Only nuptial intercourse was absent there, because in sinful flesh it could not come to pass without that concupiscence of the flesh which befell as a result of sin — that concupiscence without which He willed to be conceived who was to be without sin, not in sinful flesh, but in the likeness of sinful flesh — that from this too He might teach that all flesh which is born of intercourse is flesh of sin, since indeed that flesh alone which was not born thereof was not flesh of sin. Yet conjugal intercourse, which is done with the intention of begetting, is not itself sin, because the good will of the mind leads the following pleasure of the body, does not follow it as leading; nor is the human will dragged along by conquering sin, when the wound of sin is justly reduced to the use of begetting.
A certain itch of this wound reigns in the foulnesses of adulteries, fornications, and defilements of every kind and of all impurities; but in the necessary intimacies of marriages it serves. There it is condemned as such a shameful thing in the master; here it is put to shame as an honourable thing in the attendant. Therefore this lust is not the good of marriage, but the obscenity of sinners, the necessity of those who beget, the ardour of wantonness, the shame of marriage. Why then should not those remain spouses who by consent cease to have intercourse, if Joseph and Mary remained spouses, who never even began to have intercourse?
For this propagation of children, which among the holy fathers was a most dutiful office for the sake of begetting and preserving the people of God, in whom the prophecy of Christ had to go before, now no longer has that necessity. For now, from all nations, there lies open an abundance of children to be spiritually begotten, from whatever source they may have been carnally born. And what is written, 'A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing,' is recognized as distributed through that time and this: for that was the time of embracing, but this the time of refraining from embracing. And so the Apostle too, when he was speaking of this, says: 'But this I say, brethren: the time is short.'
'It remaineth, that both they who have wives be as though they had none, and they that weep as though they wept not, and they that rejoice as though they rejoiced not, and they that buy as though they possessed not, and they that use this world as if they used it not; for the fashion of this world passeth away. But I would have you to be without care.' All these things, that I may say something briefly here in exposition, I think are thus to be understood. 'This I say, brethren,' he says: 'the time is short'; the people of God is no longer to be propagated by carnal generation, but is now to be gathered by spiritual regeneration.
It remains, therefore, that both they who have wives be not subjected to carnal concupiscence, and they who weep at the sadness of present evil, rejoice in the hope of future good, and they who rejoice on account of some temporal advantage, fear the eternal judgment, and they who buy so possess by having as not to cleave by loving, and they who use this world consider themselves to be passing on, not to remain; for the fashion of this world passeth away. 'I would have you,' he says, 'to be without care' — that is: I would have you keep your heart above, among those things which pass not away. Then he adds and says:
He that is without a wife careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord; but he that is joined in matrimony careth for the things of the world, how he may please his wife.' And thus in a certain way he expounds what he had said above: 'They that have wives, let them be as though they had none.' For those who so have wives as to care for the things that are the Lord's, how they may please the Lord, and care not, in the things that are of the world, to please their wives, are as though they had none. And this comes about with that ease when the wives too are such that their husbands please them, not because they are rich, nor because they are exalted, nor because they are noble in birth, nor because they are lovely in the flesh, but because they are faithful, because they are religious, because they are chaste, because they are good men.
But among married persons, just as these things are to be desired and praised, so other things are to be tolerated, lest one fall headlong into damnable disgraces — that is, into fornications or adulteries. On account of avoiding which evil, even those acts of intercourse between spouses which are not done for the sake of begetting, but serve conquering concupiscence, in which they are bidden 'not to defraud one another, lest Satan tempt them for their incontinence,' are indeed not enjoined by way of command, yet are conceded by way of indulgence. For thus it is written: 'Let the husband render unto the wife her due, and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The woman hath not power over her own body, but the man; and likewise also the man hath not power over his own body, but the woman.'
'Defraud ye not one the other, except it be by consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to prayer; and again be together, lest Satan tempt you for your incontinence. But this I say by way of indulgence, not by way of command.' Where, therefore, indulgence is to be given, it can by no means be denied that there is something of fault. Since, then, intercourse with the intention of begetting is not blameworthy — which is what is properly to be imputed to marriage — what does the Apostle concede by way of indulgence, save that spouses, while they do not contain themselves, demand the debt of the flesh from one another not by the will of offspring but by the pleasure of lust? Which pleasure, nevertheless, does not fall into fault on account of marriage, but on account of marriage receives indulgence.
