To Florus 1.23

You invent the charge that I omitted the apostle's testimony, although it cannot help you and I did not omit it. I inserted it in the same order in which you had placed it. Just as I faithfully quoted it in the first book of my work, I also explained it in the fourth, though briefly and in passing (compare Augustine, Against Julian 6.75). Nor did I omit your mention of the catholic Church, which you had made so that those you deceived would abandon the catholic faith and yet, poor wretches, rejoice in the catholic name. Although words of that sort had no argumentative force, I nevertheless presented the opening of your statement exactly as you had arranged it. Read my published books; see the faithfulness of my reply, which you accuse of fraud; and for the present admit that I am speaking the truth. As for you, blush, if your habitual conduct will allow it. Your inexcusable falsehood has now been exposed. Falsehood is always disgraceful, but becomes more disgraceful when it usurps the censor's place and reproaches another person's beauty with its own ugliness. Answer, then: how does either the Church's name or the apostle's language benefit Manichaean ideas, that you should make so inflammatory a complaint about their omission?