Testimonia — Early Christian Bible Commentary

c. 182–188 (historical edition's dating) | Irenaeus of Lyons

3. Why, then, did the Lord not form the covenant for the fathers? Because "the law was not established for righteous men." But the righteous fathers had the meaning of the Decalogue written in their hearts and souls, that is, they loved the God who made them, and did no injury to their neighbour. There was therefore no occasion that they should be cautioned by prohibitory mandates (correptoriis literis), because they had the righteousness of the law in themselves. But when this righteousness and love to God had passed into oblivion, and became extinct in Egypt, God did necessarily, because of His great goodwill to men, reveal Himself by a voice, and led the people with power out of Egypt, in order that man might again become the disciple and follower of God; and He afflicted those who were disobedient, that they should not contemn their Creator; and He fed them with manna, that they might receive food for their souls (uti rationalem acciperent escam); as also Moses says in Deuteronomy: "And fed thee with manna, which thy fathers did not know, that thou mightest know that man doth not live by bread alone; but by every word of God proceeding out of His mouth doth man live." And it enjoined love to God, and taught just dealing towards our neighbour, that we should neither be unjust nor unworthy of God, who prepares man for His friendship through the medium of the Decalogue, and likewise for agreement wdth his neighbour,—matters which did certainly profit man himself; God, however, standing in no need of anything from man.

Source passage · edition’s verse reference · Against Heresies, Book 4, Preface or unspecified section · Original source

1867 (English edition) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

1 Tim. i. 14.

Editorial footnote · Exhortation to the Heathen, THE WRITINGS OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. / EXHORTATION TO THE HEATHEN. / CHAPTER IX. “THAT THOSE GRIEVOUSLY SIN WHO DESPISE OR NEGLECT GOD’S GRACIOUS CALLING.” · Original source

1867 (English edition) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

1 Tim. i. 8.

Editorial footnote · The Stromata (Miscellanies), THE WRITINGS OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. / THE MISCELLANIES. / BOOK I. / CHAPTER XXVII. THE LAW, EVEN IN CORRECTING AND PUNISHING, AIMS AT THE GOOD OF MEN. · Original source

1867 (English edition) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

1 Tim. i. 7.

Editorial footnote · The Stromata (Miscellanies), THE WRITINGS OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. / THE MISCELLANIES. / BOOK I. / CHAPTER XXVII. THE LAW, EVEN IN CORRECTING AND PUNISHING, AIMS AT THE GOOD OF MEN. · Original source

1867 (English edition) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

1 Tim. i. 5.

Editorial footnote · The Stromata (Miscellanies), THE WRITINGS OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. / THE MISCELLANIES. / BOOK I. / CHAPTER XXVII. THE LAW, EVEN IN CORRECTING AND PUNISHING, AIMS AT THE GOOD OF MEN. · Original source

1869 (English edition) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

Cf. 1 Tim. i. 15.

Editorial footnote · Against Celsus, The Writings of Origen, Vol. 1 of 2 / ORIGEN CONTRA CELSUM. / ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. BOOK I. / Chapter LXIII. · Original source

1869 (English edition) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

1 Tim. i. 9.

Editorial footnote · The Stromata (Miscellanies), THE WRITINGS OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. / BOOK IV. / CHAPTER III. THE TRUE EXCELLENCE OF MAN. · Original source

1869 (English edition) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

1 Tim. i. 18, 19.

Editorial footnote · The Stromata (Miscellanies), THE WRITINGS OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. / BOOK II. / CHAPTER VI. THE EXCELLENCE AND UTILITY OF FAITH. · Original source

1872 (English edition) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

1 Tim. i. 13.

Editorial footnote · On Baptism, Against the Donatists, WRITINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE DONATIST CONTROVERSY. / BOOK FOURTH. / Chapter V · Original source

1872 (English edition) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

1 Tim. i. 20.

Editorial footnote · Answer to the Letters of Petilianus, WRITINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE DONATIST CONTROVERSY. / BOOK SECOND. / Chapter X · Original source