Wherefore in this respect too marriages are praiseworthy, because that also which does not pertain to itself they cause to be pardoned on account of themselves. For not even that intercourse by which concupiscence is served is so carried on that offspring, which marriage demands, is hindered. Yet it is one thing not to have intercourse save by the will of begetting alone, which has no fault; another to seek the pleasure of the flesh in having intercourse, yet not beyond the spouse, which has venial fault — because, even though intercourse is not had for the cause of propagating offspring, nevertheless the propagation of offspring is not, for the cause of this lust, obstructed, whether by evil wish or by evil deed.
For those who do this, although they are called spouses, are not, nor do they retain any truth of marriage, but hold out an honourable name as a veil for their baseness. And they are betrayed when they proceed so far as to expose the children who are born to them against their will. For they hate to nourish or to have those whom they feared to beget. And so, when a dark iniquity rages against its own children whom it begot unwillingly, it is brought forth into the light by manifest iniquity, and the hidden baseness is convicted by open cruelty.
Sometimes this lustful cruelty, or cruel lust, goes so far as even to procure poisons of sterility, and, if these avail nothing, in some way to extinguish and pour forth the conceived offspring within the womb — willing its own offspring rather to perish than to live, or, if it were already alive in the womb, to be slain before it is born. Assuredly, if both are such, they are not spouses; and if from the beginning they were such, they came together not by marriage but rather by debauchery. But if both are not such, I dare to say: either she is in a certain way the harlot of her husband, or he is the adulterer of his wife.
Since, therefore, marriages cannot be such as those of the first human beings might have been, had sin not gone before, let them be such as those of the holy fathers were: so that the shameful concupiscence of the flesh — which was not in paradise before sin, nor after sin has it been permitted to be (yet because it is necessary that it be in this body of death) — should not be served, but rather itself be compelled to serve for nothing except the propagating of offspring. Or, because this time, which we have already said to be a time of refraining from embracing, does not have the necessity of this office — since on every side, among all nations, there is so great a fertility of children to be spiritually begotten — let him who can receive that better good of surpassing continence receive it;
but he who cannot receive it, even if he takes a wife, sins not; and let the woman, if she does not contain herself, marry. 'For it is good for a man not to touch a woman.' But because 'not all receive this word, but they to whom it is given,' it remains that, on account of fornications, every man should have his own wife and every woman her own husband, and that thus the weakness of incontinence, lest it fall into the ruin of disgraces, may be taken up into the honourableness of marriage. For what the Apostle says of women, 'I will therefore that the younger marry,' can be said of men also: I will that the younger take wives — so that it may pertain to both sexes to beget children, to be fathers and mothers of households, to give no occasion to the adversary for the sake of reproach.
In marriage, nevertheless, let the nuptial goods be loved: offspring, fidelity, sacrament. But offspring, not only that it may be born, but also that it may be reborn; for it is born unto punishment, unless it be reborn unto life. Fidelity, however, not such as even unbelievers jealous for the flesh have between themselves; for what husband, however impious, wants an adulterous wife? Or what woman, however impious, wants an adulterous husband? This good in wedlock is indeed natural, yet carnal. But a member of Christ ought to fear his spouse's adultery for the spouse's sake, not for his own, and to hope from Christ for the reward of the fidelity which he shows to his spouse. And the sacrament, which not even the separated and the adulterous lose, let the spouses harmoniously and chastely keep.
For this alone is what even a sterile marriage holds by the right of piety, when the hope of fecundity — for which it had been joined — is already lost. Let him who wishes to praise marriage praise these nuptial goods in marriage. But the concupiscence of the flesh is not to be imputed to marriage, but to be tolerated. For it is not a good coming from natural wedlock, but an evil befalling from ancient sin. On account of this, therefore, it comes about that even from just and lawful marriages of the sons of God, not sons of God but sons of the age are begotten; because even those who beget, if they are already regenerate, do not beget from this that they are sons of God, but from that they are still sons of the age. For it is the Lord's saying: 'The children of this age beget and are begotten.'
