that is both sin and punishment for sin. Augustine reports Julian accused…§§5.9.36–5.11.45
5.9.36There can be absolutely nothing that is both sin and punishment for sin.
Augustine reports Julian accused him of contradictory statements: that bodily intercourse was invented by the devil, and that the law of sin opposing the mind’s law was imposed by God as punishment.
5.9.39The Lord honored the glory of continence with freedom of choice, saying: ‘Let the one who can receive it receive it’ (Matthew 19:12).
5.9.40Augustine reports Julian understood the apostle’s warning not to possess one’s vessel ‘in the sickness of desire’ as referring to fornication, not marriage (1 Thessalonians 4:4–5), and denied that ‘one’s vessel’ meant one’s wife.
5.10.41Augustine reports that Julian said he had already refuted in his second book the view that Christian spouses generate children in this age so that, for the next age, those children may be regenerated in Christ.
5.10.42Nothing of that kind can be thought about during intercourse.
5.10.43Augustine reports that Julian compared parents with murderers of their children, on the ground that they cause their children to be born under condemnation.
5.11.44It would have been better for that man not to be born (Matthew 26:24).
5.11.45The ancient holy fathers did not devote themselves to producing offspring with the intention of generating guilty children to be cleansed by baptism, because the baptism through which we are now adopted had not yet been instituted.
Latin · §§5.9.36–5.11.45
§5.9.36
Nullo modo esse posse aliquid quod et peccatum sit et poena peccati?
extra futuram operum retributionem ex multa parte liberum arbitrium formam voluit implere iudicii? Iustissime enim sibi - sicut definis - bonus homo malusque committitur, ut et bonus se fruatur
et malus se ipse patiatur
concubitum corporum a diabolo fuisse repertum
inoboedientiam carnis quae in carne concupiscente adversus spiritum apparet, diabolico vulnere contigisse
Hanc legem peccati repugnantem legi mentis a Deo illatam propter ultionem, et ideo poenam esse peccati
§5.9.39
quod Dominus continentiae gloriam libertate electionis honoraverit, dicens: Qui potest capere, capiat [n97]
§5.9.40
Quamvis tu, quod monuit Apostolus, ne in morbo desiderii suum vas quisque possideat, non de coniugio, sed de fornicatione accipiendum putaveris; atque ita temperantiae totam honestatem de concubitu coniugum abstuleris, ut nemo sibi videatur in morbo desiderii suum vas possidere, quantacumque libidine in uxoris genitalibus potuerit insanire. Si enim ullum ibi tenendum existimares modum, potuisti et illic concupiscentiae reprehendere excessum, eumque dicere ab Apostolo significatum morbum desiderii, et non improbe negare suum vas dictum fuisse cuique coniugem suam. Quo verbo in eadem re etiam Petrus apostolus utitur, ubi monet ut viri uxoribus suis tamquam infirmiori vasi tribuant honorem, velut coheredibus gratiae; adiungens et dicens: Et videte ne impediantur orationes vestrae [n99] . Sicut et coapostolus eius tempora praescribit orandi temperantiae coniugali: et secundum veniam concedit, quamvis cum coniuge, non utique illum prolis, sed qui fit voluptatis intentione concubitum [n100] . Hunc audiant christiana coniugia non te, qui vis in eis quam defendis numquam frenari concupiscentiam, sed quotiescumque se commoverit, satiari avidam, regnare securam. Hunc audiant, inquam, fideles Christi qui sunt connubio colligati, ut ex consensu temperent, quo vacent orationi: et cum ad idipsum redeunt propter intemperantiam suam, noverint etiam inde dicere Deo: dimitte nobis debita nostra [n101] . Quod enim secundum veniam, non secundum imperium a tanto doctore dicitur, utique ignoscitur, non iubetur.
