Against the Epistle of Manichaeus Called Fundamental 1–13

I have prayed, and I still pray, to the one true God almighty, from whom are all things, through whom are all things, in whom are all things, that in refuting and overcoming your heresy, Manichaeans (to which you too have perhaps adhered more through imprudence than through malice), he may give me a peaceful and tranquil mind, intent more on your correction than on your overthrow. For although the Lord through his servants overthrows the kingdoms of error, yet he commands that the men themselves, insofar as they are men, be corrected rather than destroyed. And whatever punishment is inflicted by God before that last judgment, whether through the wicked or through the just, through those who do not know it or through those who know it, secretly or openly, must be believed to serve not for men’s destruction but for their healing; those who reject this healing are being prepared for the final punishment. Therefore, since in this universe of things some things serve for bodily punishment, such as fire and poison and disease and other things of this kind; others by which the soul is punished within itself, not by troubles of its body but by the snares of its own desires, such as loss, exile, bereavement, insult, and the like; while some are not torments at all but, as it were, poultices and soothing remedies for the sick, such as consolations, exhortations, discussions, and whatever else there is of this kind: of all these the supreme justice of God works some even through wicked men who do not know it, and some through good men who know it. It was ours, then, to choose and desire the better things, so that we might find a way to your correction not in strife and rivalry and persecutions, but by gentle consoling, kindly exhorting, and mild discussion, as it is written: “The servant of the Lord must not quarrel, but be gentle toward all, teachable, patient, correcting with modesty those who think otherwise.” It was ours, then, to wish to seek this part; it is God’s to give what is good to those who wish and ask.

Let those rage against you who do not know with what labor the truth is found and how hard it is to avoid errors; let those rage against you who do not know how rare and arduous it is to overcome carnal phantasms by the serenity of a godly mind; let those rage against you who do not know with what difficulty the eye of the inner man is healed so that it can gaze upon its own sun (not that sun which you worship as a heavenly body, shining and radiant to the fleshly eyes of men and beasts alike, but the one of whom it was said through the prophet, “The sun of righteousness has risen for me,” and of whom it was said in the Gospel, “He was the true light, which enlightens every man coming into this world”); let those rage against you who do not know with what sighs and groans it comes about that God can be understood in even the smallest part; finally, let those rage against you who have never been deceived by such an error as they see you deceived by.

But I, who after being long and greatly tossed about was at last able to see what that pure truth is which is perceived without the telling of an empty fable; who, wretched as I was, scarcely managed with the Lord’s help to refute the vain imaginings of my mind, gathered from various opinions and errors; who submitted so slowly to the most merciful physician as he called and coaxed me to wipe away the darkness of my mind; who wept long that the unchangeable and undefilable substance might deign to persuade me inwardly, with the divine books in harmony; who, finally, sought out with curiosity, listened to attentively, believed rashly, urged insistently on whomever I could, and defended stubbornly and spiritedly against others all those fictions which hold you entangled and bound by long habit: I cannot rage against you at all. I must now bear with you, who are as I myself was at that time, and deal with you with as much patience as my neighbors showed me when I wandered, raving and blind, in your doctrine. But so that you may grow gentler and not oppose me with a hostile spirit that harms yourselves, I must obtain this from you, with anyone at all as judge: that all arrogance be laid aside on both sides. Let none of us say that he has already found the truth; let us seek it as though it were unknown to both. For it can be sought diligently and in harmony only if it is not believed, by rash presumption, to have been already found and known. Or if I cannot obtain this from you, at least grant me this: that I may hear you as if I did not know you, and examine you now for the first time. I think what I ask is just, on this condition, of course: that I will not pray with you, will not attend your meetings, and will not take the name of Manichaean, unless you have given me a clear account, free of all obscurity, of everything that pertains to the salvation of the soul.

For in the Catholic Church (to pass over that most pure wisdom to the knowledge of which a few spiritual men attain in this life, so as to know it in the smallest part indeed, since they are men, but yet without doubt; for as to the rest of the multitude, it is not liveliness of understanding but simplicity of believing that makes them most safe), to pass over, then, this wisdom, which you do not believe to be in the Catholic Church, there are many other things that most justly keep me in her bosom. I am held by the agreement of peoples and nations; I am held by an authority begun with miracles, nourished by hope, increased by love, made firm by age; I am held by the succession of priests from the very see of the apostle Peter, to whom the Lord after his resurrection entrusted the feeding of his sheep, down to the present episcopate; I am held, finally, by the very name of Catholic, which not without reason this Church alone has so kept among so many heresies that, although all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet if a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets, none of the heretics would dare to point out his own basilica or house. These, then, so many and so great, are the most precious bonds of the Christian name that rightly hold a man who believes in the Catholic Church, even if, because of the slowness of our understanding or the merit of our life, the truth does not yet show itself most clearly. With you, however, where there is none of these things to invite and hold me, only the promise of truth sounds. If indeed it is shown so plainly that it cannot be doubted, it is to be preferred to all those things by which I am held in the Catholic Church; but if it is only promised and not displayed, no one will move me from that faith which binds my mind to the Christian religion by so many and such strong ties.

