How reliable was Mrs. Norman P. Judd, reminiscing approximately twenty six years after the event?

"'Surely God would not have created such a being as man, with an ability to grasp the infinite, to exist only for a day!  No, no, . . . man was made for immortality.'"

     Abraham Lincoln in 1856, according to Isaac N. Arnold, on p. 28 of  The layman's faith:  "If a man die, shall he live again?":  a paper read before the Philosophical Society of Chicago, Saturday, December 16th, 1882, and, of course (re-contextualized), Disney.  Arnold was channeling Mrs. Norman P. Judd, who, however, wrote only (without ever pretending to quote Lincoln),

"[Lincoln] speculated on the possibilities of knowledge which an increased power of the lens would give in the years to come; and then the wonderful discoveries of late centuries as proving that beings endowed with such capabilities as man must be immortal, and created for some high and noble end by him who had spoken those numberless worlds into existence; and made man a little lower than the angels that he might comprehend the glories and wonders of his creation."

     Mrs. Norman B. Judd, "An evening with Mr. Lincoln," in Osborn Hamiline Oldroyd, ed., The Lincoln memorial:  album-immortelles.  Original life pictures, with autographs, from the hands and hearts of eminent Americans and Europeans, contemporaries of the great martyr to liberty, Abraham Lincoln. Together with extracts from his speeches, letters, and sayings. With an introd. by Matthew Simpson, and a sketch of the patriot's life by Isaac N. Arnold (Boston:  D. L. Guernsey, 1882), 522 (520-524), where there is much more, though no occurrence of infinit* specifically.  According to Don E. and Virginia Fehrenbacher, "Mrs. Judd's vagueness about the date and circumstances casts some doubt upon the reliability of this interesting [specifically Mrs. Judd's] recollection" (Recollected words of Abraham Lincoln, ed. Don E. and Virginia Fehrenbacher (Stanford, CA:  Stanford University Press, 1996), 271).  Recollected words of Abraham Lincoln, by the way, is a very handy work of reference that places the "recollected words" under the names of those who recollected them, arranged alphabetically, and rates each recollected statement from A to E.  This one gets a D for "A quotation about whose authenticity there is more than average doubt" (liii).  The more expansive recollection of the words of Lincoln on this same occasion as set down by Arnold (above), by contrast, does not appear along with the other recollections subsumed under his name at almost the head of the alphabet on pp. 18-19.
     On the other hand, Isaac N. Arnold could, I suppose, have been present himself that evening, and therefore capable of elaborating on Mrs. Judd's account on the basis of his own memory of the conversation.
     Compare also this account from 1886, which quotes and actually cites "An evening with Mr. Lincoln" (above).
     Militating against the authenticity of this report, however, would be testimony like this, quoted on p. 50 of the 1999 edition of Guelzo's Abraham Lincoln:  redeemer president (Guelzo's source, Stevens' Reporter's Lincoln, 12, attributes it to the young Lincoln, from 1831-1837 resident in [New] Salem, IL, i.e. still nineteen years or more before 1856):  Lincoln "at least once admitted that he could not believe in the personal immortality of the soul.  'So you really believe there isn't any future state?' asked Parthena Hill.   'Mrs. Hill, I'm afraid there isn't,'  Lincoln replied.  "It isn't a pleasant thing to think that when we die that is the last of us.'"
     With thanks to my friend and colleague Dr. Ben McFarland for the diversion.

Pseudo-St. Augustine

Though I have done little more than search the English of the Past Masters version of the New City Press Works, I would be very surprised to be shown that this popular prayer was indeed composed by St. Augustine.  Surely it's just too unimaginative!

"Breathe in me, O Holy Spirit, that my thoughts may all be holy. Act in me, O Holy Spirit, that my work, too, may be holy. Draw my heart, O Holy Spirit, that I love but what is holy. Strengthen me, O Holy Spirit, to defend all that is holy. Guard me, then, O Holy Spirit, that I always may be holy. Amen."

Into whose everlasting beatitude we are raised up

William Bright translation of 1857:

"Almighty and merciful God, unto Whose everlasting blessedness we ascend, not by the frailty of the flesh, but by the activity of the soul; make us ever, by Thine inspiration, to seek after the courts of the heavenly City, and, by Thy mercy, confidently to enter them; through Jesus Christ our Lord."