§5.10.41
Sed insertis aliis verbis meis, ubi voluntatem vere piorum, quia Christianorum, coniugum commendavi, qui filios ad hoc generant in hoc saeculo, ut propter alterum saeculum regenerentur in Christo [n102] ; commemoras te iam in secundo libro istam meam destruxisse sententiam: ubi quid tibi responderim, ibi potius legant qui volunt. Sic enim non sunt facienda adulteria, etiam voluntate generandi regenerandos, quemadmodum nec furta facienda sunt, etiam voluntate pascendi pauperes sanctos: quod tamen faciendum est, non furta perpetrando, sed bene utendo mammona iniquitatis, ut et ipsi recipiant in tabernacula aeterna [n103] ; sicut non adulteria committendo, sed coniugaliter bene utendo malo libidinis, ea voluntate generandi sunt filii, ut cum eis regnetur in aeternum.
§5.10.42
quod nihil tali possit dum concumbitur cogitari
§5.10.43
parentes comparans parricidis, in eis asserens esse causam ut filii cum damnatione nascantur
§5.11.44
Quod autem commemorasti ex Evangelio: Melius erat homini illi non nasci [n106] ; nonne ut nasceretur plus opere Dei actum est, quam parentum? Cur non ipse imagini suae praestitit quod melius erat, qui malum quod ei futurum fuerat praesciebat, quod parentes nosse non possunt? Et tamen ab eis qui recte intellegunt, non tribuitur Deo, nisi quod benignitati tribuendum est Creatoris. Sic et parentibus sine nodo difficilis quaestionis hoc tribuitur, quod filios voluerunt, quorum futura nesciverunt. Ego autem non dico parvulos sine Christi Baptismate morientes tanta poena esse plectendos, ut eis non nasci potius expediret; cum hoc Dominus non de quibuslibet peccatoribus, sed de scelestissimis et impiissimis dixerit. Si enim quod de Sodomis ait, et utique non de solis intellegi voluit, alius alio tolerabilius in die iudicii punietur [n107] ; quis dubitaverit parvulos non baptizatos, qui solum habent originale peccatum, nec ullis propriis aggravantur, in damnatione omnium levissima futuros? Quae qualis et quanta erit, quamvis definire non possim, non tamen audeo dicere quod eis ut nulli essent quam ut ibi essent, potius expediret. Verum vos quoque, qui eos velut liberos ab omni damnatione esse contenditis, cogitare non vultis qua illos damnatione puniatis, alienando a vita Dei et a regno Dei tot imagines Dei, postremo separando a parentibus piis, quos ad eos procreandos tam disertus hortaris. Haec autem iniuste patiuntur, si nullum habent omnino peccatum: aut si iuste, ergo habent originale peccatum.
§5.11.45
eos non hoc intuitu operam dedisse propagini, ut tamquam reos gignerent filios Baptismate diluendos, eo quod Baptisma quo nunc adoptamur nondum fuerat institutum
Augustine reports that Julian argued that, because intercourse was absent, Mary and Joseph’s relationship…§§5.12.46–5.15.54
5.12.46Augustine reports that Julian argued that, because intercourse was absent, Mary and Joseph’s relationship was not a marriage.
Whatever was otherwise would seem evil.
5.12.47Joseph was regarded by everyone as though he were her husband.
5.12.48She received the name ‘wife’ from the pledge of betrothal.
The first spouses were established so that they would be spouses without the union of the two sexes.
5.13.49Human beings are created by God.
‘You joined me together with bones and sinews; you granted me life and mercy’ (Job 10:11–12).
5.14.51A thing existing in a subject cannot exist without the thing in which it inheres. Therefore the evil in a parent, existing in that subject, cannot transmit guilt to another thing—the offspring—to which it has not passed.
5.15.52Augustine reports that Julian argued that Christ’s flesh, born from Mary whose flesh descended from Adam like everyone else’s, cannot be distinguished from other human flesh in the interpretation of ‘the likeness of sinful flesh’ (Romans 8:3). Julian’s conclusion, as Augustine restates it, is that no flesh is sinful, so that Christ’s flesh will not be sinful either.