Let us see, then, what Mani teaches me, and above all let us consider that book which you call the Letter of the Foundation, in which nearly all that you believe is contained. For when it was read to us, wretched as we were at that time, you called us enlightened. It certainly begins thus: “Mani, apostle of Jesus Christ by the providence of God the Father. These are the words of salvation from the everlasting and living fountain.” Now, with good patience, if you please, attend to what I ask. I do not believe that this man is an apostle of Christ. Please do not be angry and begin to curse. For you know that I have resolved to believe nothing you put forward rashly. I ask, then, who this Mani is. You will answer: an apostle of Christ. I do not believe it. Now you will have nothing to say or do. For you promised knowledge of the truth, and now you force me to believe what I do not know. Perhaps you will read me the Gospel and try from it to establish the person of Mani. If, then, you were to meet someone who does not yet believe the Gospel, what would you do if he said to you, “I do not believe”? But I would not believe the Gospel unless the authority of the Catholic Church moved me. Since, then, I obeyed those who said, “Believe the Gospel,” why should I not obey them when they say to me, “Do not believe the Manichaeans”? Choose what you wish. If you say, “Believe the Catholics,” they themselves warn me to give no credence to you; so in believing them I cannot but disbelieve you. If you say, “Do not believe the Catholics,” you will not be right to use the Gospel to force me to faith in Mani, because it was at the Catholics’ preaching that I believed the Gospel itself. But if you say, “You were right to believe the Catholics when they praised the Gospel, but not right to believe them when they condemned Mani,” do you think me so foolish as to believe what you wish and not believe what you do not wish, without any reason given? For I act much more justly and cautiously if, having once believed the Catholics, I do not cross over to you, unless you stop bidding me to believe and instead make me know something most openly and clearly. Therefore, if you are going to give me a reason, leave the Gospel aside. If you hold to the Gospel, I will hold to those at whose bidding I believed the Gospel, and at their command I will not believe you at all. But if perhaps you could find in the Gospel something perfectly clear about the apostleship of Mani, you will weaken for me the authority of the Catholics, who bid me not to believe you; and once that is weakened, I shall no longer be able to believe even the Gospel, because it was through them that I had believed it. So nothing you bring forward from it will have any weight with me. Therefore, if nothing clear about the apostleship of Mani is found in the Gospel, I will believe the Catholics rather than you. But if you read from it something clear in favor of Mani, I will believe neither them nor you: not them, because they lied to me about you; and not you, because you bring me that Scripture which I had believed through those who lied to me. But far be it from me not to believe the Gospel. For believing it, I find no way in which I can believe you as well. For the names of the apostles that are read there do not include the name of Mani. And who succeeded to the place of Christ’s betrayer we read in the Acts of the Apostles, a book I must believe if I believe the Gospel, since Catholic authority commends both Scriptures to me alike. In the same book we also have the very well known account of Paul’s calling and apostleship. Read me now, if you can, where in the Gospel Mani is called an apostle, or in any other book that I have admitted I already believe. Or will you read the passage where the Lord promised the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, to the apostles? Concerning that passage, see how many and how great are the considerations that call me back and deter me from believing Mani.

