Sacred Texts  Christianity  Early Church Fathers  Index  Previous  Next 

Chapter 24.—Of the Number of Natures in the Manichæan Fiction.

26.  Again, I wish to know, when I read of God the Father and His kingdoms founded on the shining and happy region, whether the Father and His kingdoms, and the region, are all of the same nature and substance.  If they are, then it is not another nature or sort of body of God which the wedge of the race of darkness cleaves and penetrates, which itself is an unspeakably revolting thing, but it is actually the very nature of God which undergoes this.  Think of this, I beseech you:  as you are men, think of it, and flee from it; and if by tearing open your breasts you can cast out by the roots such profane fancies from your faith, I pray you to do it.  Or will you say that these three are not of one and the same nature, but that the Father is of one, the kingdoms of another, and the region of another, so that each has a peculiar nature and substance, and that they are arranged according to their degree of excellence?  If this is true, Manichæus should have taught that there are four natures, not two; or if the Father and the kingdoms have one nature, and the region only one of its own, he should have made three.  Or if he made only two, because the region of darkness does not belong to God, in what sense does the region of light belong to God?  For if it has a nature of its own, and if God neither generated nor made it, it does not belong to Him, and the seat of His kingdom is in what belongs to another.  Or if it belongs to Him because of its vicinity, the region of darkness must do so too; for it not only borders on the region of light, but penetrates it so as to sever it in two.  Again, if God generated it, it cannot have a separate nature.  For what is generated by God must be what God is, as the Catholic Church believes of the only begotten Son.  So you are brought back of necessity to that shocking and detestable profanity, that the wedge of darkness sunders not a region distinct and separate from God, but the very nature of God.  Or if God did not generate, but make it, of what did He make it?  Or if of Himself, what is this but to generate?  If of some other nature, was this nature good or evil?  If good, there must have been some good nature not belonging to God; which you will scarcely have the boldness to assert.  If evil, the race of darkness cannot have been the only evil nature.  Or did God take a part of that region and turn it into a region of light, in order to found His kingdom upon it?  If He had, He would have taken the whole, and there would have been no evil nature left.  If God, then, did not make the region of light of a substance distinct from His own, He must have made it of nothing. 282



[There is sufficient reason to think that Mani identified God with the kingdom and the region of light.  See Introduction.—A.H.N.]

Next: Chapter 25