Meanwhile certain writings were sent to me by some lay brothers who were nevertheless devoted to the study of the divine words. These so distinguished Christian faith from good works that they urged that, while one cannot attain to eternal life without that faith, one can attain to it without those works. Replying to them, I wrote a book whose title is Faith and Works. In it I argued not only how those who have been reborn by the grace of Christ ought to live, but also what kind of people are to be admitted to the bath of rebirth.

This book begins thus: Some are of the opinion.

1. Some are of the opinion that all are to be admitted indiscriminately to the bath of rebirth, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord, even if they have refused to change an evil and shameful life marked by the most obvious crimes and disgraceful deeds, and have even declared by an open profession that they will persevere in it. For example, if a man is attached to a prostitute, he is not first to be commanded to leave her and then to come to baptism; rather, even while remaining with her, and confident that he will remain with her, or even professing as much, he is to be admitted and baptized, and is not to be hindered from becoming a member of Christ, even if he persists in being a member of a prostitute. But afterward he is to be taught how great an evil this is, and, once baptized, he is to be instructed to change his ways for the better.

For they think it perverse and backward to teach first how a Christian ought to live and then to baptize him. Instead they hold that the sacrament of baptism ought to come first, so that the teaching of life and morals may then follow; and that if a person is willing to hold and keep that teaching, he will have done well, but if he is unwilling, then, so long as he retains the Christian faith, without which he would perish forever, he will be saved as through fire even if he remains in any wickedness and uncleanness whatever—as one who has built upon the foundation that is Christ, not gold, silver, and precious stones, but wood, hay, and straw; that is, not just and chaste morals, but wicked and shameless ones.

2. Now they seem to have been driven to this argument because they were disturbed that those are not admitted to baptism who have dismissed their wives and married others, or women who have dismissed their husbands and married others; for the Lord Christ testifies without any doubt that these are not marriages but adulteries. Since, then, they could not deny that it is adultery, which the Truth confirms without ambiguity to be adultery, and since they wished to assist toward receiving baptism those whom they saw so caught in a snare of this kind that, if they were not admitted to baptism, they would prefer to live or even die without any sacrament rather than be freed by breaking the bond of adultery, they were moved by a certain human compassion to take up their cause in such a way that they held that all the criminal and disgraceful people along with them—even those reproved by no prohibition, corrected by no instruction, changed by no penance—should be admitted to baptism. For they supposed that, unless this were done, such people would perish forever; but that if it were done, they would be saved through fire even while persevering in those evils.

3. Replying to them, I say first that no one should take those testimonies of the Scriptures which either indicate a present mingling of the good and the wicked in the Church or foretell a future one in such a way as to suppose—not taught by those writings but deceived by his own opinion—that the severity or the diligence of discipline is to be wholly relaxed and omitted.

For it does not follow that, because Moses the servant of God most patiently bore with that mingling among the first people, he therefore did not also avenge it upon many with the sword. And Phinehas the priest ran through with avenging steel the adulterers found together. This surely signified what is to be done in this present time through degradations and excommunications, when in the discipline of the Church the visible sword was to cease.

Nor does it follow that, because the blessed Apostle most tolerantly grieved among false brothers, and permitted even some who were driven by the diabolical goads of envy nevertheless to preach Christ, he therefore judged that the man who had his father's wife should be spared—the man whom he commanded, with the Church assembled, to be handed over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (1 Cor 5:5);

or that he himself did not for that reason hand over others to Satan, that they might learn not to blaspheme (1 Tim 1:20); or that he says in vain: I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with the immoral—not at all meaning the immoral of this world, or the greedy, or robbers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of this world. But now I wrote to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is immoral or an idolater, or greedy, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or rapacious—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging those who are outside? Is it not those who are inside whom you judge? God will judge those who are outside. Drive out the evil from among yourselves (1 Cor 5:9-13).

Here indeed some understand what is said, from among yourselves, in this way: that each one should drive the evil out of himself, that is, that he himself should be good. But in whichever way it is understood—whether that the wicked are reproved by the Church's severity through excommunications, or that each one, by reproving and correcting himself, drives the evil out of himself—still what was said above has no ambiguity, where he commands not to associate with those brothers who are named in any of the aforesaid vices, that is, who are known and notorious.

3. Now in what spirit and with what love this merciful severity is to be applied, he shows clearly not only in that passage where he says that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (1 Cor 5:5), but elsewhere too, saying: if anyone does not obey our word by this letter, note that man and do not associate with him, that he may be ashamed; and do not regard him as an enemy, but reprove him as a brother (2 Thess 3:14-15).

4. And the Lord himself is a singular example of patience, who bore with the devil even among the twelve apostles right up to his passion, and who said: let both grow until the harvest, lest perhaps, while you wish to gather the weeds, you uproot the wheat along with them (Matt 13:29-30); and who, in the likeness of the Church, foretold that those nets, right up to the shore—that is, up to the end of the age—would hold good and bad fish (See Matt 13:47-48);

and whatever else he spoke about the mingling of the good and the wicked, whether openly or through likenesses—he did not on that account judge that the Church's discipline was to be omitted; on the contrary, he admonished that it should be applied, when he said: take heed to yourselves; if your brother sins against you, go and reprove him between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take with you one or two others, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. But if he does not listen to them, tell it to the Church. And if he does not listen even to the Church, let him be to you as a heathen and a tax collector (Matt 18:15-17).

Then he added the most grave terror of this very severity, also in that passage, saying: whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed also in heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven (Matt 18:18). He also forbids giving what is holy to dogs (See Matt 7:6).

Nor is the Apostle contrary to the Lord because he says: those who sin, rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest may have fear (1 Tim 5:20), while the Lord says: reprove him between you and him (Matt 18:15). For both are to be done, as the diversity of the weakness admonishes in those whom we have taken up not to destroy but to correct and heal; and one is to be healed in one way, another in another. So too there is a reason for overlooking and tolerating the wicked in the Church, and there is again a reason for chastising and reproving them, for not admitting them or removing them from communion.

5. Now people go astray by not keeping measure: and when they have begun to incline readily toward one side, they do not look back to the other testimonies of divine authority by which they could be called back from that inclination and made to stand in the truth and moderation that is tempered from both. And this happens not only in the matter now in question, but also in many others. For some, looking at the testimonies of the divine Scriptures by which it is taught that one God is to be worshiped, supposed that the Father is the same as the Son and the Holy Spirit; others again, suffering as it were from the contrary disease, when they attended to those texts by which the Trinity is declared, and could not understand how there is one God, since the Father is not the Son, nor the Son the Father, nor the Holy Spirit either the Son or the Father, thought that diversities of substances too must be asserted. Some, looking in the Scriptures at the praise of holy virginity, condemned marriages; others again, pursuing those testimonies by which chaste marriages are commended, made virginity equal to marriage. Some, when they read: it is good, brothers, not to eat flesh nor to drink wine (See Rom 14:21), and some similar things, judged that the creation of God, and whatever foods they wished, were unclean; but others, reading: every creation of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected which is received with thanksgiving (1 Tim 4:4), collapsed into gluttony and drunkenness—unable to take away their vices unless equal or greater ones took their place in their stead.

6. So also in this case, which is in hand, some, looking at the precepts of severity by which we are admonished to reprove the unruly, not to give what is holy to dogs, to regard one who despises the Church as a heathen, to tear away from the framework of the body the member that gives offense, so disturb the peace of the Church that they try to separate the weeds before the time, and, blinded by this error, they themselves are rather separated from the unity of Christ. Such is our case against the schism of Donatus. And this is not with those who knew that Caecilian was assailed by charges that were not true but slanderous, and who do not abandon their pernicious opinion out of a deadly shame; but with those to whom we say: "Even if those on account of whom you are not in the Church had been wicked, you nevertheless ought to have remained in the Church by bearing with those whom you could in no way amend or set apart."

But others, on the contrary, are imperiled when, having perceived that the mingling of the good and the wicked in the Church has been demonstrated or foretold, and having learned the precepts of patience (which make us so firm that, even if there seem to be weeds in the Church, neither our faith nor our love is hindered, so that we should withdraw from the Church ourselves because we discern that there are weeds in the Church), they think that the Church's discipline is to be abandoned, attributing to the prelates a certain most perverse complacency, as if it pertained to them only to say what is to be avoided and what is to be done, but not to care what anyone actually does.

7. But we judge that it belongs to sound doctrine to govern our life and our opinion from both kinds of testimony, so that for the sake of the Church's peace we both tolerate the dogs in the Church, and, where the Church's peace is safe, we do not give what is holy to the dogs.

When, therefore, whether through the negligence of the prelates, or through some excusable necessity, or through hidden deceptions, we find in the Church wicked people whom we cannot correct or restrain by ecclesiastical discipline, then—lest there rise up in our heart that impious and pernicious presumption by which we suppose that we must separate ourselves from these so as not to be defiled by their sins, and so try to drag after us, like clean and holy disciples, those set apart from the framework of unity as from a fellowship of the wicked—let there come to mind those likenesses from the Scriptures and the divine oracles, or the most certain examples, by which it has been demonstrated and foretold that the wicked will be mingled with the good in the Church until the end of the age and the time of judgment, and that they will do no harm to the good, who in the unity and participation of the sacraments have not consented to their deeds.

But when those through whom the Church is governed have the power, with the Church's peace preserved, to exercise discipline against the wicked or the impious, then again, lest we sleep in sloth and laziness, we must be roused by the other goads of the precepts that pertain to the severity of correction, so that, directing our steps in the way of the Lord from both kinds of testimony, with him as our guide and helper, we neither grow sluggish under the name of patience nor rage under the pretext of diligence.