You have not understood this apostolic statement.
5.15.53Even if newborns could draw some evil from their parents, it would be cleansed by God’s hands, because he himself forms them in their mothers’ wombs.
God’s works are hidden (compare Sirach 3:22–23).
This pronouncement exposes the emptiness of those who think nature’s depths can be comprehended by some investigation.
‘I do not know how you appeared in my womb’ (2 Maccabees 7:22).
Why are children not cleansed by the very act of their making, so that the maker’s majesty purifies them from the alleged pollutions of their parents?
5.15.54Augustine reports Julian cited his earlier statement that Adam ‘corrupted in himself everyone to come from his stock,’ as an argument about Christ’s descent from Adam.
Latin · §§5.12.46–5.15.54
§5.12.46
de Ioseph, cuius Mariam
coniugem
quia concubitus defuit, nullo modo fuisse coniugium
fidem, quia nullum adulterium; prolem, ipsum Dominum Christum; sacramentum, quia nullum divortium
ut quidquid aliter fuerit, malum esse videatur
§5.12.47
Quasi maritus - inquis - Ioseph in opinione omnium erat
§5.12.48
ex desponsionis fide eam nomen coniugis accepisse
sic fuisse primos coniuges institutos, ut sine commixtione utriusque sexus coniuges essent
§5.13.49
a Deo creari hominem
§5.14.51
Rem quae in subiecto est, sine illa re esse non posse, in qua subiecta est. Et ideo, putas, malum quod est in parente, utique in subiecto, alii rei, id est proli, ad quam non pervenit, reatum non posse transmittere
§5.15.52
Christi caro, quia de Maria natus est, cuius virginis caro sicut ceterorum omnium ex Adam fuerat propagata, nihil distet a carne peccati, et sine ulla distinctione Apostolus dixisse credatur, eum fuisse missum in similitudine carnis peccati [n125]
ut nulla sit caro peccati, ne hoc sit et Christi
hanc apostolicam sententiam me non intellexisse
§5.15.53
etiam si nascentes mali aliquid ex parentibus trahere possent, quod expiaretur manibus Dei, quia eos ipse format in uteris matrum
Quae sententia eorum arguit vanitatem, qui putant naturalem profunditatem posse investigatione aliqua comprehendi
Cur non ipso filii mundentur effectu, ut a pollutionibus - inquis - quae dicuntur parentum, maiestate opificis expientur?
§5.15.54
quod tabificavit in se omnes de sua stirpe venturos
Occulta - inquam - tabe carnalis concupiscentiae suae tabificavit in se omnes de sua stirpe venturos
The error of Apollinaris, who denied that Christ possessed bodily sensation.§§5.15.55–5.16.62
5.15.55The error of Apollinaris, who denied that Christ possessed bodily sensation.
5.15.56Augustine reports Julian accused him of placing ‘those regenerated back under the necessity of crimes, while God bestows gifts of virtues.’
5.15.57A dissimilar nature could not provide an example.
‘He committed no sin’ (1 Peter 2:22).
Notice that the apostle judged it sufficient to show there was no sin in Christ by saying he committed no sin, teaching that someone who did not commit it could not possess it.
5.15.58Remove the reason of his example, and you will also remove the reason for his becoming a ransom for us.
We hurry to faith’s defenses in the hope of being free from evil. Yet we do not become free from what is inborn: male sexual capacity itself remains after baptism.
5.16.59Sins are not born from something free from sin.
5.16.60When it serves married people for producing offspring, lust is then honored.
Using lust always entails guilt.
Adulterers sin less than married people, because lust serves married people so that they sin, while it commands adulterers.
If lust is evil, it binds married people whom it serves with greater guilt than adulterers whom it rules.
5.16.61We know that its excess can be held within permitted limits by the mind’s power.
We testify that virgins and those practicing continence possess complete disdain for it.
5.16.62Marriage is nothing other than the union of bodies.
Propagation is impossible without mutual desire and the natural act.