For I ask why the beginning of this letter is “Mani, apostle of Jesus Christ,” and not “The Paraclete, apostle of Jesus Christ.” But if the Paraclete sent by Christ sent Mani, why do I read “Mani, apostle of Jesus Christ,” and not rather “Mani, apostle of the Paraclete”? If you say that Christ himself is the one who is also the Holy Spirit, you contradict Scripture itself, where the Lord says, “And I will send you another Paraclete.” But if you think the name of Christ is rightly put not because Christ is himself also the Paraclete but because both are of the same substance (that is, not because he is one, but because they are one), then Paul too could have said, “Paul, apostle of God the Father,” since the Lord said, “I and the Father are one.” He nowhere says this, nor does any of the apostles write that he is an apostle of the Father. What, then, does this novelty mean? Does it not seem to you to smell of some deceit? Certainly, if he thought it made no difference, why does he not vary, calling himself apostle of Christ in some letters and of the Paraclete in others? But I always heard “of Christ,” as often as I heard it, and “of the Paraclete” not even once. What do we think is the reason for this, unless that pride, the mother of all heretics, drove the man to wish to appear not as sent by the Paraclete but as so taken up by him that he himself would be called the Paraclete? Just as the man Jesus Christ was not sent by the Son of God, that is, by the power and wisdom of God, through whom all things were made, but was so taken up, according to the Catholic faith, that he himself was the Son of God, that is, that in him the very wisdom of God appeared for the healing of sinners: so Mani wished to seem to have been taken up by the Holy Spirit whom Christ promised, so that when we hear “Mani” we should understand the Holy Spirit, and by “apostle of Jesus Christ” understand one sent by Jesus Christ, who promised that he would send him. Singular audacity, and unspeakable sacrilege!

But still I ask: since, as we too confess, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are united in a nature that is not unequal, why do you not think it shameful to proclaim that Mani, a man taken up by the Holy Spirit, was born of both sexes, while you are afraid to believe that the man taken up by the only-begotten Wisdom of God was born of a virgin? If human flesh, if a man’s intercourse, if a woman’s womb could not defile the Holy Spirit, how could a virgin’s womb defile the Wisdom of God? This Mani, then, who boasts of the Holy Spirit and of the reading of the Gospel, must grant you that he was either sent by the Holy Spirit or taken up by him. If he was sent, let him call himself apostle of the Paraclete; if taken up, let him grant a human mother to the man whom the only-begotten Son of God took up, since he grants a father too to the man whom the Holy Spirit took up. Let him believe that the Word of God was not polluted by Mary’s virginity, if he urges us to believe that the Holy Spirit could not be polluted by his parents’ intercourse. But if you say that Mani was taken up by the Holy Spirit not in the womb or before the womb but after he was already born, it is enough that you admit that he had flesh begotten of a man and a woman. For since you are not afraid of Mani’s bowels and blood, which came from human intercourse, and the intestines full of dung that that flesh carried, and do not believe that the Holy Spirit, by whom you believe that man was taken up, was contaminated by all these things, why should I shrink from a virgin’s womb and untouched genitals, and not rather believe that the Wisdom of God, having taken up a man in his mother’s very womb, remained undefiled and pure? Therefore, since your Mani can establish neither, whether he claims to be sent or taken up by the Paraclete, I, now more cautious, believe him neither sent nor taken up.

For as to his adding “by the providence of God the Father,” what else was he aiming at, having named Jesus Christ, whose apostle he says he is, and God the Father, by whose providence he says he was sent by the Son, but that we should believe that he himself is the Holy Spirit, the third? For he writes thus: “Mani, apostle of Jesus Christ by the providence of God the Father.” The Holy Spirit is not named, who above all should have been named by one who commends his apostleship to us by the promise of the Paraclete, so as to press the unlearned with the authority of the Gospel. When you are asked about this, you of course answer that in naming Mani the apostle the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, is named, because he deigned to come in him. I ask, then, as I said above, why you shudder when the Catholic Church says that the one in whom divine Wisdom came was born of a virgin, when you do not shudder at all that the one in whom you proclaim the Holy Spirit came was born of a woman joined to a man. I do not know what else to suspect, then, except that this Mani, who seeks access to the minds of the unlearned through the name of Christ, wished to be worshiped in place of Christ himself. I will say briefly how I infer this. At the time when I was one of your hearers, I often asked you what the reason was that you mostly kept the Lord’s Pasch with no celebration at all, or sometimes with a very lukewarm one among a few, with no vigils, no longer fast enjoined on the hearers, in short no more festive preparation, while you honor your Bema, that is, the day on which Mani was put to death, with great honors, with a platform of five steps set up, adorned with precious linen cloths, placed in full view and set before the worshipers. When I asked this, the answer was that the day of the passion of him who had truly suffered should be celebrated, but that Christ, who had not been born and had shown to human eyes not true but feigned flesh, had not endured but feigned his passion. Who would not groan that men who wish to be called Christians fear that the truth may be polluted by a virgin’s womb, and do not fear that it is polluted by a lie? But to return to the point: who would not suspect, if he pays close attention, that Mani denies that Christ was born of a woman and had a human body precisely so that Christ’s passion, which is now the most festive season of the whole world, should not be celebrated by those who had believed Mani, and so that the longed-for solemnity should not honor the day of Mani’s own death with less devotion? For what made that celebration of the Bema most pleasing to us was that it was kept in place of the Pasch, since we longed for that feast day all the more because the other, which used to be the sweetest, had been taken away.