"W. M. L. Jay" (i.e. Julia L[ouisa] M[atilda] Woodruff?) expanded version of 1897 (p. 246:   “THE PRAYERS | Are taken or compiled from Bright’s Ancient Collects, à Kempis’ Imitation of Christ, Knox Little’s Treasury of Devotion, Rowland Williams’s Psalms and Litanies, Christina G. Rosetti’s Face of the Deep, and the Book of Common Prayer”):

"Almighty and merciful God, into whose gracious presence we ascend, not by the frailty of the flesh but by the activity of the soul: Make us ever by thy inspiration to seek after the courts of the heavenly city, whither our Saviour Christ hath ascended, and by thy mercy confidently to enter them, both now and hereafter; through the same Jesus Christ our Lord."

"Leonine" sacramentary of the (5th/)early 7th century: 

"Omnipotens et misericors deus, ad cuius beatitudinem sempiternam non fragilitate carnis, sed alacritate mentis ascenditur:  fac nos atria supernae ciuitatis et te inspirante semper ambire, et tua indulgentia fidenter intrare:  per."

Steve Perisho translation of 2025: 

Almighty and merciful God, into whose sempiternal beatitude [one] is raised up [(ascenditur)] not by the fragility of the flesh but by the ardor of the soul [(mentis)]:  cause us both, [1] you inspiring [us], always to strive for, and, [2] you indulging [us (tua indulgentia, with your indulgence)], boldly to enter, the atria of the supernal city.  Through.

     "Leonine" sacramentary | Sacramentarium Veronense no. 550 (ed. Mohlberg (1956), p. 71, ll. 26-29; ed. Feltoe (1896), p. 71, ll. 10-13).

"It is no dream that I died for you, and that you are saved by Me, any more than your eating and drinking is a dream"

      The source (with thanks to the Rev. Dr. Kendall S. Harmon for the diversion):

      So, when you take the Bread and the Wine, which the Minister of Christ has consecrated (that is to say, set apart for this sacred purpose), what shall you think?  what shall you believe?  The Bread is in itself just bread still, the Wine is just wine.  But because the Lord has told you to take them 'in remembrance of Him,' and because you who take them humbly believe in Him, therefore, that simple Bread, that small drought of Wine, speak straight from Him to you.  They are like the very sound of His Voice, saying:  'All is true, all is yours.  It is no dream that I died for you, and that you are saved by Me, any more than your eating and drinking is a dream.'  They are like the very grasp of His Hand taking hold of your hand, and meaning:  'We are one, poor believing sinner.  I have joined you, I have clasped you, to Myself.  As surely as you touch and taste that Bread and Wine, so surely you, who believe in Me, are one with Me.'

      H. C. G. Moule, At the Holy Communion:  helps for preparation and reception (London:  Seely and Co., Limited, 1903 [1892]), 3.   Here, by the way, so that it can be found by searching, is the variant on the quotation supplied by the Rev. Dr. Harmon:

When you take the bread and the wine, what shall you think? What shall you believe? The bread is in itself just bread still, the wine is just wine, but because the Lord has told you to take them in remembrance of him and because you who take them humbly believe in him, therefore, that simple bread, that small draft of wine speaks straight from him to you. They are like the very sound of his voice saying, 'All is true, all is yours. It is no dream that I died for you and that you are saved by me, any more than your eating and drinking is a dream.' They are like the very grasp of his hand taking hold of your hand and meaning. 'We are one,' says Jesus, 'poor believing sinner. I have joined you. I have clasped you to myself. As surely as you touch and taste that bread and wine, so surely you who believe in me are one with me.'

(Needless to say, I am not, by posting this for others to find, endorsing the claim that "The Bread is in itself just bread still, the Wine is just wine"!)

In necessariis unitas, in non necessariis libertas, in utrisque caritas

"The fact that other customs and laws are kept by others, yet without violating the Faith or departing from common and universally-held decrees, will not lead the discerning observer into thinking either that those who keep them fall into the wrong, or that those who do not accept them violate the law."

"Where matters of faith are not denied and there is no case of falling away from the common and catholic teaching accepted by all, when some maintain different customs and uses, one should not condemn those who profess or accept them."

"Whenever that which is violated is not the faith, nor (there) is [(there)] a fall from the common and catholic decree, because other customs and laws are kept by others, he who knows how to judge rightly should not think that they who keep these fall into adikia or that they who do not accept them violate the law."