8. With this moderation, then, preserved according to sound doctrine, let us see what is at issue—namely, whether people are to be admitted to receive baptism in such a way that no diligence keeps watch there lest what is holy be given to dogs; to the point that not even the perpetrators of the most open adultery and the professors of their perseverance in it would seem to be barred from the sacrament of so great a holiness. They would without doubt not be admitted if, during those very days on which they are to receive that grace—their names having been given in—they are purified by abstinence, fastings, and exorcisms, they were to profess that they would lie with their own lawful and true wives, and that, in this matter, though lawful at another time, they would keep no continence during those few solemn days. How, then, is an adulterer admitted to those holy things while refusing correction, when a married man is not admitted while refusing observance?

9. "But let him first," they say, "be baptized; then let him be taught what pertains to a good life and morals." This happens when perhaps one's last day presses upon him, so that he may believe with the very fewest words—which nevertheless contain everything—and receive the sacrament, so that, if he departs from this life, he may go out freed from the guilt of all his past sins.

But if he is in good health when he seeks it, and there is time for learning, what other more suitable time can be found for him to hear how he ought to become and to live as one of the faithful than that time when, with a more attentive mind and held in suspense by religion itself, he seeks the sacrament of the most healthful faith? Or do we so dissemble from our own senses that we do not even recall how attentive and anxious we were about what those who catechized us were commanding us, when we sought the sacraments of that font, and were on that account also called candidates for baptism; or that we do not observe others, who year by year hasten to the bath of rebirth, what kind of people they are on those very days when they are catechized, exorcized, and examined, with how great vigilance they come together, with what zeal they burn, with what care they wait in suspense?

If, then, there is not the time for learning what life befits so great a sacrament as they desire to receive, when will it be? Or will it be when they have received it, while remaining in such great crimes even after baptism—not new men, but old defendants? So that, by a remarkable perversity, it would first be said to them, "Put on the new man"; and when they have put it on, it would afterward be said, "Put off the old"—whereas the Apostle, keeping the sound order, says: put off the old and put on the new (See Eph 4:22-24); and the Lord himself cries out: no one sews a new patch on an old garment, no one puts new wine into old wineskins (See Matt 9:16-17).

And what else does the whole time accomplish in which they hold the place and name of catechumens, except that they may hear what the faith and what kind of life a Christian ought to have; so that, when they have tested themselves, they may then eat from the table of the Lord and drink from the cup? For whoever eats and drinks unworthily, eats and drinks judgment to himself (1 Cor 11:29). And what is done throughout the whole time during which it has been healthfully established in the Church that the rank of catechumens should receive those coming to the name of Christ—this is done much more diligently and urgently in those days on which they are called candidates, when they have already given in their names to receive baptism.

10. "What if," they say, "a virgin has unknowingly married another woman's husband?" If she always remains ignorant of this, she will never on this account be an adulteress; but if she comes to know it, she will already begin to be one from the moment she knowingly lies with another woman's husband. Just as in the law of estates, a person is most rightly called a possessor in good faith for as long as he is unaware that he possesses what belongs to another; but when he has come to know it and has not withdrawn from another's possession, then he is held to be in bad faith, then he is justly called unjust.

Far be it from us, then, to grieve—with a sense plainly not human, but plainly empty—when disgraceful deeds are corrected, as though marriages were being dissolved; above all in the city of our God, on his holy mountain (Ps 48:1 (47:2)), that is, in the Church, where not only the bond of marriage but also its sacrament is so commended that a man is not permitted to hand over his own wife to another—which in the Roman commonwealth of that time Cato is reported to have done, not only with no blame at all, but even praiseworthily.

Nor is there need to argue about this at greater length now, since even those to whom I am replying do not dare to affirm that this is no sin, nor do they deny that it is adultery, lest they be openly convicted of opposing the Lord himself and the holy Gospel. But since it pleases them that such people are first to be admitted to receive the sacrament of baptism and to the Lord's table, even if they have refused correction with a most explicit voice—indeed, that they ought not to be admonished about this matter at all, but taught afterward, so that if they accept the observance of the precept and correct their fault, they may be reckoned among the wheat, but if they despise it, they may be tolerated among the weeds—they sufficiently show that they are not defending these crimes, or acting as though they were trivial or nothing. For what Christian of good hope would consider adultery to be no crime, or a small one?

11. Yet they think they can bring forward from the Holy Scriptures the order by which these things are to be either corrected or borne with in others, when they say that the apostles acted thus; and they bring forward certain testimonies from their letters, where the apostles are found to have first imparted the teaching of faith and then handed on the precepts of morals. And from this they want it understood that only the rule of faith is to be imparted to those who are to be baptized, but that to those already baptized the precepts of changing one's life for the better are then to be handed on—as if they were reading some letters of the apostles addressed to those who are to be baptized, where they argued about faith alone, and others addressed to the baptized, which contain precepts about avoiding evils and establishing good ones.

Since, then, it is established that they sent their letters to Christians already baptized, why are these letters woven together with both kinds of discourse, namely both that which pertains to faith and that which pertains to the good life? Or does it perhaps now please them that we should give neither of the two to those who are to be baptized, and render both to the baptized? But if this is absurd to say, then let them confess that the apostles set in their letters a teaching complete from both, but that for the most part they imparted faith first and then added what pertains to the good life because in a person himself, too, unless faith goes before, a good life cannot follow.

For whatever a person may have done as though rightly, unless it is referred to the godliness that is toward God, it ought not to be called right. And if some foolish and exceedingly inexperienced people were to think that the letters of the apostles were given to catechumens, surely they themselves would also confess that the precepts of morals which accord with the faith are to be made known to those not yet baptized, together with the rules of faith—unless perhaps these people drive us by their argument to this necessity, that they would want the first parts of the apostolic letters, where they speak of faith, to be read to catechumens, but the later parts to the faithful, where it is now prescribed how Christians ought to live.

But if this is most foolish to say, then there is no proof of this opinion from the letters of the apostles—no reason to think that those to be baptized should be admonished about faith alone and the baptized about morals—merely because the apostles commended faith in the first parts of their letters and afterward consequently exhorted the faithful to live well. For although the one comes first and the other later, still very often, in a single weaving of discourse, both must be proclaimed to catechumens, both to the faithful, both to those to be baptized, both to the baptized, whether that they may be instructed, or may not forget, or may make profession, or may be confirmed, by the most sound and most diligent teaching. So then, to the letters of Peter and the letters of John, from which they recall certain testimonies, let them add those of Paul too and of the other apostles; and what they noticed—that faith is spoken of first and morals afterward—is to be received in that sense which, unless I am mistaken, I have explained most plainly.

12. "But in the Acts," they say, Peter addressed in this way those three thousand who in one day were baptized when they had heard the word, so that he preached to them only the faith by which they were to believe in Christ. When they had said, what shall we do? (Acts 2:37), he answered them: repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38). Why, then, do they not notice what was said: repent? For there is the stripping off of the old life, that those who are baptized may put on the new. But for whom is the repentance fruitful that is done concerning dead works, if he perseveres in adultery and other crimes in which the love of this world is entangled?

13. "But it was of unbelief only," they say, "by which they had not believed in Christ, that he willed them to repent." A remarkable presumption (I do not wish to say anything more severe), when, on hearing what was said, repent, it is claimed to be done concerning unbelief only, whereas the changing of one's life from the old to the new was being handed on by the teaching of the Gospel—where surely there is also that which the Apostle sets down in this opinion: let the one who stole steal no more (Eph 4:28); and the rest, by which he pursues what it is to put off the old man and to put on the new.

But in these very words of Peter they have wherewith they could have been admonished, if they had been willing to attend diligently. For when he had said, repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For to us this promise belongs, and to our children, and to all who are far off, whomever the Lord our God will call (Acts 2:38-39), the one who wrote the book immediately added, and said: And with many other words he testified, saying, 'Save yourselves from this crooked age.' But they, most eagerly receiving it, took in his words, and believed, and were baptized; and on that day three thousand souls were added (Acts 2:40-41). Who here does not understand that, by the many other words which are passed over by the writer on account of their length, Peter was acting to make them save themselves from this crooked age, since the very sentence has been briefly set down which Peter was urging upon them to persuade with many words? For the sum itself is set down when it is said: save yourselves from this crooked age. But with many words Peter testified that this should be done. In these words there was the condemnation of dead works, which the lovers of this age do wickedly, and the commendation of the good life, which those should hold and pursue who save themselves from this crooked age.

And so now, if it please them, let them try to affirm that he saves himself from this crooked age who only believes in Christ, even if he perseveres in whatever disgraceful deeds he wishes, right up to the profession of adultery. But if it is wicked to say this, then let those who are to be baptized hear not only what they ought to believe, but also how they may save themselves from this crooked age. For there it is necessary that they hear how, as believers, they ought to live.

14. That eunuch, they say, whom Philip baptized, said nothing more than: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (Acts 8:37); and on this profession he was immediately baptized. Does it then please them that people should answer this alone and be immediately baptized? Nothing about the Holy Spirit, nothing about the holy Church, nothing about the remission of sins, nothing about the resurrection of the dead, finally, nothing about the Lord Jesus Christ himself except that he is the Son of God? Is nothing to be said by the one catechizing, and professed by the one believing, about his incarnation from the Virgin, about his passion, his death on the cross, his burial, his resurrection on the third day, his ascension, and his sitting at the right hand of the Father? For if, when the eunuch had answered, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, this seemed to suffice for him to depart immediately baptized, why do we not follow this? Why do we not imitate it, and remove the other things that we find it necessary to express by questioning—even when, for baptizing, the shortness of time presses—so that the one to be baptized may answer to all of them, even if he has had no leisure to commit them to memory?