Date uncertain | Augustine of Hippo

In Paradise, then, man lived as he desired so long as he desired what God had commanded. He lived in the enjoyment of God, and was good by God's goodness; he lived without any want, and had it in his power so to live eternally. He had food that he might not hunger, drink that he might not thirst, the tree of life that old age might not waste him. There was in his body no corruption, nor seed of corruption, which could produce in him any unpleasant sensation. He feared no inward disease, no outward accident. Soundest health blessed his body, absolute tranquillity his soul. As in Paradise there was no excessive heat or cold, so its inhabitants were exempt from the vicissitudes of fear and desire. No sadness of any kind was there, nor any foolish joy; true gladness ceaselessly flowed from the presence of God, who was loved "out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned." The honest love of husband and wife made a sure harmony between them. Body and spirit worked harmoniously together, and the commandment was kept without labour. No languor made their leisure wearisome; no sleepiness interrupted their desire to labour. In tanta facilitate rerum et felicitate hominum, absit ut suspicemur, non potuisse prolem seri sine libidinis morbo: sed eo voluntatis nutu moverentur illa membra quo cætera, et sine ardoris illecebroso stimulo cum tranquillitate animi et corporis nulla corruptione integritatis infunderetur gremio maritus uxoris. Neque enim quia experientia probari non potest, ideo credendum non est; quando illas corporis partes non ageret turbidus calor, sed spontanea potestas, sicut opus esset, adhiberet; ita tunc potuisse utero conjugis salva integritate feminei genitalis virile semen immitti, sicut nunc potest eadem integritate salva ex utero virginis fluxus menstrui cruoris emitti. Eadem quippe via posset illud injici, qua hoc potest ejici. Ut enim ad pariendum non doloris gemitus, sed maturitatis impulsus feminea viscera relaxaret: sic ad fœtandum et concipiendum non libidinis appetitus, sed voluntarius usus naturam utramque conjungeret. We speak of things which are now shameful, and although we try, as well as we are able, to conceive them as they were before they became shameful, yet necessity compels us rather to limit our discussion to the bounds set by modesty than to extend it as our moderate faculty of discourse might suggest. For since that which I have been speaking of was not experienced even by those who might have experienced it,—I mean our first parents (for sin and its merited banishment from Paradise anticipated this passionless generation on their part),—when sexual intercourse is spoken of now, it suggests to men's thoughts not such a placid obedience to the will as is conceivable in our first parents, but such violent acting of lust as they themselves have experienced. And therefore modesty shuts my mouth, although my mind conceives the matter clearly. But Almighty God, the supreme and supremely good Creator of all natures, who aids and rewards good wills, while He abandons and condemns the bad, and rules both, was not destitute of a plan by which He might people His city with the fixed number of citizens which His wisdom had foreordained even out of the condemned human race, discriminating them not now by merits, since the whole mass was condemned as if in a vitiated root, but by grace, and showing, not only in the case of the redeemed, but also in those who were not delivered, how much grace He has bestowed upon them. For every one acknowledges that he has been rescued from evil, not by deserved, but by gratuitous goodness, when he is singled out from the company of those with whom he might justly have borne a common punishment, and is allowed to go scathless. Why, then, should God not have created those whom He foresaw would sin, since He was able to show in and by them both what their guilt merited, and what His grace bestowed, and since, under His creating and disposing hand, even the perverse disorder of the wicked could not pervert the right order of things?

Source passage · edition’s verse reference · The City of God, THE CITY OF GOD. / BOOK FOURTEENTH.[1] / ARGUMENT. / 26. That we are to believe that in Paradise our first parents begat offspring without blushing. · Original source

