PREFACE — CHAPTER II. ON THE ARGUMENT OF THE BOOK OF STEPS.

manner of acting. He criticizes the "disciples of faith" because they are enemies to the "disciples of charity" and persecute them harshly; he demonstrates how much greater the martyrs of perfection are—who love their enemies and murderers—than the disciples and martyrs of faith, who are unwilling to love their haters and persecutors or to pray for them. He exhorts the "disciples of charity" to show obedience to the master of perfection they have chosen, and after a dogmatic digression, in which he states that Christ is the first-born of the perfect, he commends his doctrine concerning the distinction between the just and the perfect with new arguments.

The Index of the Discourses of the Book preserved in Codex $α$ counts thirty-one discourses and says that the last discourse (i.e., XXXI) is placed in the first position in the codex. As has already been said above ¹ See the description of Codex $α$, p. 1., Codex $α$ in truth presents that entire discourse as a prologue (which is also found in a condensed version in Codex $β$), where the Author defends the fact that his doctrine was drawn from proven sources; Codex R counts only thirty discourses and closes with the last one (in $α$, XXXI) as Sermon XXX. Hence, it is explained why that part of the discourse, which acts as a preface to the Work in $α$ and $β$, lacks a title.

3. A few things must still be said about the composition and arrangement of the whole Work. — Indeed, the first discourse begins as if the Author intended to arrange the material of the Book in a logical order and to treat each point with precision. He properly proposes the theme of his work—namely, that there is an internal difference between the various precepts of divine law—and assigns its partition not inappropriately; nevertheless, he seems to have quickly lost the thread of the things to be considered.

Looking at the matters and the manner in which the Author presents his doctrine, the whole Work can be divided into two unequal parts. The first, encompassing the twenty-one preceding discourses, is didactic; the second, a smaller part of the discourses, is polemical. Within the scope of this division, it is hardly possible to establish any certain and consistent order of ideas. The second and sixth discourses deal with the perfect; three intermediate ones discuss that weakness of soul and dullness of mind to which the just are subject. The seventh and ninth discourses describe the duties of the just: the former explains the laws of justice, the latter illustrates the matter with examples drawn from the Old Covenant. In the eighth and tenth, the heroic virtues of perfection are celebrated. The two following discourses are intimately connected; the eleventh urges the moral inferiority of the Old Covenant and distinguishes the harsh precepts of the Law from the meek ones; the twelfth, in turn, in the exact same manner, weighs the internal value of the visible ministry of the Church and establishes it as a mere figure of the heavenly ministry of the perfect. In a similar way, the subsequent discourses (XIII and XIV) are connected, treating the just and the perfect, in which the manner of acting of

each is compared point by point. The fifteenth discourse seems to disturb the order of things entirely; for the Author suddenly begins to discuss the fall of the first parents. However, upon closer consideration, this discourse is found not to have been placed in its position without cause; for the Author, intending to introduce a new dogmatic element to his ascetic speculation, deals with original sin—which in his mind is concupiscence—so that in the five subsequent discourses he might propose the ultimate goal of perfection: namely, the extirpation of concupiscence, by the deletion of which from the heart of man the Paraclete might be received, which is explained more fully, especially in the twentieth discourse. The didactic part of the work ends with the twenty-first discourse, which further develops the sentiments treated in the fifteenth discourse.

The second part, the polemical part, begins with the twenty-second discourse, by which the vindictive power of civil authority is attacked as contrary to justice; afterward, he attacks those who, leaning on certain places of Scripture where sinners are said to be hardened by God, contend that God Himself is the author of sin. In the twenty-fourth discourse, he attacks the Cathari a group believing in extreme purity/dualism or other heretics of this flour, who deny penance to those who have fallen after baptism; then he reproves the manner of acting of certain "solitaries" who, while they may indeed sincerely seek perfection, yet simultaneously wish to engage in corporal works of charity. Added to this discourse is a dissertation on the second law, which God placed upon Adam after the fall. Apparently, that discourse seems to disturb the rest, the polemical ones; but in reality, it is intimately connected with the preceding one: for the Author, intending to confirm his opinions regarding the corporal works of charity as contrary to perfection with a new dogmatic argument, appeals to that fictitious law, which proves that no one is perfect who has not renounced the world. The twenty-seventh and twenty-eighth discourses are likewise polemical; the former lashes out at false disciples of perfection, the latter reproves the opinion of those who think that man is composed trichotomistically of body, soul, and spirit. The penultimate discourse is peaceful in appearance, yet it does not lack a polemical edge, for it seems to be directed against those who deny the necessity of mortification to achieve salvation and who, by appealing to certain places in Scripture, reject fasting. Finally, the last discourse is sometimes downright bilious. The Author accuses the "disciples of faith" of various crimes and does not hesitate to call into doubt the very merits of martyrdom, which lack the love of enemies.