But if Scripture was silent and left to be understood the other things that Philip did with that eunuch to be baptized, and in saying Philip baptized him (Acts 8:38) wished it understood that all things were fulfilled which, though passed over in the Scriptures for the sake of brevity, we nevertheless know by the order of tradition are to be fulfilled, then in the same way also, in that which is written—that Philip preached the Lord Jesus to the eunuch—it is in no way to be doubted that those things too were said in the catechism which pertain to the life and morals of one who believes in the Lord Jesus.

For this is to preach Christ: not only to say what is to be believed about Christ, but also what is to be observed by the one who approaches the framework of the body of Christ; indeed, to say all the things that are to be believed about Christ—not only whose Son he is, whence he was begotten according to his divinity, whence according to the flesh, what he suffered and why, what is the power of his resurrection, what gift of the Spirit he promised and gave to the faithful—but also what kind of members he, who is their head, seeks, establishes, loves, frees, and leads through to eternal life and honor. When these things are said, sometimes more briefly and concisely, sometimes more broadly and fully, Christ is preached; and yet not only what pertains to the faith, but also what pertains to the morals of the faithful, is not passed over.

15. This can be understood also in that which they recall the Apostle Paul to have said: I judged that I knew nothing among you except Christ Jesus, and him crucified (1 Cor 2:2). This they think was said as though nothing else had been imparted to them, so that they first believed and then, once baptized, learned whatever pertains to life and morals. This, they say, was more than enough for the Apostle, who told them that, even if they had many tutors in Christ, yet they did not have many fathers, because he himself had begotten them in Christ Jesus through the Gospel (See 1 Cor 4:15).

If, then, the one who begot them through the Gospel—although he gives thanks that he baptized none of them except Crispus and Gaius and the household of Stephanas (See 1 Cor 1:14-16)—taught them nothing more than Christ crucified, what if someone should say that they did not even hear that Christ rose again when they were begotten through the Gospel? Whence, then, is it that he says to them: for I handed on to you among the first things that Christ died according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he rose on the third day according to the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3-4), if he had taught nothing except him crucified?

But if they do not understand it so, but contend that this too pertains to Christ crucified, let them know that people learn many things in Christ crucified, and especially that our old man was crucified together with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, and that we should no longer be slaves to sin (Rom 6:6)—whence too he says of himself: but far be it from me to glory, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world (Gal 6:14).

Accordingly, let them attend and see how Christ crucified is taught and learned, and let them recognize that it pertains to his cross that we too are crucified to the world in his body—where every restraint of evil desires is understood; and through this it cannot be that to those who are formed by the cross of Christ professed adulteries should be allowed. For the apostle Peter too admonishes, concerning the sacrament of the cross itself, that is, of the passion of Christ, that those who are consecrated by it should cease to sin, speaking thus: since Christ therefore suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves also with the same intention; for whoever has died in the flesh has ceased from sin, so that he may now live the rest of his time in the flesh no longer by the desires of men, but by the will of the Lord God (1 Pet 4:1-2); and the rest, by which he consequently shows that he belongs to Christ crucified—that is, to Christ who suffered through the flesh—who, having crucified his carnal desires in Christ's body, lives well through the Gospel.

16. What of the fact that they think even those two precepts, on which the Lord says the whole Law and the Prophets depend, support this opinion of theirs? And they recall them in such a way that, since the first precept is stated, you shall love the Lord your God with your whole heart, and with your whole soul, and with your whole mind, and the second is like it, you shall love your neighbor as yourself (Matt 22:37-39), they believe the first pertains to those to be baptized, where the love of God is enjoined, but the second to the baptized, where the morals of human conduct seem to lie. Thus they forget what is written: if you do not love your brother whom you see, how will you be able to love God whom you do not see? (1 John 4:20), and that other passage in the same letter of John: if anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him (1 John 2:15). But to what do all the disgraceful deeds of evil morals pertain, if not to the love of this world? And through this that first precept, which they think pertains to those to be baptized, can in no way be observed without good morals. I do not wish to dwell on this at greater length; for when these two precepts are diligently considered, they are found to be so connected with each other that neither can the love of God be in a person if he does not love his neighbor, nor the love of neighbor if he does not love God. But for the matter now at hand, what we have said about these two precepts suffices.

17. But, they say, the people of Israel were first led through the Red Sea, by which baptism is signified, and afterward received the Law, where they would learn how they should live. Why, then, do we hand over even the Creed to those to be baptized and require it to be given back? For nothing of the sort was done with regard to those whom God freed from the Egyptians through the Red Sea. But if they rightly understand that this is signified by the preceding mysteries concerning the blood of the lamb smeared on the doorposts, and concerning the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, why do they not consequently understand this too: that the separation itself from the Egyptians signifies the departure from sins which those to be baptized profess?

For to this pertains what was said by Peter: repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 2:38)—as though he said, "Withdraw from Egypt, and cross through the Red Sea." Whence too, in the letter that is entitled to the Hebrews, when the beginnings of those who are baptized were being recalled, repentance from dead works was placed there. For it says thus: therefore, leaving behind the elementary word of Christ, let us look toward perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, of the teaching of baptisms, of the laying on of hands, of the resurrection also of the dead, and of eternal judgment (Heb 6:1-2).

Scripture, then, testifies clearly enough that all these things pertain to the beginnings of neophytes. But what is repentance from dead works, if not from those things which must be mortified that we may live? And if adulteries and fornications are not such things, what then is to be named among dead works? But the profession of withdrawal from such things does not suffice unless also, by the bath of rebirth, all past sins, which as it were pursue them, are blotted out—just as it did not suffice for the Israelites to withdraw from Egypt unless the multitude of enemies that pursued them perished in the waves of that same sea, which lay open for God's people to cross and be freed.

How, then, will the one who professes that he is unwilling to change from adultery be led through the Red Sea, when he still refuses to withdraw from Egypt? Furthermore, they do not attend to the fact that in that Law which was given to that people after the crossing of the Red Sea, the first precept is: you shall have no other gods besides me. You shall not make for yourself idols, nor any likeness of whatever is in heaven above, and whatever is on the earth below, and whatever is in the water and under the earth; you shall not adore them, nor serve them (Exod 20:3-5); and the rest pertaining to this precept.

So then let these people affirm, if they wish, against their own very assertion, that even concerning the worship of one God and the avoidance of idolatry it is to be preached not to those still to be baptized, but to the already baptized; and let them no longer say that to those who are to receive baptism only faith, which is toward God, is to be imparted, and that after the reception of that sacrament they are to be instructed about the morals of life, as about a second precept, concerning what pertains to the love of neighbor. For the Law contains both, which the people received after the Red Sea as though after baptism; nor was the distribution of precepts made in such a way that before the crossing of that sea the people was taught about avoiding idolatry, and after they had crossed they heard that father and mother are to be honored, that one must not commit adultery, must not kill, and the rest of good and innocent human conduct.

18. If, then, someone comes to ask for the holy bath in such a way that he professes he will not withdraw from the sacrifices of idols—except perhaps later, whenever it pleases him—yet demands baptism this very instant, and clamors to be made a temple of the living God, while not only being a worshiper of idols but even persevering in some such wicked priesthood, I ask these people whether they would judge that such a man should even be made a catechumen: which without doubt they will cry out ought not to be done. For nothing else is to be supposed about their heart.

Let them, then, give a reason, according to the testimonies of the Scriptures which they think are to be understood thus, how they would dare to contradict this man, and would maintain that he ought not to be admitted who protests and says: "I have learned and venerate Christ crucified, I believe that Christ Jesus is the Son of God; do not put me off any longer, require nothing further of me now. Those whom the Apostle was begetting through the Gospel he wished to know nothing then beyond Christ crucified; after the voice of the eunuch, by which he answered that he believed Jesus Christ to be the Son of God, Philip immediately did not delay to baptize him. Why do you prohibit me from the worship of idols, and not admit me to the sacrament of Christ, before I have withdrawn from it? That I learned from boyhood, I am pressed there by a most grievous habit; I will do it when I can, when it is convenient; and even if I do not do it, still I will not end this life without the sacrament of Christ, lest God require my soul at your hands."

What do they think is to be answered to this man? Or does it please them that he be admitted? Far be it: in no way would I believe that they go so far. What then will they answer to one who says these things, and adds that nothing ought to have been said to him about abandoning idolatry at least before baptism, just as that first people heard nothing about it before the Red Sea, since the Law has this, which, once freed from Egypt, they received? Surely they are going to say to the man: "You are to be a temple of God when you have received baptism"; but the Apostle says: what agreement has the temple of God with idols? (2 Cor 6:16)

Why, then, do they not see that it must likewise be said: "You are to be a member of Christ when you have received baptism; the members of Christ cannot be members of a prostitute"? For the Apostle says this too (See 1 Cor 6:15); and he who in another place says: do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor those who serve idols, and the rest which he there enumerates, will possess the kingdom of God (1 Cor 6:9-10).

Why, then, do we not admit to baptism those who serve idols, yet think that fornicators are to be admitted, when he says to these and to the other wicked: and such some of you were, but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God (1 Cor 6:11)?