Date uncertain | Augustine of Hippo

Chap. V.—7. "Further," Cyprian goes on to say, "in vain do some, who are overcome by reason, oppose to us custom, as though custom were superior to truth, or that were not to be followed in spiritual things which has been revealed by the Holy Spirit, as the better way." This is clearly true, since reason and truth are to be preferred to custom. But when truth supports custom, nothing should be more strongly maintained. Then he proceeds as follows: "For one may pardon a man who merely errs, as the Apostle Paul says of himself, 'Who was before a blasphemer, a persecutor, and injurious; but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly;' but he who, after inspiration and revelation given, perseveres advisedly and knowingly in his former error, sins without hope of pardon on the ground of ignorance. For he rests on a kind of presumption and obstinacy, when he is overcome by reason." This is most true, that his sin is much more grievous who has sinned wittingly than his who has sinned through ignorance. And so in the case of the holy Cyprian, who was not only learned, but also patient of instruction, which he so fully himself understood to be a part of the praise of the bishop whom the apostle describes, that he said, "This also should be approved in a bishop, that he not only teach with knowledge, but also learn with patience." I do not doubt that if he had had the opportunity of discussing this question, which has been so long and so much disputed in the Church, with the pious and learned men to whom we owe it that subsequently that ancient custom was confirmed by the authority of a general Council, he would have shown, without hesitation, not only how learned he was in those things which he had grasped with all the security of truth, but also how ready he was to receive instruction in what he had failed to perceive. And yet, since it is so clear that it is much more grievous to sin wittingly than in ignorance, I should be glad if any one would tell me which is the worse,—the man who falls into heresy, not knowing how great a sin it is, or the man who refuses to abandon his covetousness, knowing its enormity. I might even put the question thus: If one man unwittingly fall into heresy, and another knowingly refuse to depart from idolatry, since the apostle himself says, "The covetous man, which is an idolater;" and Cyprian too understood the same passage in just the same way, when he says, in his letter to Antonianus, "Nor let the new heretics flatter themselves in this, that they say they do not communicate with idolaters, whereas there are amongst them both adulterers and covetous persons, who are held guilty of the sin of idolatry; 'for know this, and understand, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God;' and again, 'Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry.'" I ask, therefore, which sins more deeply,—he who ignorantly has fallen into heresy, or he who wittingly has refused to abandon covetousness, that is idolatry? According to that rule by which the sins of those who sin wittingly are placed before those of the ignorant, the man who is covetous with knowledge takes the first place in sin. But as it is possible that the greatness of the actual sin should produce the same effect in the case of heresy that the witting commission of the sin produces in that of covetousness, let us suppose the ignorant heretic to be on a par in guilt with the consciously covetous man, although the evidence which Cyprian himself has advanced from the apostle does not seem to prove this. For what is it that we abominate in heretics except their blasphemies? But when he wished to show that ignorance of the sin may conduce to ease in obtaining pardon, he advanced a proof from the case of the apostle, when he says, "Who before was a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious; but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly." But if possible, as I said before, let the sins of the two men—the blasphemy of the unconscious, and the idolatry of the conscious sinner—be esteemed of equal weight; and let them be judged by the same sentence,—he who, in seeking for Christ, falls into a truth-like setting forth of what is false, and he who wittingly resists Christ speaking through His apostle, "seeing that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, which is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God,"—and then I would ask why baptism and the words of the gospel are held as naught in the former case, and accounted valid in the latter, when each is alike found to be estranged from the members of the dove. Is it because the former is an open combatant outside, that he should not be admitted, the latter a cunning assenter within the fold, that he may not be expelled?

Source passage · edition’s verse reference · On Baptism, Against the Donatists, WRITINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE DONATIST CONTROVERSY. / BOOK FOURTH. / Chapter V · Original source

Date uncertain | Augustine of Hippo

Chap. viii.—9. Wherefore, as the apostle said of the law, "The law is good, if a man use it lawfully," so we may fairly say of baptism, Baptism is good, if a man use it lawfully. And as they who used the law unlawfully could not in that case cause that it should not be in itself good, or make it null and void, so any one who uses baptism unlawfully, either because he lives in heresy, or because he lives the worst of lives, yet cannot cause that the baptism should be otherwise than good, or altogether null and void. And so, when he is converted either to Catholic unity, or to a mode of living worthy of so great a sacrament, he begins to have not another and a lawful baptism, but that same baptism in a lawful manner. Nor does the remission of irrevocable sins follow on baptism, unless a man not only have lawful baptism, but have it lawfully; and yet it does not follow that if a man have it not lawfully, so that his sins are either not remitted, or, being remitted, are brought on him again, therefore the sacrament of baptism should be in the baptized person either bad or null and void. For as Judas, to whom the Lord gave a morsel, gave a place within himself to the devil, not by receiving what was bad, but by receiving it badly, so each person, on receiving the sacrament of the Lord, does not cause that it is bad because he is bad himself, or that he has received nothing because he has not received it to salvation. For it was none the less the body of the Lord and the blood of the Lord, even in those to whom the apostle said, "He that eateth unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself." Let the heretics therefore seek in the Catholic Church not what they have, but what they have not,—that is, the end of the commandment, without which many holy things may be possessed, but they cannot profit. "Now, the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned." Let them therefore hasten to the unity and truth of the Catholic Church, not that they may have the sacrament of washing, if they have been already bathed in it, although in heresy, but that they may have it to their health.

