Migne Reading Room
PL 3 · cols. 201–240
In Minucii Felicis Octavium: prolegomena G. Lumper; dissertatio F. Balduini; praefatio J. A. Ernesti; analysis logica dialogi J. G. Lindneri
Editors' preface
INEUNTE SAECULO TERTIO.
AT THE BEGINNING OF THE THIRD CENTURY.
MARCUS MINUCIUS FELIX,
MARCUS MINUCIUS FELIX,
CAUSIDICUS ET APOLOGETA
ADVOCATE AND APOLOGIST
PROLOGOMENA.
PROLEGOMENA.
DE M. MINUCII FELICIS APOLOGETAE VITA, HISTORIA ET SCRIPTIS,
ON THE LIFE, HISTORY AND WRITINGS OF M. MINUCIUS FELIX THE APOLOGIST,
AUCTORE D. GOTHOFREDO LUMPER, O. S. B.
BY DOM GOTTFRIED LUMPER, O.S.B.
I. — Minutio, seu Minucio, Marci agnomen erat; Octavius siquidem his eum verbis compellavit; « Non boni viri est, Marce frater, hominem etc. » Caecilius vero: « Quanquam tibi, Marce frater, etc. » Quam nota autem omnibus et nobilis fuit consularis apud Romanos Minuciorum familia, tam cuilibet hactenus incompertum, utrum ex ea aut qua ex alia suam Minucius noster originem duxerit. Neque ulli magis exploratum quae fuerit illius patria. Quidam tamen eum ex sui libri stylo in Africa natum suspicantur. Sed hi nec probant, nec probare possunt aliquid durioris Africani sermonis in eo deprehendi. Nunquid potiori jure dici posset Caecilium et Octavium, tanto amoris vinculo Minucio devinctos, revera Africanos fuisse ejusque populares? At sane id, sicut paulo post videbimus, neque ita certum est, neque ex illorum quantavis amicitiae necessitudine potest ullo absque dubio colligi.
I. — Minutius, or Minucius, had the name Marcus; for Octavius addressed him in these words: "It is not the part of a good man, brother Marcus, [to leave] a man etc." And Caecilius: "Although to you, brother Marcus, etc." But however well known to all and noble the consular family of the Minucii was among the Romans, it is as yet undiscovered by anyone whether our Minucius drew his origin from it or from what other. Nor has anyone better ascertained what his native country was. Some, however, from the style of his book, suspect that he was born in Africa. But they do not prove, nor can they prove, that anything of the harsher African speech is detected in him. Could it be said with better right that Caecilius and Octavius, bound to Minucius by so strong a bond of love, were in fact Africans and his countrymen? But surely this, as we shall see a little later, is neither so certain, nor can it be inferred without any doubt from the closeness of their friendship, however great.
II. — Neminem vero fore putamus qui negabit Minucium Romae, quae tunc caeterarum totius mundi
II. — But we think there will be no one who will deny that Minucius, at Rome, which was then the head of the other cities of the whole world
Editors' notes and page, col. 201
Footnotes
(1) ‹anchor: LUMPER, O. S. B› · call in col 201 (title, across both columns)
Hist. Theolog. critica de Vita, scriptis atque doctrina SS. PP., pars VII.
Historia theologico-critica de vita, scriptis atque doctrina Sanctorum Patrum, part VII.
(printed under page 153)
(2) ‹anchor: eum verbis compellavit› · call in col 201
Minut. in Dialogo, cap. 2 et 5.
Minucius, in the Dialogue, ch. 2 and 5.
(printed under page 153)
(3) ‹anchor: fuerit illius patria› · call in col 201
Galland, tom. II, in Prolegom., Ceillier, Hist. des Auteurs, tom. II, pag. 122.
Galland, vol. II, in the Prolegomena; Ceillier, Histoire des auteurs, vol. II, p. 122.
(printed under page 153)
(4) ‹anchor: in Africa natum suspicantur› · call in col 201
Tillemont, Mémoires, tom. III, H. E. pag. 71; Basnage, ad ann. 210, 3 Dupinius post Rigaltium ita ratiocinatur: « Hieronymus in Catalogo, in quo temporum servat ordinem, Tertullianum inter et Cyprianum eum numerat. » Minucium a Tertulliano non pauca sumpsisse liquet, et a Cypriano in libro de Vanitate Idolorum Minucii verba non uno in loco exscripta fuisse. Inde praesumitur eum Africanum fuisse; et ejus scriptio ad Africanum stylum accedit.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, Ecclesiastical History, p. 71; Basnage, at the year 210, 3. Dupin, following Rigault, reasons thus: "Jerome in his Catalogue, in which he keeps the order of time, numbers him between Tertullian and Cyprian." It is clear that Minucius took not a little from Tertullian, and that Minucius's words were copied out by Cyprian in his book On the Vanity of Idols in more than one place. Hence it is presumed that he was an African; and his writing approaches the African style.