Perhaps you will say to me: when, then, did the Paraclete promised by the Lord come? Here, if I had nothing else to believe, I would more easily wait for him as still to come than grant that he had come through Mani. But now, since the coming of the Holy Spirit is most plainly proclaimed in the Acts of the Apostles, what necessity forces me to believe heretics so dangerously and so easily? For in the book mentioned it is written thus: “The first account we gave of all things, O Theophilus, which Jesus began to do and to teach, on the day on which he chose the apostles through the Holy Spirit and commanded them to preach the gospel; to whom he showed himself alive after his passion by many proofs, being seen by them for forty days and teaching about the kingdom of God, how he had lived with them, and commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, ‘which you have heard,’ he said, ‘from my mouth; for John indeed baptized with water, but you will begin to be baptized with the Holy Spirit, whom you are also to receive not many days from now, at Pentecost.’ So when they had come together, they asked him, saying, ‘Lord, if at this time you will be made present, and when is the kingdom of Israel?’ But he said, ‘No one can know the time which the Father has put in his own power; but you will receive the power of the Holy Spirit coming upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the whole earth.’” See, you have here where he reminded the disciples of the Father’s promise, which they had heard from his mouth, about the Holy Spirit who was to come. Now let us see when he was sent. For shortly after, it follows and says: “At the time when the day of Pentecost was fulfilled, they were all together in one place with one spirit; and suddenly there came a sound from heaven as if a violent wind were rushing, and it filled the whole place where they were sitting; and there appeared to them tongues divided as of fire, which also sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in tongues, as the Spirit gave them to utter. Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, men from every nation that is under heaven. And when the sound occurred, the crowd gathered and was confounded, because each one heard them speaking in his own language and his own tongues. And they were amazed and marveled, saying to one another, ‘Are not all these who are speaking Galileans by nation? And how do we recognize in them the language in which we were born? Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and those who live in Mesopotamia, Armenia and Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the regions of Africa toward Cyrene, and the visitors from Rome, both Jews and residents, and Cretans and Arabs, hear them speaking in their own tongues the mighty works of God.’ And they were amazed and perplexed at what had happened, saying, ‘What does this mean?’ But others mocked, saying, ‘These men are all full of new wine.’” See where the Holy Spirit came. What more do you want? If the Scriptures are to be believed, why should I not rather believe these, which are made firm by the strongest authority, and which, together with the Gospel itself, in which we equally believe the Holy Spirit was promised, have earned the right to become known to the nations, to be commended to posterity, and to be preached? So when I read these Acts of the Apostles, joined to the Gospel with equal authority, I find that the Holy Spirit was not only promised to those true apostles but was also sent so manifestly that no room was left for errors on this matter.

For the glorification of our Lord among men is his resurrection from the dead and ascension into heaven. And it is written in the Gospel itself according to John: “The Spirit had not yet been given, because Jesus had not yet been glorified.” If, then, the Spirit had not yet been given for this reason, that Jesus had not yet been glorified, then once Jesus was glorified the Spirit was necessarily given at once. And because of this twofold glorification, according to his humanity and according to his divinity, the Holy Spirit was also given twice: once after he rose from the dead, when he breathed on the faces of the disciples, saying, “Receive the Holy Spirit”; and again after he ascended into heaven, when ten days had passed, a number that signifies perfection, since to the number seven, by which all created things subsist, is added the Trinity of the Creator. Many things are discussed about these matters, piously and carefully, among spiritual men. But I will not depart from my purpose; for I undertook at the outset to deal with you in such a way, not that I should teach you, which you might perhaps think arrogant, but as though I myself were eager to learn from you what I could not learn in nine years. Therefore I have writings to believe concerning the coming of the Holy Spirit; and if you forbid me to believe them, so that I may not rashly believe what I do not know (for that is how you usually warn people), much less will I believe your writings. So either take away all books altogether and lay open by argument a truth I cannot doubt, or produce such books as do not impose on me with arrogance something to believe, but display without deceit something to learn. Perhaps, you say, this letter too is such a book. I do not want, then, to linger any longer on its threshold; let us look at what is inside.