Latin · §§5.15.55–5.16.62
§5.15.55
Apollinaris errori, qui carnis sensum fuisse negavit in Christo
§5.15.56
Regeneratos
ut redigamus
sub necessitate criminum, Deo largiente dona virtutum
§5.15.57
Non potuit - inquis - exemplum dare natura dissimilis
doceret - iniquis - quia qui non fecit, habere non potuit
§5.15.58
Tolle - inquis - exempli causam, tolletur et pretii, quod pro nobis factus est
Spe - inquis - malo carendi ad fidei praesidia convolamus, non autem caremus innatis: siquidem post Baptisma virilitas ipsa perdurat
§5.16.59
Coniugalem concubitum, qui fit intentione generandi, non ipsum esse peccatum, eo quod bona voluntas animi sequentem ducat, non ducentem sequatur corporis voluptatem
De ea re quae a peccato libera est, peccata non nasci
De ea re quae a peccato libera est, peccata non nasci
De ea re quae a peccato libera est - dicis - peccata non nasci
§5.16.60
Cum servit coniugatis ad propagandam prolem, tunc honorari libidinem
Semper ad reatum pertinere uti libidine
minus peccare adulteros quam maritos; quia maritis - inquis - libido servit ut peccent, adulteris imperat
Libidinem, si mala est, maiori reatu obstringere quibus obsequitur coniuges, quam quibus dominatur adulteros
§5.16.61
quia eum nostis - ut dicis - intra concessos fines animi potestate posse retineri
Sed universum contemptum eius - inquis - virginibus continentibusque inesse testamur
§5.16.62
Nihil aliud - dicis - esse nuptias, quam corporum commixtionem
sine appetitu mutuo et sine opere naturali propagationem esse non posse
Eas aliud non esse nisi corporum commixtionem
Augustine reports Julian accused him of offering shameful and criminal people an excuse: after committing…§§5.16.63–5.16.66
5.16.63Augustine reports Julian accused him of offering shameful and criminal people an excuse: after committing unspeakable and unclean acts, they could say they acted against their will and therefore had no sin.
5.16.64Guilt cannot be born from an act that has no guilt.
5.16.65You praised continence in the Christian age not to kindle people toward virginity, but to condemn the good of marriage established by God.
If you sincerely invite people to pursue continence, then you acknowledge that those who will it can maintain chastity’s virtue, so that whoever wishes may be holy in body and spirit (compare 1 Corinthians 7:34).
5.16.66Augustine reports Julian applied to him the apostolic condemnation of heretics ‘forbidding marriage’ (1 Timothy 4:3), alleging that his position was: ‘After Christ’s coming, marriages are shameful.’
A human being is sufficient to lay down laws for his inborn impulses.
Latin · §§5.16.63–5.16.66
§5.16.63
Aliud esse dixi non concumbere nisi voluntate generandi, quod non habet culpam; aliud concumbendo carnis appetere voluptatem, sed non praeter coniugem, quod venialem habet culpam
nos excusationem praebere turpibus et flagitiosis hominibus, ut cum infanda immunda commiserint, contra voluntatem se dicant fecisse, et ideo nullum habere peccatum
§5.16.64
quia de hoc opere quod non habet culpam, nasci, sicut dicis, culpa non potest
De hoc opere quod non habet culpam, nasci culpa non potest
de opere Dei
culpa non nascitur
§5.16.65
Ob hoc a me christiani temporis continentiam fuisse laudatam, non ut ad virginitatem incenderentur homines, sed ut bonum nuptiarum quod a Deo institutum est damnaretur
Si fideliter invitas homines ad studium continentiae, fateris ergo ita virtutem pudicitiae a volentibus posse servari, ut sit, quicumque voluerit, corpore sanctus et spiritu
§5.16.66
Apostolica sententia, qua notat haereticos prohibentes nubere [n142] , etiam me - asseris - tangi
Post adventum Christi turpia esse coniugia
hominem sufficere ingenitis sibi motibus dare leges