(printed under page 153)
Page
- running head: 201 M. MINUCIUS FELIX. — PRO[cut off]
- marginal letters: A ‹nihil in totum recipimus›; B ‹I. — Minutio, seu Minucio›; C ‹ita certum est›; D (none)
- old-edition numerals: 192 after ‹nihil›
- other: a full-width band stands across cols 201/202 in mid-page: the paragraph above it in col 201 and the one above it in col 202 end the previous work (another unit) and are not set here; the band itself (its title lines) is not set by the volunteer page: set it here, at the move, with full_width
- other: the column opens with the end of the previous work (another unit); not set here: the unit begins at I. — Minutio
- running head: 201 M. MINUCIUS FELIX. — PROLEGOMENA. 202
- marginal letters: A (in the gutter beside the previous unit's text above the band, "una cum Basilide"); B beside "I. — Minutio, seu Minucio"; C beside "res ? At sane id"; D (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none in this column's layer-1 text; 192 in the previous unit's text above the band)
- other: misprints kept as printed: "PROLOGOMENA" (for PROLEGOMENA) in the band title
urbium caput erat, diu mansisse, ubi causidici munere fungebatur, quemadmodum Lactantius atque Hieronymus hoc palam aperteque asseverant. Ipsemet vero Minucius initio sui libri scribit Octavium ad se Romam venisse, atque una cum eo et altero comite paulo post Ostiam petivisse: « Cum ad vindemiam, inquit, feriae judiciariam curam relaxaverant, » id est, cum a forensi labore, quo per totum annum occupabatur, vindemiarum tempore vacaret. Nonne etiam Octavius de se ipso, et de Minucio, vel potius Minucii tantum nomine dixit: « Non tamen sacrilegos aliquos et incestos, parricidas etiam defendendos et tuendos suscipiebamus: hos vero, » scilicet Christianos, « nec audiendos in totum putabamus? » Ex quibus liquet illum, cum ethnicus adhuc esset, causidici munus obiisse.
remained for a long time, where he discharged the office of an advocate, as Lactantius and Jerome openly and plainly assert. Indeed Minucius himself writes at the beginning of his book that Octavius came to him at Rome, and that a little later, together with him and another companion, he made for Ostia: "When," he says, "the holidays for the vintage had relaxed the care of the courts," that is, when at the time of the vintage he was free from the work of the forum with which he was occupied through the whole year. Did not Octavius also say of himself and of Minucius, or rather in the name of Minucius only: "Yet we undertook to defend and protect certain sacrilegious and incestuous men, even parricides: but these," namely the Christians, "we thought should not be heard at all?" From which it is clear that he, while he was still a pagan, performed the office of an advocate.
III. — Verum nostra aetate vir acerrimi ingenii, Heumannus, dubitari de statu Minucii, eumque e numero causidicorum sive jurisconsultorum eximendum
III. — But in our own age a man of the keenest intellect, Heumann, judged that the standing of Minucius should be called in question, and that he should be removed from the number of advocates or jurisconsults.
Editors' notes and page, col. 202
Footnotes
(5) ‹anchor: quemadmodum Lactantius› · call in col 202
Lactant. lib. V Institut., cap. 1.
Lactantius, Institutes, book V, ch. 1.
(printed under page 153)
(6) ‹anchor: Hieronymus› · call in col 202
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 58, et Epist. 83 ad Magnum.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 58, and Letter 83, to Magnus.
(printed under page 153)
(7) ‹anchor: initio sui libri› · call in col 202
Minuc. in Dialog., cap. 2.
Minucius, in the Dialogue, ch. 2.
(printed under page 153)
(8) ‹anchor: in totum putabamus› · call in col 202
Idem, cap. 28.
The same, ch. 28.