“These,” he says, “are the words of salvation from the everlasting and living fountain; whoever hears them and first believes them, and then keeps what they teach, will never be subject to death, but will enjoy eternal and glorious life. For truly he must be judged blessed who has been instructed in this divine knowledge, through which, set free, he will abide in everlasting life.” And this too, as you see, is a promise, not yet a display of the truth. And you too can very easily see that any errors at all can be painted over with this veil, so as to creep secretly into the minds of the unlearned through an adorned doorway. For if he said, “These are words of pestilence from a poisonous fountain; whoever hears them and first believes them, and then keeps what they teach, will never be restored to life, but will suffer a penal and wretched death; for truly he must be judged wretched who has been entangled in this hellish ignorance, through which, sunk down, he will abide in everlasting torments”: if, then, he said this, he would be speaking the truth, but he would not only win no reader for this book but would stir up the greatest hatred in all into whose hands it fell. So let us pass on to what follows, and let us not be deceived by these words, which can be common to good and bad, learned and unlearned. What follows, then? “The peace,” he says, “of the invisible God and the knowledge of the truth be with the holy and most dear brothers, who both believe and serve the heavenly commandments.” So be it, as he says. For this too is a kind and most welcome wish. Only let us remember that such things can be said both by good teachers and by deceivers. So if he said nothing but such things, I would grant that it should be read and embraced by all. Nor would I disapprove of what follows next; for he adds: “But may the right hand of the light also protect you and rescue you from every evil assault and from the snares of the world.” And in general, whatever is written at the beginning of this letter, until the subject itself is reached, I do not wish to criticize, so as not to spend much labor on minor matters. Let us now look, then, at the man’s most evident promise.

“Concerning that matter, then,” he says, “most beloved brother Patticius, about which you informed me, saying that you wished to know what kind of birth Adam and Eve had, whether they were brought forth by a word or begotten from a body, you will be answered as is fitting. For about these things it has been inserted and recorded in different ways by many, in various writings and revelations. Therefore the truth of this matter, as it really is, is unknown to nearly all nations, and to all who have disputed long and much about it. For if it had fallen to them to know plainly about the generation of Adam and Eve, they would never be subject to corruption and death.” He promises us, then, a plain knowledge of this matter, so that we may not be subject to corruption and death. And if this is still too little, see what follows. “Necessarily, then,” he says, “many things must first be recounted, so that one may arrive at this mystery without any ambiguity.” This is what I was saying: that the truth ought to be shown to me in such a way that I may arrive at it without any ambiguity. And if he himself did not promise this, I should still have to demand and insist on it, so that, for so great a reward as most evident and certain knowledge, I might not be ashamed, whoever might object, to become a Manichaean instead of a Catholic Christian. Let us hear now, then, what he brings. “Hence, if you please,” he says, “listen first to what things were before the constitution of the world, and how the battle was waged, so that you may be able to separate the nature of light from that of darkness.” Now he has put forward things incredible and altogether false. For who would believe that any battle was fought before the constitution of the world? And yet, even if it were credible, we now want not to believe but to know. For one who says that the Persians and Scythians made war on each other many years ago says something credible, but something that we can believe because we have heard or read it, not know because we have experienced and grasped it. Since, then, I would reject him if he said anything of this kind (for he did not promise things I should be compelled to believe, but things I could know without any ambiguity), how shall I not reject him when he says things not merely uncertain but even incredible? But what if he makes them clear and known by some reasons? Let us hear, then, if we can, with all patience and gentleness, what follows.

“For in the beginning,” he says, “there were these two substances, divided from each other. And the empire of light was held by God the Father, everlasting in his holy stock, magnificent in power, true by his very nature, ever rejoicing in his own eternity, holding with himself wisdom and the vital senses, through which he also embraces the twelve members of his light, namely the overflowing riches of his own kingdom. And in each of his members are hidden thousands of countless and immeasurable treasures. The Father himself, pre-eminent in his praise, incomprehensible in greatness, has joined to himself blessed and glorious ages, which cannot be reckoned either in number or in length, with which the same holy and illustrious Father and Begetter lives, no one in his glorious kingdoms being either in need or in a lowly state. And his most splendid kingdoms are so founded upon the bright and blessed land that they can never be moved or shaken by anyone.” Whence is he going to prove these things to me, or whence did he himself come to know them? Do not frighten me with the name of the Paraclete. First, because I came not to believe unknown things but to know certain ones, having been made more cautious by you yourselves. For you know how vehemently you usually mock those who believe rashly, especially since this very man, who has now begun to narrate uncertain things, promised full and firm knowledge a little earlier.