From that, then, whereby we are still sons of this age, our outer man is corrupted; from this too the sons of this age are begotten, nor do they become sons of God unless they be regenerated. But from that whereby we are sons of God, the inner man is renewed day by day, although even the outer man himself has been sanctified through the laver of regeneration and has received the hope of future incorruption — on account of which it is rightly called the temple of God. 'Your bodies,' says the Apostle, 'are the temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which ye have from God, and ye are not your own; for ye are bought with a great price. Glorify therefore God in your body.' All this is said not only on account of present sanctification, but chiefly on account of that hope, of which the same Apostle elsewhere says:
But we ourselves also, having the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body.' If, therefore, according to the Apostle, the redemption of our body is awaited, assuredly what is awaited is still hoped for, is not yet held. Whence he adds and says: 'For by hope we were saved; but hope that is seen is not hope; for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that which we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.' Not therefore through that which we await, but through that which we tolerate, are carnal children propagated. Far be it, then, from a faithful man, when he hears from the Apostle:
Love your wives,' love the concupiscence of the flesh in his wife, which he ought not to love even in himself, hearing another Apostle: 'Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him; for all that is in the world is the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, which is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof; but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever, even as God abideth for ever.' From this lust of the flesh, then, what is born is born assuredly unto the world, not unto God; but it is born unto God when it is reborn of water and the Spirit.
Regeneration alone remits the guilt of this concupiscence, which generation draws along. Therefore let that which has been generated be regenerated, because it cannot otherwise be that what has been drawn along should be remitted. For that what has been remitted in the parent should be drawn along in the offspring comes to pass in wondrous ways indeed, yet nevertheless comes to pass. These things are invisible and to unbelievers incredible, yet true; but that they might have some visible example, divine providence has provided this in certain trees. For why should we not believe that it was so instituted, that from the olive should be born the wild olive? Or is it not to be believed that in some thing which was created for the uses of men the Creator provided and instituted something that might serve as an example for the human race?
It is a wonder, then, how those who have been freed from the bond of sin through grace should nevertheless beget children bound by the same bond, who must in the same way be freed. We confess it is a wonder. But that the seeds of wild olives lie hidden even in the seeds of olives — when would this too be believed, unless it were proved by experience? Accordingly, just as from the seed of the wild olive is born the wild olive, and from the seed of the olive is born nothing but the wild olive, though between the wild olive and the olive there is very great difference — so from the flesh of the sinner and from the flesh of the just man is born, in either case, a sinner, although between the sinner and the just man there is very great difference. And the sinner is begotten as yet no sinner by act and new by birth, but old by guilt: a man from the Creator, a captive from the deceiver, in need of a Redeemer.
But it is asked how the captivity of the offspring can be drawn along even from parents already redeemed. And because it is not tracked out by easy reasoning nor unfolded in speech, it is not believed by unbelievers — as though that too which we said about the wild olive and the olive, namely that the offspring of a dissimilar kind should be similar, some reasoning easily finds out or speech unfolds. But this can be discerned by anyone who is willing to test it. Let it therefore serve as an example, from which that too may be believed which cannot be discerned.
For the Christian faith does not doubt — that faith which the new heretics have begun to assail — both that those who are washed in the laver of regeneration are redeemed from the power of the devil, and that those who have not yet been redeemed by such regeneration, even the little children of the redeemed, are captives under the power of the same devil, unless they too be redeemed by the same grace of Christ. For we do not doubt that that benefit of God, of which the Apostle speaks, pertains to all ages: 'who hath delivered us from the power of darkness and hath translated us into the kingdom of the Son of His love.'
From this power of darkness, therefore, of which the devil is prince — that is, from the power of the devil and his angels — whoever shall deny that little children are rescued when they are baptized, is convicted by the very truth of the Church's own sacraments, which no heretical novelty is permitted to take away or change in the Church of Christ, the Head ruling and aiding His whole body, the little ones together with the great. In truth, therefore, not in falsity, the devil's power is exorcised in little children, and they renounce him — because, since they cannot do so through themselves, they do so through the hearts and mouths of those who carry them — that, rescued from the power of darkness, they may be translated into the kingdom of their Lord.
What, then, is in them, through which they are held in the power of the devil, until they be rescued thence through the sacrament of Christ's baptism? What is it, save sin? For the devil found nothing else whereby he might make human nature subject to his own right, that good nature which a good Author instituted. But little children have committed no sin proper to their own life. There remains, therefore, original sin, through which they are held captive under the power of the devil, unless from thence they be redeemed by the laver of regeneration and the blood of Christ, and pass over into the kingdom of their Redeemer, the power of their captor being frustrated and the power being given whereby, from sons of this age, they may become sons of God.