What reason, then, is there that, when the power lies open to prohibit both, I should permit a fornicator coming to baptism to remain so, and not permit one who serves idols, when I hear it said to both these and those: and such some of you were, but you were washed? But these people are moved by this, that they think the salvation of those is secure—though through fire—who have believed in Christ and received his sacrament, that is, have been baptized, even if they are so negligent about correcting their morals that they live wickedly. Whence presently, if God helps, I will see what is to be held according to the Scriptures.

19. Now I am still engaged in this question, in which it seems to them that the baptized should be admonished about the morals pertaining to the Christian life, but to those to be baptized only faith should be imparted. But if it were so, then—besides the many things we have said—John the Baptist would not have said to those coming to his baptism: brood of vipers, who showed you how to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruit worthy of repentance (Matt 3:7-8); and the rest, by which he surely admonishes not about faith but about good works. Whence too, to the soldiers saying, what shall we do?, he did not say, "For now believe and be baptized, afterward you will hear what you ought to do"; but he said it before, he forewarned them before, so that, as a forerunner, he might cleanse the way in their hearts for the Lord who was to come: do violence to no one, accuse no one falsely, let your wages be enough for you (Luke 3:14). Likewise to the tax collectors asking what they ought to do, he said: exact nothing more than what has been appointed for you (Luke 3:13).

By recalling these things briefly, the Evangelist (for he did not have to insert whole catechisms) sufficiently signified that it pertains to the one by whom a person to be baptized is catechized to teach and admonish about morals. But if they had answered John, "We will not at all bring forth fruits worthy of repentance; we are going to accuse falsely, we are going to do violence, we are going to exact what is not owed to us," and he nevertheless baptized them after this profession—even so it could not be said, which is the point now in question, that it is not the time, when someone is to be baptized, for a discourse first to be made to him about how he ought to lead a good life.

20. What of the Lord himself—to omit other things—when that rich man asked him what good he should do to attain eternal life? Let them recall what he answered: if you wish to come to life, he said, keep the commandments (Matt 19:17). But the man said, which? Then the Lord recalled the precepts of the Law: you shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery (Matt 19:18), and the rest. And when the man had answered that he had done these from his youth, he added also the precept of perfection: that, having sold all his goods and given them out in alms to the poor, he should have treasure in heaven, and should follow the same Lord (See Matt 19:20-21). Let them see, then, that it was not said to him that he should believe and be baptized, by which sole help these people think a person comes to life; but that precepts of morals were given to the man, which surely cannot be guarded and observed without faith. And yet, because here the Lord seems to have been silent about imparting faith, we do not prescribe and contend that only precepts of morals are to be told to people who desire to come to life.

For both are mutually connected, as I said before; because neither can the love of God be in a person who does not love his neighbor, nor the love of neighbor in one who does not love God. Therefore Scripture is sometimes found to recall the one without the other—whether this or that—as a complete teaching, so that in this way too it may be understood that the one cannot exist without the other: because both he who believes God ought to do what God has commanded, and he who does it for the reason that God has commanded must necessarily believe God.

21. Therefore let us now see that which must be shaken out of religious hearts, lest by an evil complacency they lose their salvation, if they suppose that faith suffices to obtain it, but neglect to live well and to keep to the way of God by good works. For even in the times of the apostles, when certain rather obscure statements of the Apostle Paul were not understood, some thought that he said this: let us do evil, that good may come (Rom 3:8); because he had said: the Law entered in, that the offense might abound; but where the offense abounded, grace superabounded (Rom 5:20).

This is true for the reason that people who most proudly presumed upon their own strength when they received the Law, and did not by right faith obtain divine help for conquering their evil desires, were burdened with more and graver offenses, the Law itself having been transgressed; and so, compelled by their great guilt, they fled to faith, by which they might merit the mercy of pardon and help from the Lord who made heaven and earth; so that, love having been poured out through the Holy Spirit in their hearts, they might do with love the things that were commanded against the desires of this world, according to what had been foretold in the Psalm: their infirmities were multiplied; afterward they made haste (Ps 16:4 (15:4)).

When, therefore, the Apostle says that he judges a person to be justified by faith without the works of the Law, he does not mean this, that once faith has been received and professed the works of justice are to be despised, but that each one may know that he can be justified by faith, even if the works of the Law have not gone before. For they follow the one justified; they do not go before one who is to be justified.

Hence in the present work there is no need to argue more broadly, especially because I have lately published a lengthy book on this question, which is entitled The Spirit and the Letter. Since, then, this opinion had arisen at that time, the other apostolic letters—of Peter, John, James, and Jude—direct their intention chiefly against it, in order vehemently to establish that faith without works is of no profit; just as Paul himself defined not any sort of faith whatever, by which one believes in God, but that healthful and plainly evangelical faith whose works proceed from love: and faith, he says, which works through love (Gal 5:6). Hence he asserts that the faith which seems to some to suffice for salvation is so wholly without profit that he says: if I have all faith, so as to move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing (1 Cor 13:2). But where faithful love works, without doubt one lives well. For love is the fullness of the law (Rom 13:10).

22. Hence Peter, in his second letter, evidently—when he was exhorting to holiness of life and morals, and foretelling that this world would pass away, but that new heavens and a new earth were to be awaited, which would be given to the just to inhabit, so that from this they might consider how they ought to live in order to become worthy of that dwelling—knowing that some wicked people had taken occasion from certain rather obscure statements of the Apostle Paul, so that, as though secure of the salvation which is in faith, they cared not to live well, recalled that there are certain things difficult to understand in his letters, which people perverted, as they did the other Scriptures also, to their own destruction; and yet that apostle too, concerning eternal salvation, which is given to none but those who live well, held the same as the other apostles.

So then Peter says: since all these things, then, are perishing, what kind of people ought you to be in holy ways of life and in godliness, awaiting and hastening toward the presence of the day of the Lord, through which the burning heavens will be dissolved and the elements will be melted by the heat of fire? But according to his promises we await new heavens and a new earth, in which justice dwells. Wherefore, beloved, awaiting these things, take care to be found undefiled and unstained before him in peace, and consider the patience of our Lord to be salvation. As also our most beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given to him, as he does in all his letters, speaking in them of these things: among which are certain things difficult to understand, which the unlearned and unstable pervert, as they do the other Scriptures also, to their own destruction. You therefore, most loving, knowing this beforehand, beware lest, led astray by the error of the wicked, you fall away from your firmness; but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory, both now and to the day of eternity (2 Pet 3:11-18).

23. James, moreover, is so vehemently hostile to those who hold that faith without works avails for salvation that he even compares them to demons, saying: you believe that God is one; you do well; the demons also believe, and tremble (Jas 2:19). What could be said more briefly, more truly, more forcefully, since we read in the Gospel too that the demons said this, when they confessed Christ to be the Son of God and were rebuked by him (See Matt 8:29)—the very thing that was praised in Peter's confession? What will it profit, says James, my brothers, if someone says he has faith, but has not works? Can faith save him? (Jas 2:14) He also says: that faith without works is dead (Jas 2:20). How long, then, are they deceived who promise themselves everlasting life from a dead faith?

24. Wherefore we must attend diligently to how that statement of the Apostle Paul is to be received—plainly difficult to understand—where he says: for no one can lay another foundation than that which has been laid, which is Christ Jesus. But if anyone builds upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, the work of each will be made manifest. For the day will declare it, because it will be revealed in fire, and the fire will test of what kind each one's work is. If anyone's work that he has built upon it remains, he will receive a reward. But if anyone's work burns, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire (1 Cor 3:11-15). Some think this is to be understood in such a way that those seem to build upon this foundation gold, silver, and precious stones who add good works to the faith which is in Christ; but those wood, hay, and straw who, while they have the same faith, do evil. Hence they suppose that by certain punishments of fire these can be purified so as to receive salvation by the merit of the foundation.

25. If this is so, we confess that these people, with a praiseworthy love, are striving that all be admitted indiscriminately to baptism—not only adulterers and adulteresses putting forward false marriages against the Lord's judgment, but even public prostitutes persevering in their most shameful profession, whom certainly not even the most negligent Church has been accustomed to admit unless first freed from that prostitution. But on this reasoning I do not see at all why they should not be admitted in every manner. For who would not prefer that they, the foundation having been laid—though they heap up wood, hay, and straw—be purified by a somewhat more prolonged fire, rather than perish forever?

But then those texts will be false which have no obscurity or ambiguity: if I have all faith, so as to move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing (1 Cor 13:2); and: what will it profit, my brothers, if someone says he has faith, but has not works? Can faith save him? (Jas 2:14) That too will be false: do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor those who serve idols, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor men who lie with men, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor the rapacious will possess the kingdom of God (1 Cor 6:9-10). And that too: the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornications, uncleannesses, shamelessness, debauchery, the service of idols, sorceries, enmities, contentions, jealousies, animosities, dissensions, heresies, envies, drunkennesses, carousings, and things like these, which I foretell to you, as I have foretold, that those who do such things will not possess the kingdom of God (Gal 5:19-21). These will be false. For if they only believe and are baptized, although they persevere in such evils, they will be saved through fire; and therefore those baptized in Christ, even those who do such things, will possess the kingdom of God.

And it is said in vain: and such some of you were, but you were washed (1 Cor 6:11), when even the washed are these things.