"When the faith remains inviolate, the common and catholic decisions are also safe."

Etc.

     Photius (St. Photios the Great), Patriarch of Constantinople, Epistle 290 to Pope Nicholas I, August/September 861.  See p. 131 ll. 241 ff. of vol. 3 of the Teubner edition ed. B. Laourdas & L. G. Westerink:

Οὕτως ἐν οἷς οὐκ ἔστι πίστις τὸ ἀθετούμενον,  οὐδὲ κοινοῦ τε καὶ καθολικοῦ ψηφίσματος ἔκπτωσις, ἄλλων παρ' ἄλλοις ἐθνῶν τε καὶ νομίμων φυλαττομένων, οὔτε τοὺς φύλακας ἀδικεῖν οὔτε τοὺς μὴ παραδεξαμένους παρανομεῖν ὀρθῶς ἄν τις κρίνειν εἰδὼς διορίσαιτο.

Obviously I have not yet translated that myself, but only reproduced the translations and paraphrases of it that I have found ready-to-hand.
     With thanks to Liz Leahy and her faculty for the diversion.

A cautionary note on 'image' and 'resemblance'

     "The text of Genesis to which Maximus refers[here, namely Gen 1:26,] juxtaposes 'image' and 'resemblance'.  The Gnostics had attributed to these two words a different sense:  the terrestrial, 'hylic' man was fashioned in the image of God; the 'psychic' man, in his resemblance.  It [was] perhaps this usage of the Gnostics that led also Irenaeus, their adversary, into a distinction of sense:  the image comprehends the natural gifts [of] reason [and] self-determination, and is inalienable [(inamisssible)]; the resemblance is given by possession of the Word and participation in the Spirit; lost in Adam, it is restored in Christ.  For Clement of Alexandria and Origen, image and resemblance are linked as power and act, imperfect state and consummation.  Athanasius, by contrast, abandons the Alexandrine tradition anterior [to him] and rejects every distinction between the two notions.  It is the same with Gregory of Nazianzus and with Basil.  In Gregory of Nyssa, the complexity of the question will allow him to say that the image is itself dynamic and that the resemblance is [on the other hand] ontological, [i.e.] not restricted to the operative order [of action alone].  The Antiochenes Theodore of Mopsuestia and Theodoret of Cyrus ignore the distinction [between] the two notions, as does Cyril of Alexandria.  But it becomes once again common after the homily [from the pen] of Pseudo-Gregory of Nyssa, Quid sit ad imaginem et similitudinem.
     "Many texts of Maximus [the Confessor] give expression to a dynamic straining of the natural image towards the free resemblance. . . .  'He who has allowed [(fait)] his mind to be illuminated [(étinceler)] by the flashes of lightning [(éclairs)] that divine contemplations diffuse, who has occupied his reason in the incessant offering of praise to the Creator, and who has purified his sensibility by means of irreproachable representations, this man adds to the natural good of the image the gnomic good of the resemblance.' . . .
     "But the word 'image' does not have only, in Maximus, the precise signification that we see in the preceding texts.  The absence of a break in continuity between the image and the resemblance permits him to pass from the one to the other, and to employ [often] the word 'image' [by itself] alone in the sense of resemblance[, and vice versa]. . . .
     "In the dithelite argumentation of the Dispute, [which was also] based on th[is very] text from Genesis, Maximus employs the two words 'image' and 'resemblance', but in a manner out of concord with the others in which he distinguishes the two notions[,] . . . [such that] the image, because it preserves its resemblance to the archetype, is naturally capable of self-determination [and] The resemblance does not signify here something alienable [(amissible)]; it adds nothing, it seems, to the image."

     Marcel Doucet, F.I.C., "La voluntaté humaine du Christ, spécialement en son agonie:  Maximus le Confesseur, interprète de l’écriture," Science et esprit 37, no. 2 (1985):  128-130 (123-159), following mostly W. J. Burghardt, The image of God in man according to Cyril of Alexandria (Woodstock, MD:  Woodstock College Press, 1957).

"do right and let nothing terrify you"

you are [Sarah's] children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening (ESV)

you are . . . [Sarah's] children if you do right and let nothing terrify you (RSV)

ἧς ἐγενήθητε τέκνα ἀγαθοποιοῦσαι καὶ μὴ φοβούμεναι μηδεμίαν πτόησιν.