Now, then, if we should in a certain way interrogate those goods of marriage, whence sin could have been propagated by them into little children, the operation of propagating offspring will answer us: 'I in paradise should be more happy, if sin had not been admitted. For to me pertains that blessing of God: Increase and multiply. For this good work diverse members of a diverse sex were created, which indeed already existed before sin, but were not shameful.' Fidelity of chastity will answer: 'If there had been no sin, what could have been more secure for me in paradise, where neither my own lust would goad me nor another's tempt me?' The sacrament of wedlock too will answer: 'Concerning me, before sin, it was said in paradise:
A man shall leave father and mother and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be two in one flesh — which the Apostle says is a great sacrament in Christ and in the Church. That, therefore, which in Christ and in the Church is great, this in single individual men and wives is least, yet still a sacrament of inseparable union.' Which of these is in marriage, whence the bond of sin might pass into posterity? Surely none; and certainly by these three goods the goodness of marriage would hold itself perfectly — by which goods marriages are good even now. But further, if that concupiscence of the flesh should be interrogated, by which those things were made shameful which before were not shameful, will it not answer that it began to be in the members of man after sin?
And so it, called by the apostolic words 'the law of sin' because it has made man subject to itself, since man was unwilling to be subject to his God — and that it is such is proved by the fact that the first married pair then blushed for it, when they covered their shameful parts, and all now blush when they seek out secret places for intercourse, nor dare to have witnesses of this work, even the children whom they have begotten thereby. Against which natural sense of shame the error of the Cynic philosophers struggled with marvellous shamelessness, since they judged that this — because it was lawful and honourable — ought to be done openly with a spouse. Whence deservedly the uncleanness of this shamelessness received a canine name; for from this the Cynics were so called.
This concupiscence in every respect, this law of sin dwelling in the members, which the law of righteousness forbids us to obey — the Apostle saying, 'Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof; neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin' — this concupiscence, I say, which is expiated only by the sacrament of regeneration, surely transmits by generation the bond of sin to posterity, unless they too be loosed from it by regeneration. For concupiscence itself is indeed no longer sin in those who have been regenerated, when consent is not given to it for unlawful deeds, and when the members are not yielded up by the mind, as queen, that they may carry out those deeds — so that even if that which is written, 'Thou shalt not covet,' be not fulfilled, at least that may be fulfilled which is read elsewhere:
'Go not after thy lusts.' But because in a certain manner of speaking it is called sin, inasmuch as it was produced by sin and, if it conquers, produces sin, its guilt has force in the one begotten; and this guilt the grace of Christ, through the remission of all sins, does not suffer to have force in the one who has been regenerated, provided he does not obey it when it in a certain way commands him to evil deeds. Now it is called sin in this way, because it was produced by sin, although in the regenerate it is not itself sin — just as speech is called 'the tongue' which the tongue makes, and writing is called 'the hand' which the hand makes; and likewise it is called sin because sin, if it conquers, produces it, just as cold is called 'sluggish,' not because it is produced by sluggish men, but because it makes men sluggish.
This wound, inflicted by the devil upon the human race, compels whatever is born through it to be under the devil, as though he plucked by right a fruit from his own shrub — not that human nature is from him, since it is only from God, but the vice, which is not from God. For human nature is condemned not on account of itself, which is praiseworthy because it is the work of God, but on account of the damnable vice by which it has been corrupted. And on account of that for which it is condemned, on that account also it is subjected to the damnable devil; for the devil too is an unclean spirit, and certainly the good is that he is spirit, the evil that he is unclean — since he is spirit by nature, unclean by vice: of which two the former is from God, the latter from himself.
Therefore he does not hold men, whether of greater or of infant age, on account of their being men, but on account of their being unclean. Whoever, then, wonders that a creature of God is subjected to the devil, let him not wonder; for a creature of God is subjected to a creature of God, the lesser to the greater, since man is subjected to an angel — yet not on account of nature, but on account of vice, since the unclean is subjected to the unclean. This is his fruit from the ancient stock of uncleanness which he planted in man; and he himself indeed shall suffer greater punishments at the last judgment, the more unclean he is; yet even those for whom in that condemnation it will be more tolerable are subjected to him as to the prince and author of sin, since there will be no cause of condemnation except sin.