That too which was said by Peter will seem to have been said emptily: so baptism likewise in a similar form saves you—not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the appeal of a good conscience (1 Pet 3:21); if indeed baptism saves even those who have the worst consciences, full of all disgraceful deeds and crimes, and not changed by repentance for those evils: for on account of the foundation which is laid in that same baptism, they will be saved, though through fire.

I also do not see why the Lord said: if you wish to come to life, keep the commandments (Matt 19:17), and recalled those things which pertain to good morals, if life can be reached, even without these kept, by faith alone, which without works is dead (Jas 2:20).

Then how will that be true which he will say to those whom he is to place on his left: go into the eternal fire, which has been prepared for the devil and his angels (Matt 25:41)? He does not rebuke them because they did not believe in him, but because they did not do good works. For surely, lest anyone should promise himself eternal life from a faith which is dead without works, he therefore said that he would separate all the nations, which, mingled together, had used the same pastures, so that it might appear that those would say to him, Lord, when did we see you suffering this and that, and did not minister to you? (Matt 25:44)—those who had believed in him but had not cared to do good works, as though from a dead faith itself one might come to eternal life.

Or will those perhaps go into the eternal fire who did not do works of mercy, while those will not go who plundered the goods of others, or who, by corrupting in themselves the temple of God, were without mercy toward themselves—as though works of mercy profited anything without love, when the Apostle says: if I distribute all my goods to the poor, but have not love, it profits me nothing (1 Cor 13:3); or as though anyone could love his neighbor as himself who does not love himself? For whoever loves iniquity hates his own soul (Ps 11:5 (10:6)).

Nor can that be said here by which some deceive themselves, saying that the fire was called eternal, not the punishment itself eternal: for they think that those will pass through the fire—which will be eternal—to whom they promise salvation through fire on account of a dead faith; namely, that the fire itself is eternal, but that their burning, that is, the working of the fire, is not eternal upon them. But the Lord, foreseeing this too, as Lord, so concluded his statement, saying: so these will go into eternal burning, but the just into eternal life (Matt 25:46). The burning, then, will be eternal, like the fire; and the Truth said that those would go into it whose good works, not whose faith, he declared to have been lacking.

26. If, then, all these things, and the countless others that can be found stated without ambiguity throughout all the Scriptures, are to be false, then that understanding about the wood, hay, and straw could be true—that those will be saved through fire who, holding faith in Christ alone, neglected good works. But if these texts are both true and clear, then without doubt another understanding must be sought in that statement of the Apostle, and it must be reckoned among those things which Peter says are in his writings certain matters difficult to understand, which people ought not to pervert to their own destruction, so as, against the most evident testimonies of the Scriptures, to make secure about receiving salvation the most wicked, who cling most stubbornly to their wickedness, and are not changed by amendment or repentance.

27. Here perhaps it will be asked of me what I myself hold concerning that very statement of the Apostle Paul, and in what way I think it is to be understood. I confess that on this point I would rather hear those more intelligent and more learned, who would so expound it that all those things may remain true and unshaken which I recalled above, and whatever others I did not recall by which Scripture most plainly testifies that no faith profits except that which the Apostle defined, that is, which works through love (Gal 5:6); and that without works it cannot save, neither apart from fire nor through fire: because if it saves through fire, then it surely saves. But it has been said absolutely and plainly: what does it profit, if someone says he has faith, but has not works? Can faith save him? (Jas 2:14) Nevertheless I too will say, as briefly as I can, what I hold concerning that statement of the Apostle Paul which is difficult to understand—provided that, as pertains to my profession, this be held above all, that I said I would rather hear better people on this.

Christ is the foundation in the structure of the wise architect; this needs no exposition, for it has been said plainly: for no one can lay another foundation than that which has been laid, which is Christ Jesus (1 Cor 3:11). But if Christ, then without doubt faith in Christ: for through faith Christ dwells in our hearts, as the same Apostle says (See Eph 3:17). Further, if faith in Christ, then surely that which the Apostle defined: which works through love (Gal 5:6). For that faith of the demons—since they too believe and tremble, and confess Jesus to be the Son of God (See Matt 8:29)—cannot be received in the foundation. Why, except that it is not the faith which works through love, but that which is expressed through fear? Faith in Christ, then—the faith of Christian grace, that is, the faith which works through love, placed in the foundation—allows no one to perish. But as to what it is to build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, and wood, hay, straw, if I should try to discuss it more subtly, I fear lest the exposition itself be more difficult to understand; nevertheless I will strive, as the Lord helps, to set forth what I hold both briefly and, as far as I can, clearly.

Behold, that man who asked the good Teacher what good he should do that he might have eternal life, and heard that, if he wished to come to life, he must keep the commandments; and when he asked which commandments, it was said to him: you shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not bear false witness, honor your father and your mother; and, you shall love your neighbor as yourself (Matt 19:18-19). Doing these things in faith in Christ, he would without doubt hold the faith which works through love. For he would not love his neighbor as himself unless he had received the love of God, without which he would not love himself. Further, if he also did what the Lord added, saying: if you wish to be perfect, go, sell all that you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me (Matt 19:21), he would build upon that foundation gold, silver, precious stones: for he would think of nothing but the things that are God's, how he might please God (See 1 Cor 7:32); and these thoughts are, as I judge, the gold, silver, and precious stones.

Further, if he were held by a certain carnal affection toward his riches—although he made many alms from them, and contrived nothing of fraud or plunder to increase them, nor, through fear of diminishing or losing them, slipped into any crime or disgraceful deed (otherwise he would in that way withdraw himself from the stability of that foundation), but, on account of the carnal affection, as I said, which he had toward them, by which he could not be without such goods without grief—he would build upon that foundation wood, hay, straw: especially if he also had a wife in such a way that, on her account too, he thought of the things that are of the world, how he might please his wife (See 1 Cor 7:33).

These things, therefore, since loved with carnal affection they are not lost without grief, on this account those who have them in such a way that they have in the foundation the faith which works through love, and do not by any reasoning or desire prefer these things to it, suffering loss in losing them, come to salvation through a certain fire of grief. And from this grief and loss each one is the more secure the less he has loved them, or the more he has had them as though not having them. But whoever, for the sake of holding or acquiring those things, has committed murder, adultery, fornication, idolatry, and any such things, will not be saved through fire on account of the foundation, but, the foundation having been lost, will be tormented by eternal fire.

28. Wherefore that too which they say, as though desiring to prove how much faith alone avails, where the Apostle says: but if the unbeliever departs, let him depart; for the brother or sister is not subject to servitude in such cases (1 Cor 7:15)—that is, that on account of faith in Christ even one's lawful wife, joined in lawful partnership, may be left without any fault, if she has been unwilling to remain with a Christian husband for the very reason that he is a Christian—they do not consider that she is in that way most rightly dismissed if she says to her husband: "I will not be your wife unless you heap up riches for me even by robbery, or unless, even as a Christian, you carry on the accustomed pandering by which you used to manage our household"; or if she had known of some other criminal or disgraceful thing in her husband, in which she took delight, either satisfying her lust, or having an easy livelihood, or even going about more finely adorned.

For then the man to whom his wife says this—if he truly repented of dead works when he came to baptism, and has in the foundation the faith which works through love—will without doubt be held more by love of divine grace than of the wife's flesh, and will strongly cut off the member that gives him offense. But whatever grief of heart he will bear in this separation on account of the carnal affection for his spouse, this is the loss he will suffer, this is the fire through which, with the hay burning, he himself will be saved. But if he already had his wife as though not having her, not on account of concupiscence, but on account of mercy, lest perhaps he might save her, rendering rather than exacting the conjugal debt, then surely he will not grieve carnally when such a marriage is separated from him: for he thought of nothing in her but the things that are God's, how he might please God. And through this, insofar as he was building gold, silver, and precious stones with those thoughts, so far he would suffer no loss, so far his structure, which was not of hay, would be burned by no fire.

29. Whether, then, people suffer these things in this life only, or whether after this life too certain such judgments follow, this understanding of this statement does not, so far as I judge, conflict with the account of the truth. Nevertheless, even if there is another, which does not occur to me, rather to be chosen, then so long as we hold this one, we are not compelled to say to the unjust, the insubordinate, the wicked, the defiled, the patricides, the matricides, the murderers, the fornicators, those who lie with men, the kidnappers, the liars, the perjurers, and anything else that is contrary to sound doctrine, which is according to the Gospel of the glory of the blessed God (1 Tim 1:9-11): "If you only believe in Christ and receive the sacrament of his baptism, even if you do not change this most wicked life, you will be saved."

30. Hence that Canaanite woman does not lay down a rule for us, because the Lord gave her what she asked, though he had said before: it is not good to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs (Matt 15:26); for he, the searcher of the heart, saw her changed when he praised her. And therefore he did not say, "O dog, great is your faith!" but: O woman, great is your faith! (Matt 15:28) He changed the word because he saw her affection changed, and recognized that that rebuke had come to fruit.

But I would be astonished if he praised in her a faith without works—that is, a faith not such as could now work through love, a dead faith, and, what James did not at all hesitate to say, the faith not of Christians but of demons. Finally, if they are unwilling to understand that this Canaanite woman changed her ruined morals when Christ refuted her by despising and rebuking her, then let them heal the children of whomever they find merely to believe, but to lead a most defiled life, not even concealing it but even freely professing it, and unwilling to change it—let them heal their children, if they can, as the daughter of the Canaanite woman was healed; yet let them not make them members of Christ, when they themselves do not cease to be members of a prostitute. That indeed they understand not absurdly, that he sins against the Holy Spirit and is without pardon, guilty of an eternal sin, who has been unwilling, right up to the end of his life, to believe in Christ; but only if they rightly understood what it is to believe in Christ. For this is not to have the faith of demons, which is rightly held to be dead, but the faith which works through love.