Source passage · edition’s verse reference · On Baptism, Against the Donatists, WRITINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE DONATIST CONTROVERSY. / BOOK FIFTH. / Chapter viii · Original source

Date uncertain | Augustine of Hippo

2. For as the spiritual man, keeping "the end of the commandment," that is, "charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned," can see some things less clearly out of a body which is yet "corruptible and presseth down the soul," and is liable to be otherwise minded in some things which God will reveal to him in His own good time if he abide in the same charity, so in a carnal and perverse man something good and useful may be found, which has its origin not in the man himself, but in some other source. For as in the fruitful branch there is found something which must be purged that it may bring forth more fruit, so also a grape is often found to hang on a cane that is barren and dry or fettered. And so, as it is foolish to love the portions which require purging in the fruitful branch, whilst he acts wisely who does not reject the sweet fruit wherever it may hang, so, if any one cuts himself off from unity by rebaptizing, simply because it seemed to Cyprian that one ought to baptize again those who came from the heretics, such a man turns aside from what merits praise in that great man, and follows what requires correction, and does not even attain to the very thing he follows after. For Cyprian, while grievously abhorring, in his zeal for God, all those who severed themselves from unity, thought that thereby they were separated from baptism itself; while these men, thinking it at most a slight offence that they themselves are severed from the unity of Christ, even maintain that His baptism is not in that unity, but issued forth with them. Therefore they are so far from the fruitfulness of Cyprian, as not even to be equal to the parts in him which needed purging.

Source passage · edition’s verse reference · On Baptism, Against the Donatists, WRITINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE DONATIST CONTROVERSY. / BOOK SIXTH. / Chapter I · Original source

Date uncertain | Augustine of Hippo

89. In respect of this testimony of John there is no need of further disputation, since it has no reference at all to the question of baptism, which we are at present discussing. For he says, "If any come unto you, and bring not the doctrine of Christ." But heretics leaving the doctrine of their error are converted to the doctrine of Christ, that they may be incorporated with the Church, and may begin to belong to the members of that Dove whose sacrament they previously had; and therefore what previously they lacked belonging to it is given to them, that is to say, peace and charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned. But what they previously had belonging to the Dove is acknowledged, and received without any depreciation; just as in the adulteress God recognises His gifts, even when she is following her lovers; because when after her fornication is corrected she is turned again to chastity, those gifts are not laid to her charge, but she herself is corrected. But just as Cyprian might have defended himself, if this testimony of John had been cast in his teeth, whilst he was holding communion with men like these, so let those against whom it is spoken make their own defence. For to the question before us, as I said before, it has no reference at all. For John says that we are not to bid God speed to men of strange doctrine; but Paul the apostle says, with even greater vehemence, "If any man that is called a brother be covetous, or a drunkard," or anything of the sort, with such an one no not to eat; and yet Cyprian used to admit to fellowship, not with his private table, but with the altar of God, his colleagues who were usurers, and treacherous, and fraudulent, and robbers. But in what manner this may be defended has been sufficiently set forth in other books already.