Wherefore the devil holds as guilty those little ones who are born, not from the good by which marriage is good, but from the evil of concupiscence, of which marriage indeed makes good use, yet at which even marriage blushes. For although marriage is honorable in all things that properly pertain to it as goods — even if it should keep the bed undefiled not only from fornications and adulteries, which are damnable enormities, but also from those excesses of intercourse which take place not for the sake of offspring, will governing, but for the sake of pleasure, lust prevailing (which in married persons are venial sins) — nevertheless, when it comes to the work of begetting, that very lawful and honorable intercourse cannot take place without the ardor of lust, so that what belongs to reason, not to lust, may be accomplished.
Which ardor certainly, whether it follow or precede the will, nevertheless moves those members which cannot be moved by the will only by a certain command as it were of its own; and thus it shows itself to be not the servant of one who commands, but the punishment of a disobedient will — to be roused not by free choice, but by some enticing goad, and therefore to be a thing of shame.
From this concupiscence of the flesh, which, although in the regenerate it is no longer reckoned as sin, nevertheless befalls nature only from sin — from this, I say, concupiscence of the flesh, as from a daughter of sin, and, when consent is given to it for shameful things, also the mother of many sins, whatever offspring is born is bound by original sin, unless it be born again in Him whom a virgin conceived without this concupiscence; and for this reason, when He deigned to be born in the flesh, He alone was born without sin.
But if it be asked how this concupiscence of the flesh remains in the regenerate, in whom remission of all sins has been made, seeing that through it seed is sown and with it fleshly offspring is begotten even of a baptized parent — or, at any rate, if in a baptized parent it can exist and not be sin, why the very same thing should be sin in the offspring: to these questions the answer is that the concupiscence of the flesh is remitted in baptism, not so that it should not exist, but so that it should not be imputed as sin. And although its guilt is now loosed, it nevertheless remains until all our infirmity be healed, as the renewal of the inner man advances from day to day, when the outer man shall have put on incorruption;
for it does not remain substantially, like some body or spirit, but is a certain disposition of evil quality, like a sickness. Therefore nothing remains which is not remitted when it comes to be, as it is written: 'The Lord is merciful to all our iniquities' — but until there also comes to pass that which follows, 'Who healeth all thy sicknesses, who redeemeth thy life from corruption,' there remains in the body of this death the concupiscence of the flesh, whose vicious desires we are commanded not to obey for the committing of unlawful things, lest sin reign in our mortal body. Yet this concupiscence is daily diminished in those who make progress; and in the continent, especially with old age also coming on, by very much the most.
But in those who serve it wickedly, it acquires such strength in them that for the most part, even when their members are already failing with age and those same parts of the body are less able to be moved to that work, it does not cease to rage more shamefully and more shamelessly. In those, therefore, who are regenerated in Christ, when they receive the remission of absolutely all their sins, it is assuredly necessary that the guilt also of this concupiscence — though it still remains — be remitted, so that, as I said, it should not be imputed as sin. For just as the guilt of those sins which cannot remain, since when they are committed they pass away, nevertheless remains and, unless it be remitted, will remain forever, so, when it is remitted, the guilt of this concupiscence is taken away. For this is to have no sin — namely, not to be guilty of sin.
For if anyone, for example, should commit adultery, even if he never afterwards commits it, he is guilty of adultery until the guilt of it be remitted by pardon. He has sin therefore, although that which he committed no longer exists, since it passed away together with the time in which it was done. For if to cease from sinning were to have no sins, it would be enough for Scripture to admonish us thus: 'My son, hast thou sinned? Do so no more.' But it is not enough, for it added: 'And pray concerning thy former sins, that they may be forgiven thee.' They remain, therefore, unless they be remitted. But how do they remain, if they are past — except that though they have passed away in act, they remain in guilt? And so, conversely, it can come to pass that a thing should even remain in act, yet pass away in guilt.
For the concupiscence of the flesh does something even when there is not yielded to it either the consent of the heart, in which it may reign, or the members as instruments by which what it commands may be fulfilled. But what does it do except its very desires, evil and shameful? For if they were good and lawful, the Apostle would not forbid us to obey them, saying: 'Let not sin reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.' For he does not say, 'that ye should have the lusts thereof,' but 'that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof'; so that, since in some these lusts are greater and in others less, according as each has advanced in the newness of the inner man, we may in this maintain the contest of righteousness and chastity, that we obey them not.