31. Since these things are so, when we do not admit such people to baptism, we are not trying to pluck up the weeds before the time, but rather we refuse, like the devil, to sow weeds on top of it; nor do we prohibit those willing to come to Christ, but by their very profession we convict them of being unwilling to come to Christ; nor do we forbid believing in Christ, but we demonstrate that they are unwilling to believe in Christ—those who either say that what he calls adultery is not adultery, or believe that adulterers can be his members, whom through the Apostle he says do not possess the kingdom of God, and are contrary to sound doctrine, which is according to the Gospel of the glory of the blessed God (1 Tim 1:10-11).

Hence these people are not to be reckoned among those who came to the marriage banquet, but among those who were unwilling to come. For since they themselves dare most plainly to contradict the teaching of Christ and to be contrary to the holy Gospel, they are not repelled when coming, but they scorn to come. But those who renounce the world at least in words, even if not in deeds, do come, and are sown among the wheat, and are heaped into the threshing floor, and are gathered with the sheep, and enter the nets, and are mingled with the banqueters; but whether they lie hidden within or appear, then there will be a reason for tolerating them if there is no power of correcting them, and there ought to be no presumption of separating.

But far be it from us to understand what is written—that those brought to the marriage banquet were such as they found good and bad (Matt 22:10)—in such a way that they are believed to have brought in those who professed that they would persevere as bad. Otherwise the servants of the head of the household themselves sowed weeds, and that will be false: but the enemy who sowed them is the devil (Matt 13:39). But because this cannot be false, the servants brought in good and bad, whether those who lay hidden, or those who, once brought in and admitted, appeared; or "good and bad" was said according to a certain human conduct, in which even those who have not yet believed are wont to be either praised or blamed.

Hence there is also that which the Lord admonishes the disciples whom he first sends to preach the Gospel: that in whatever city they come, they should seek who there is worthy, that they may stay with him until they depart from there (See Matt 10:11). Surely who will be that worthy one, except the one who, in the estimation of his fellow citizens, will be held good? And who unworthy, except the one who has become known to them as bad? From both these kinds they come to faith in Christ, and thus good and bad are brought in: because even those bad ones do not refuse repentance from dead works. But if they refuse, they are not repelled while desiring to enter, but by open contradiction they themselves withdraw from the entrance.

32. That servant too, then, will be secure, and will not be condemned among the slothful for being unwilling to pay out the master's talent, since those were unwilling to receive what he paid out. For this likeness was set forth on account of those who are unwilling to undertake in the Church the office of a steward, putting forward the lazy excuse that they are unwilling to render an account of others' sins—those who hear and do not do, that is, who receive and do not render.

But when the faithful and diligent steward, most ready in paying out and most eager for the Lord's gains, says to the adulterer, "Do not be an adulterer, if you wish to be baptized; believe Christ, who says that what you do is adultery, if you wish to be baptized; do not be a member of a prostitute, if you wish to become a member of Christ," but the other answers, "I do not obey, I do not do it"—he himself is unwilling to receive the Lord's true money, but wishes rather to bring his own counterfeit money into the Lord's treasuries. But if he professed that he would do it and did not, and could not afterward be corrected in any way, then something would be found to be done about him, lest he be useless to others who could not be useful to himself: so that, if within the Lord's nets he were a bad fish, he might nevertheless not ensnare the Lord's fish with bad nets; that is, that if he had a bad life in the Church, he might nevertheless not establish there a bad teaching.

For when such people defend their deeds of this kind, or, most plainly professing that they will persevere in them, are admitted to baptism, nothing else seems to be preached except that fornicators and adulterers, remaining in that wickedness even to the end of this life, will possess the kingdom of God, and by the merit of a faith which without works is dead, will come to eternal life and salvation.

These are the bad nets which fishermen ought especially to beware of—if indeed by that evangelical likeness bishops, or the prelates of the Churches of lower rank, are to be understood as fishermen; because it was said: come, and I will make you fishers of men (Matt 4:19). For with good nets both good and bad fish can be caught; but with bad nets good fish cannot be caught. For in good teaching he who hears and does can be good, and he who hears and does not do can be bad; but in bad teaching, even he who thinks it true, although he does not obey it, is bad; and he who obeys it is worse.

33. This indeed is remarkable, that the brothers who—when they ought rather to depart from that opinion, whether new or old, but in any case pernicious—themselves go further and say that it is a new teaching by which the most wicked people, openly professing that they will persevere in their disgraceful deeds, are not admitted to baptism, as if I know not where they were sojourning abroad; when prostitutes and actors, and any other professors of public shamefulness, are not permitted to approach the Christian sacraments unless such bonds are loosed or broken—all of whom, according to these people's opinion, would surely be admitted, unless the holy Church retained the ancient and robust custom, coming, namely, from that most clear truth by which she holds it certain that those who do such things will not possess the kingdom of God (Gal 5:21). And unless they repent of these dead works, they are not allowed to approach baptism; but if they slip in, unless they are afterward changed and repent, they cannot be saved.

But drunkards, the greedy, the abusive, and any others with damnable vices, cannot be convicted and refuted by open deeds; yet they are most strongly scourged by precepts and catechisms, and all such seem to come to baptism with their will changed for the better.

But if perhaps they have noticed that adulterers—whom not human but divine law condemns, that is, those who have others' wives as their own, or women who have others' husbands—are wont to be admitted somewhere too carelessly, they ought to try to correct these wrong practices from those right ones, that is, so that these too are not admitted; not to corrupt those right practices from these wrong ones, so as to judge that the candidates need not be catechized about the correction of morals; and consequently to think that all the professors even of those public shamefulnesses and crimes—that is, prostitutes, panderers, gladiators, and any of this kind—ought to be admitted even while remaining in those evils.

For all those things which the Apostle enumerates, concluding, that those who do such things will not possess the kingdom of God (Gal 5:21), those who act more vigorously rebuke fittingly in those to whom they have been made manifest, and do not admit to receive baptism those who resist and profess that they will remain in them.

34. But those who suppose that the rest are easily compensated by alms do not, nevertheless, doubt that three are deadly and to be punished by excommunications until they are healed by a more humble penance: unchastity, idolatry, and murder. Nor is there now need to inquire what kind of opinion this of theirs is, and whether it is to be corrected or approved, lest we draw out the work we have undertaken to great length on account of that question, which is in no way necessary for completing this one. For it suffices that, if not all things are to be admitted to the sacrament of baptism, among all these things is adultery; but if those three alone are to be excepted, then even in those three is adultery, from which this discussion arose.

35. But since the morals of evil Christians, who were formerly even most wicked, do not seem to have had this evil—that men should marry others' wives, or women marry others' husbands—from this, perhaps, that negligence crept in among certain Churches, so that in the catechisms of the candidates these vices were neither inquired into nor struck at; and from this it came about that they began even to be defended: vices which nevertheless are still rare among the baptized, if we do not, by neglecting them, make them dense. Such negligence in some, inexperience in others, ignorance in others, the Lord is understood probably to have signified by the name of sleep, where he says: but while people were sleeping, the enemy came and oversowed weeds (Matt 13:25).

But from this it is to be supposed that these things did not first appear in the morals even of evil Christians, since the blessed Cyprian, in the letter On the Lapsed, when in lamenting and reproving he recalled many things by which he rightly says the indignation of God was aroused, so that he allowed his Church to be scourged by an intolerable persecution, does not name these things there at all; whereas he also does not pass over, and confirms that it pertains to the same evil morals, to join the bond of marriage with unbelievers, asserting that it is nothing else than to prostitute the members of Christ to the gentiles—things which in our times are no longer thought to be sins, since indeed in the New Testament nothing is prescribed about it, and therefore it has either been believed to be permitted, or left as it were doubtful. Just as that too is ambiguous, whether Herod married the wife of a dead or of a living brother: and therefore it is not so clear what John was telling him was not permitted.

Concerning a concubine too, if she has professed that she will know no other man even if she is dismissed by him to whom she is subject, it is rightly doubted whether she ought not to be admitted to receive baptism. Anyone too who has dismissed a wife caught in adultery and married another does not seem to be equated with those who dismiss and marry apart from the cause of adultery; and in the divine statements themselves it is so obscure whether this man too—who without doubt is permitted to dismiss an adulteress—is nevertheless held an adulterer if he marries another, that, as I judge, anyone may there err pardonably.

Wherefore the manifest crimes of unchastity are in every way to be prohibited from baptism, unless they are corrected by a change of will and repentance; but as to those that are doubtful, every effort must be made that such unions not occur. For what need is there to put one's head into so great a hazard of ambiguity? But if they have occurred, I do not know whether those who have made them likewise ought to seem not to be admitted to baptism.

36. As far, then, as pertains to the healthful teaching of the truth—lest a most pernicious complacency be granted to any deadly sin, or even a most pestilent authority be attributed to it—this is the order of healing: that those to be baptized believe in God the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, by that rite by which the Creed is handed on; and that they repent of dead works, and not doubt that they will receive in baptism the remission of absolutely all past sins: not that it may be permitted to sin, but that having sinned may not harm; so that there may be remission of the deed, not permission of the doing.