Source passage · edition’s verse reference · On Baptism, Against the Donatists, WRITINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE DONATIST CONTROVERSY. / BOOK SEVENTH. / Chapter xlv · Original source

Date uncertain | Augustine of Hippo

50. Augustine answered: If therefore every traditor has forfeited his baptism, it will follow that every one who, having been baptized by you, has afterwards become a traditor, ought to be baptized afresh. And if you do not do this, you yourselves sufficiently prove the falseness of the saying, "Whosoever therefore has incurred the guilt of treason, has forfeited, like you, his baptism." For if he has forfeited it, let him return and receive it again; but if he returns and does not receive it, it is clear that he had not forfeited it. Again, if the reason why it was said to the apostles, "Now are ye clean," and "My peace I give unto you," was that the traitor had already left the room, then was not that supper of so great a sacrament clean and able to give peace, which He distributed to all before his going out? And if you venture to say this with your eyes closed against the truth, what can we do save exclaim the more, See how blindness comes in punishment of the madness of those who wish to be, as the apostle says, "teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm?" And yet, unless blindness came in the way of their pertinacity, it was not a very difficult matter that you should understand and see that the Lord did not say in the presence of Judas, Ye are not yet clean, but "Now are ye clean." He added, however, "But not all," because there was one there who was not clean; yet if he had been polluting the others by his presence, it would not have been declared to them, "Now are ye clean," but, as I said before, Ye are not yet clean. But, after Judas had gone out, He said to them, "Now are ye clean," and did not add the words, But not all, because he had now departed in whose presence indeed, as had been said to them, they were already clean, but not all, because there was one there unclean. Wherefore in these words the Lord rather declared that in the one company of men receiving the same sacraments, the uncleanness of some members cannot hurt the clean. Certainly, if you think that there are among us men like Judas, you might apply to us the words, "Ye are clean, but not all." But this is not what you say; but you say that because of the presence of some who are unclean, therefore we are all unclean. This the Lord did not say to the disciples in the presence of Judas, and therefore whoever says this has not learned from the good Master what He says.

Source passage · edition’s verse reference · Answer to the Letters of Petilianus, WRITINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE DONATIST CONTROVERSY. / BOOK SECOND. / Chapter xxii · Original source

Date uncertain | Augustine of Hippo

Chap. lvi.—127. Petilianus said: "But even if, as you yourselves suppose, you are following the law of the Lord in purity, let us nevertheless consider the question of the most holy law itself in a legal form. The Apostle Paul says, 'The law is good, if a man use it lawfully.' What then does the law say? 'Thou shalt not kill.' What Cain the murderer did once, you have often done, in slaying your brethren."

Source passage · edition’s verse reference · Answer to the Letters of Petilianus, WRITINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE DONATIST CONTROVERSY. / BOOK SECOND. / Chapter lvi · Original source

Date uncertain | Clement of Alexandria

And, indeed, the old Hebrew wanderers in the desert received typically the end of the threatening; for they are said not to have entered into the rest, because of unbelief, till, having followed the successor of Moses, they learned by experience, though late, that they could not be saved otherwise than by believing on Jesus. But the Lord, in His love to man, invites all men to the knowledge of the truth, and for this end sends the Paraclete. What, then, is this knowledge? Godliness; and “godliness,” according to Paul, “is profitable for all things, having the promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come.” If eternal salvation were to be sold, for how much, O men, would you propose to purchase it? Were one to estimate the value of the whole of Pactolus, the fabulous river of gold, he would not have reckoned up a price equivalent to salvation.

Source passage · edition’s verse reference · Exhortation to the Heathen, THE WRITINGS OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. / EXHORTATION TO THE HEATHEN. / CHAPTER IX. “THAT THOSE GRIEVOUSLY SIN WHO DESPISE OR NEGLECT GOD’S GRACIOUS CALLING.” · Original source

Date uncertain | Clement of Alexandria

For this was the law from the first, that virtue should be the object of voluntary choice. Wherefore also the commandments, according to the Law, and before the Law, not given to the upright (for the law is not appointed for a righteous man), ordained that he should receive eternal life and the blessed prize, who chose them.

Source passage · edition’s verse reference · The Stromata (Miscellanies), THE WRITINGS OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. / BOOK VII. / CHAPTER II. THE SON THE RULER AND SAVIOUR OF ALL. · Original source