Then it can truly be said, spiritually too: behold, you have been made well; now sin no more (John 5:14)—which the Lord said concerning bodily health for this reason, because he knew that the weakness of the flesh too had befallen the man whom he had made well by the merits of his sins. But to the man who enters to be baptized an adulterer, and goes out baptized an adulterer, I wonder how they think it can be said: behold, you have been made well. For what grievous and deadly disease will there be, if adultery is health?

37. "But among the three thousand," they say, "whom the apostles baptized in one day, and among so many thousands of believers among whom the Apostle filled up the Gospel from Jerusalem as far as Illyricum (Rom 15:19), there were surely some joined to others' wives, or women to others' husbands: in whom the apostles ought to have established a rule, to be kept thereafter in the Churches, whether they should not be admitted to baptism unless they had corrected those adulteries."

As though it could not likewise be said against them that they do not find anyone mentioned who, being such, was admitted. Or as though the crimes of individual people could be recalled, which would be endless; whereas that general rule abundantly suffices, where Peter, testifying with many words, says to those to be baptized: save yourselves from this crooked age (Acts 2:40). For who would doubt that adulteries pertain to the crookedness of this age, and those who have chosen to persist in the same iniquity?

Likewise it can be said that public prostitutes—whom surely no Church admits to baptism unless freed from that shamefulness—could have been found among so many thousands then believing throughout so many nations, and that the apostles ought to have established examples about receiving or prohibiting these. Nevertheless, from certain lesser matters we can conjecture greater ones. For if tax collectors coming to John's baptism were prohibited from exacting anything more than what had been appointed for them, I wonder whether adultery could be permitted to those coming to the baptism of Christ.

38. They have also recalled that the Israelites perpetrated many and grave evils, and shed much blood of the prophets, and yet did not deserve to be utterly destroyed from these deeds, but from unbelief alone, by which they were unwilling to believe in Christ: not considering that their sin was not this only, that they did not believe in Christ, but also that they killed Christ; of which the one pertains to the crime of unbelief, the other to the crime of cruelty. The former, then, is against right faith, the latter against the good life. But he is free of both vices who has faith in Christ—not the dead faith without works, which is found even in demons, but the faith of grace, which works through love (Gal 5:6).

39. This is the faith of which it is said: the kingdom of heaven is within you (See Luke 17:21). For this they seize who do violence by believing, obtaining the Spirit of love, where is the fullness of the Law, without which the Law in the letter made them guilty even of transgression.

It is therefore not to be thought that this was said—the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and those who do violence seize it (Matt 11:12)—because even the wicked, merely by believing and living most wickedly, come into the kingdom of heaven; but because that guilt of transgression, which the Law alone, that is, the letter without the spirit, made by commanding, is loosed by believing, and by the violence of faith the Holy Spirit is obtained, through whom, love being poured out in our hearts, the Law is fulfilled not by fear of punishment but by love of justice.

40. Let not the incautious mind in any way be deceived, so as to suppose that it has known God if it confesses him with a dead faith, that is, without good works, after the manner of demons, and therefore no longer doubt that it will come to eternal life, because the Lord says: and this is eternal life, that they may know you the one true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent (John 17:3). For there ought to come to mind also that which is written: in this we know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says, 'I have known him,' and does not keep his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him (1 John 2:3-4).

And lest anyone suppose that his commandments pertain to faith alone—although no one has dared to say this, especially because he said commandments, which, lest they scatter the thought by their multitude, are such that on those two the whole Law and the Prophets depend (Matt 22:40); though it may rightly be said that the commandments of God pertain to faith alone, if that faith is understood not as dead but as living, which works through love—nevertheless John himself afterward made clear what he meant, when he said: this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another (1 John 3:23).

41. This, then, is the profit of believing in God with right faith, of worshiping God, of knowing God: that we may both have help from him to live well, and, if we have sinned, may merit pardon from him—not persevering secure in the deeds he hates, but withdrawing from them, and saying to him: I said, Lord, have mercy on me; heal my soul, for I have sinned against you (Ps 41:4 (40:5))—which those have no one to say to who do not believe in him; and they say it in vain who, being so far from him, are estranged from the grace of the Mediator.

Hence are those words in the book of Wisdom, which a pernicious complacency somehow understands: and if we sin, we are yours (Wis 15:2); namely, because we have a good and great Lord, who both wills and is able to heal the sins of the repentant, not one who would in no way dare to destroy those who remain in malice.

Finally, when he had said, we are yours, he added: knowing your power (Wis 15:2)—surely the power from which the sinner can neither withdraw himself nor hide.

And therefore he went on to add: but we will not sin, knowing that we are accounted yours (Wis 15:2). For who, worthily considering a dwelling with God, in which all are accounted by predestination who are called according to his purpose, would not strive so to live as to be suited to such a dwelling?

Therefore that too which John says—these things I have written to you, that you may not sin; and if anyone sins, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the just; and he is the propitiation for our sins (1 John 2:1-2)—does not mean that we should sin with complacency, but that, withdrawing from sin, if any has been committed, we should in no way despair of pardon on account of that advocate whom unbelievers do not have.

42. From these words, then, no milder condition is to be promised to those willing so to believe in God that they remain in ruined morals; much less from those where the Apostle says: those who have sinned without the Law will perish without the Law; but those who have sinned in the Law will be judged through the Law (Rom 2:12)—as though in this place there were some difference between perishing and being judged, when by another word this same thing is signified.

For the Scriptures are wont to put judgment even for eternal damnation: as in the Gospel the Lord says: the hour will come in which all who are in the tombs will hear his voice; and those who have done good will come forth into the resurrection of life, but those who have done evil into the resurrection of judgment (John 5:28-29). Nor was it said here: this for those who believed, but that for those who did not believe; but: this for those who have done good, that for those who have done evil. For the good life is inseparable from the faith which works through love; indeed, it is that very good life. We see, then, that the Lord said the resurrection of judgment for the resurrection of eternal damnation. For of all who are to rise again (among whom without doubt will be also those who do not believe at all; for they too are not absent from the tombs) he made two parts, declaring that some will rise into the resurrection of life, others into the resurrection of judgment.

43. But if they say that those who do not believe at all are not to be understood there, but those who will be saved through fire because they believed, even if they lived badly, so that they think their transitory punishment is signified by the name of judgment—although this is said most shamelessly, since the Lord divided absolutely all who are to rise again, among whom without doubt the unbelieving too will be, into two: life and judgment, thus wishing the judgment to be understood as eternal, although he did not add this, as he did with life. For he did not say "into the resurrection of eternal life," since he surely wished nothing else to be understood.

Let them see, nevertheless, what they are going to answer where he says: but whoever does not believe is already judged (John 3:18). For here, without doubt, either they understand judgment to be put for eternal punishment, or they will dare to say that unbelievers too will be saved through fire; since, whoever does not believe, he says, is already judged—that is, already destined for judgment. And there will be nothing they can promise as a great benefit to those who believe and live wickedly, when even those who do not believe are not to be destroyed but to be judged.

But if they dare not say this, let them not dare to promise anything milder to those of whom it was said: they will be judged through the Law (Rom 2:12); for it is established that judgment is wont to be named even for eternal damnation. What of the fact that we find those who sin knowingly to be not only in no milder, but even in a worse, condition? For these are especially those who received the Law. For, as it is written: where there is no law, neither is there transgression (Rom 4:15). Hence too is that: I did not know concupiscence unless the Law said, 'you shall not covet.' Taking occasion, then, sin through the commandment worked in me all manner of concupiscence (Rom 7:7-8); and many other things which the same Apostle says about this matter.

From this graver guilt the grace of the Holy Spirit frees us through Jesus Christ our Lord, which, love being poured out in our hearts, grants the delight of justice, by which the immoderation of concupiscence may be overcome. Hence, then, it is confirmed that not anything milder, but something graver, is to be understood concerning those of whom it was said: those who have sinned in the Law will be judged through the Law (Rom 2:12), than concerning those who, sinning without the Law, will perish without the Law; nor was judgment said in this place for a transitory punishment, but for that by which even unbelievers will be judged.

44. For those who use this statement to promise salvation through fire to those who, though believing, live most wickedly, so as to say to them, those who have sinned without the Law will perish without the Law; but those who have sinned in the Law will be judged through the Law (Rom 2:12)—as though it were said, they will not perish, but will be saved through fire—could not even attend to this, that the Apostle said this about those who sinned without the Law and those who sinned in the Law when he was dealing with the gentiles and the Jews; so that he might show that the grace of Christ, by which they are freed, is necessary not only for the gentiles but for both: which the whole Letter to the Romans evidently shows.

Now, then, let them also promise, if it please them, salvation through fire to the Jews too who sin in the Law, of whom it was said, they will be judged through the Law, the grace of Christ not freeing them; since it was said of these, they will be judged through the Law. But if they do not do this, lest they come against themselves, who say that these are bound by the most grievous crime of unbelief, why do they transfer to unbelievers and believers, in what pertains to faith in Christ, that which was said of those who sinned without the Law and of those who sinned in the Law, when the dealing was about the Jews and the gentiles, that both might be invited to the grace of Christ?

44. For it was not said, "Those who have sinned without faith will perish without faith; but those who have sinned in faith will be judged through faith"; but it was said without the Law and in the Law, so that it might sufficiently appear that the case being touched on was the one between the gentiles and the Jews, not the one between good and bad Christians.

45. Although, if in that place they want law to be taken for "faith"—which is exceedingly inopportune and absurd—even from this they can read the most plain statement of the apostle Peter, who, when he was speaking of those who had taken occasion for the flesh and for a veil for malice from what is written, that we who belong to the New Testament are not children of the slave woman, but of the free, by which liberty Christ has freed us (See Gal 4:31; 5:1), and had thought this to be living freely—namely, that, as though secure about so great a redemption, they should judge that whatever pleased them was permitted to them, not considering what was said: you have been called to liberty, brothers; only do not give liberty as an occasion for the flesh (Gal 5:13);

whence Peter himself too says: free, yet not having liberty as a veil for malice (1 Pet 2:16)—says of them also in his second letter:

These are dry springs, and clouds driven about by a whirlwind, for whom the gloom of darkness has been reserved. For speaking proud words of vanity, they entice in the desires of the flesh, in shamelessness, those who have a little escaped, who live in error, promising them liberty, while they themselves are slaves of corruption. For by whatever one has been overcome, to this he is also bound as a slave. For if, fleeing the defilements of the world in the knowledge of our Lord and preserver Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in these and overcome, their last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of justice, than, having known it, to turn back from the holy commandment handed on to them. For there has befallen them the thing of the true proverb: 'a dog returned to its own vomit, and a sow, once washed, to wallowing in the mire.' (2 Pet 2:17-22)

Why is a better condition still promised, against this most manifest truth, to those who have known the way of justice—that is, the Lord Christ—and live in ruin, than if they had not known it at all, when it is said most plainly: it would have been better for them not to have known the way of justice, than, having known it, to turn back from the holy commandment handed on to them? (2 Pet 2:21)

46. For in this place the holy commandment is not to be understood as that by which it is enjoined that we believe in God—although in that very thing the whole is contained, if we understand the faith of believers which works through love (Gal 5:6); but he plainly expressed what he meant by the holy commandment, that is, that by which it is enjoined that, withdrawing from the defilements of this world, we live in chaste conduct. For he says thus: for if, fleeing the defilements of the world in the knowledge of our Lord and preserver Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in these and overcome, their last state has become worse for them than the first (2 Pet 2:20). He does not say "fleeing the ignorance of God," or "fleeing the unbelief of the age," or anything of the sort; but: the defilements of the world, in which is surely all the uncleanness of disgraceful deeds. For speaking of these earlier, he said: feasting together with you, having eyes full of adultery and of unceasing sin (2 Pet 2:13-14).

Therefore he also calls them dry springs: springs, namely, because they have received the knowledge of the Lord Christ; but dry, because they do not live accordingly. For the apostle Jude too, speaking of such people, says: these are they who, defiled, feast together in your love-feasts, feeding themselves without fear, clouds without water (Jude 12); and the rest. For what Peter says, feasting together with you, having eyes full of adultery, Jude says, defiled, they feast together in your love-feasts. For they are mingled with the good in the feasts of the sacraments and in the love-feasts of the peoples. And what Peter says, dry springs, Jude says, clouds without water; and James, dead faith.

47. Let not, then, a transitory punishment of fire be promised to those who live basely and wickedly, because they have known the way of justice, for whom it was better not to have known it, as the most truthful Scripture testifies. For of such the Lord too says: and the last things of that man will be worse than the first were (Matt 12:45); since, not receiving the Holy Spirit, the inhabitant of his purification, he caused the unclean spirit to return into him multiplied.

Unless perhaps those with whom we are dealing are to be held better for this reason, that they have not returned to the uncleanness of adulteries, but have not withdrawn from it; nor, once purified, have they defiled themselves again, but have refused to be purified. For they do not deign even to vomit forth their former uncleannesses—so as to enter to baptism with a relieved conscience—which they would then, dog-like, swallow up again; but in the very holiness of the bath they stubbornly strive to hold, with a raw breast, an undigested wickedness: nor do they conceal it by a promise, even a feigned one, but they belch it forth in the shamelessness of their profession; nor, going out of Sodom in the manner of Lot's wife, do they look back again on the things behind, but they disdain to go out of Sodom at all; rather, they try to enter to Christ together with Sodom.

The apostle Paul says: who formerly was a blasphemer and a persecutor and insolent; but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief (1 Tim 1:13); and to these people it is said: "You will then rather obtain mercy if you have lived badly knowingly, in the faith itself." It is far too long, and almost endless, to wish to gather all the testimonies of the Scriptures by which it appears that the case of those who knowingly lead a most wicked and most iniquitous life is not only no milder than that of those who do so unknowingly, but even, by this very fact, graver: accordingly let these suffice.

48. Let us therefore beware diligently, with the help of the Lord our God, not to make people evilly secure, telling them that if they have been baptized in Christ, in whatever way they have lived in that faith, they will come to eternal salvation: lest we make Christians the way the Jews made proselytes, to whom the Lord says: woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, who go about sea and land to make one proselyte; and when you have made him, you make him a son of hell twice as much as yourselves (Matt 23:15).

But let us rather hold the sound teaching of God our Teacher in both respects: that the Christian life be in harmony with holy baptism, and that eternal life be promised to no one if either of the two is lacking. For he who said: unless one is reborn of water and the Spirit, he will not enter the kingdom of heaven (John 3:5), himself also said: unless your justice abounds beyond that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven (Matt 5:20).

For of them he says: the scribes and Pharisees sit on the seat of Moses: what they say, do; but what they do, do not do; for they say and do not do (Matt 23:2-3). Their justice, then, is to say and not to do; and through this he wished ours, which abounds beyond theirs, to be to say and to do; and if this is lacking, the kingdom of heaven will not be entered. Not that anyone ought so to be exalted as to dare—I do not say to boast before others, but to think before himself—that he is in this life without sin; but unless there were certain things so grave that they must be punished even with excommunication, the Apostle would not say: when you are gathered together, with my spirit, to hand over such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (1 Cor 5:4-5).

Hence he also says: lest I mourn many who sinned before, and did not repent of the uncleanness and fornication which they committed (2 Cor 12:21). Again, unless there were certain things to be healed not by that humility of penance which is given in the Church to those who are properly called penitents, but by certain medicines of reproofs, the Lord himself would not say: reprove him between you and him alone; and if he listens to you, you have gained your brother (Matt 18:15). Finally, unless there were certain things without which this life is not lived, he would not have set a daily remedy in the prayer he taught, that we should say: forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors (Matt 6:12).

49. Now I have sufficiently, as I judge, set forth what seemed to me concerning that whole opinion, where they raised three questions:

One about the mingling in the Church of the good and the wicked, as of wheat and weeds: where care must be taken lest we therefore think these likenesses were set forth—whether this one, or the one about the unclean animals in the ark, or any others that signify the same thing—so that the Church's discipline may sleep, of which it was said, in the figure of that woman: severe are the ways of her household (See Prov 31:27); but rather so that the rashness of madness, rather than the severity of diligence, may not proceed so far as to presume, as it were, to separate the good from the wicked by wicked schisms. For by these likenesses and predictions counsel was not given to the good for sloth, by which they might neglect what they ought to prohibit, but for patience, by which they might endure, with the teaching of the truth preserved, what they are not able to amend.

Nor, because it is written that unclean animals too entered the ark to Noah, ought the prelates therefore not to forbid it if any most unclean people wish to enter to baptism while dancing—which is certainly milder than committing adultery; but by this figure of the deed done it was foretold that there would be unclean people in the Church for the sake of toleration, not for the corruption of teaching or the dissolution of discipline. For the unclean animals did not enter wherever they pleased, the framework of the ark having been broken open, but with it whole, through one and the same door which the maker had made.

The second question is the one in which it seemed to them that faith alone is to be handed on to those to be baptized, but that afterward, once baptized, they are to be taught about morals. But it has been sufficiently demonstrated, unless I am mistaken, that it pertains rather to the care of the watchman—when all who are candidates for the sacrament of the faithful hear more intently and more anxiously all that is said—not to be silent about the punishment which the Lord threatens to those who live badly; lest in baptism itself they be guilty of the most grievous crimes, to which they come that the guilt of all sins may be remitted.

The third question is the most dangerous, from which—too little considered, and not handled according to the divine word—that whole opinion seems to me to have arisen, in which it is promised to those who live most wickedly and most basely that, even if they persevere in living in that way, and only believe in Christ and receive his sacraments, they will come to salvation and eternal life: against the most plain statement of the Lord, who answered the man desiring eternal life: if you wish to come to life, keep the commandments (Matt 19:17); and recalled which commandments—namely, those by which the very sins are avoided to which, I know not how, eternal salvation is promised on account of a faith which is dead without works.

About these three questions I have argued sufficiently, as I judge; and I have demonstrated that the wicked are to be so tolerated in the Church that ecclesiastical discipline is not neglected; that those who seek baptism are to be so catechized that they not only hear and receive what they ought to believe, but also how they ought to live; that eternal life is so promised to the faithful that no one should think he can come to it even by a dead faith, which without works cannot save, but by that faith of grace which works through love (Gal 5:6). Let not, then, the faithful stewards be blamed—not by their own negligence or laziness, but rather by the obstinacy of certain people who refuse to receive the Lord's money and force the Lord's servants to pay out their own counterfeit money—while they are unwilling to be even such evil people as holy Cyprian recalls, renouncing the world in words only and not in deeds; since they will not even in words renounce the works of the devil, when they profess with a most plain voice that they will remain in adultery.

If anything is wont to be said by them which perhaps I have not touched on in arguing, I have judged it to be such that my response to it would not have been necessary—whether because it would not pertain to the matter at hand, or because it would be so trivial that it could most easily be refuted by anyone.