(printed under page 153)
Page
- running head: …ELIX. — PROLEGOMENA. 202 (left part cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A ‹una cum Basilide›; B ‹urbium caput erat›; C ‹bus liquet illum›
- old-edition numerals: 194 after ‹Basilide›; 195 after ‹atque›
- other: the column begins mid-sentence at the end of the Muratorian fragment. The Variae lectiones ("vel constitutores. Routh.") and Routh's Commentarius below it were not set. Full-width lines below the double rule were not set because they are cut off at the left edge: "SÆCULO TERTIO.", "…NUCIUS FELIX,", "…ET APOLOGETA", "…OGOMENA.", "…GETÆ VITA, HISTORIA ET SCRIPTIS,", "…FREDO LUMPER, O. S. B (1)." The Lumper prolegomena column starts mid-sentence at "urbium caput erat". "dubitaride" is printed without a space and is set as "dubitari de". The last word "eximen-" is split at the column break. The English of the last paragraph is incomplete because the sentence's governing verb falls in the next column.
- other: the 1 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 201 (reading order, moved on receipt)
- other: the word eximendum was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 203
- running head: 201 M. MINUCIUS FELIX. — PROLEGOMENA. 202
- marginal letters: A beside "una cum Basilide" (previous unit, above the band); B beside "urbium caput erat"; C beside "bus liquet illum"; D (none)
- old-edition numerals: 195 after "atque" (before Hieronymus); 194 after "Basilide" in the previous unit above the band
esse censuit. Nimirum, inquit Heumannus, Lactantius, qui primus omnium inter antiquiores eo munere functum esse Minucium perhiberc existimatur, appellat illum quidem « causidicum; » ea tamen eleganti notione, qua ipsum non « forensem, » sed « christianae religionis » causidicum innuat: quo semel posito, Lactantii verba perperam accepisse Hieronymum arbitratur: quin et eo procedit, ut sibi propemodum persuadeat haud scripsisse Lactantium: « Minucius Felix non ignobilis inter causidicos loci, » sed, « non ignobilis inter causidicos Ecclesiae fuit. » Scilicet, ait, ex compendiosa scriptura Ecce pro Ecclesiae, facile loci nasci potuit. At operam ludere vir criticus comperitur. Mitto locum illum Minucianum modo laudatum, quem unum vidit, alioque detorsit Heumannus. Licet enim ex ejus sententia verba illius loci minus apta existimentur, quibus ejusmodi lis dirimatur; alibi tamen adeo luculenter suam causam perorat noster « causidicus, » et quidem « non ignobilis loci, » ut nemo plane fuerit qui, aequi judicis partes sibi sumens, juxta ipsius placita sententiam ferre detrectet. Sic igitur ille: « Nos cum sacrilegos aliquos et incestos, parricidas etiam defendendos et tuendos suscipiebamus; hos (Christianos) nec audiendos in totum putabamus. » Ubi notandum in primis verbum « suscipiebamus, » ex foro sumptum, ut ad eum locum ex Wowerio animadversum. « Suscepti » enim « clientes. » Servius ad illud Virgilianum:
Of course, says Heumann, Lactantius, who is thought to be the very first of all among the earlier writers to report that Minucius performed that office, does indeed call him a "causidicus" [advocate]; but in that refined sense by which he implies that he was an advocate not "of the forum" but "of the Christian religion". Having once laid this down, he judges that Jerome took the words of Lactantius wrongly; indeed he goes so far as almost to persuade himself that Lactantius did not write: "Minucius Felix was of no mean place among the advocates," but "was of no mean standing among the advocates of the Church." For, he says, from the abbreviated writing Ecce for Ecclesiae, loci could easily have arisen. But the critic is found to be wasting his effort. I pass over that passage of Minucius just cited, the only one that Heumann saw, and which he twisted to another sense. For although in his opinion the words of that passage may be judged less fit for settling a dispute of this kind, elsewhere our "advocate", and indeed one "of no mean place", pleads his own case so clearly that there could be absolutely no one who, taking upon himself the part of a fair judge, would refuse to give sentence in accordance with his own declarations. Thus, then, he says: "When we used to undertake the defence and protection of certain sacrilegious and incestuous persons, even parricides, we thought that these (the Christians) were not even to be heard at all." Here one must note first of all the word "suscipiebamus" [we used to undertake], taken from the forum, as was observed on that passage by Wouwer. For clients are "suscepti" [taken up]. Servius, on that line of Virgil:
Et fraus innexa clienti:
And fraud woven against a client:
« Vult, inquit, intelligi praevaricatores qui patroni sunt clientium, quos nunc susceptos vocamus. » Reliqua porro Minuciani contextus, quem descripsimus, ita cohaerere noscuntur ejusmodi vocis illius acceptioni, ut quisquis integram auctoris sententiam inspiciat, fateatur oporteat ipsum aliquando saltem, quo tempore scilicet ethnicae superstitioni esset adhuc addictus, causidici munere fuisse perfunctum. Neque vero jure quis regerat Octavium hic a Minucio ita loquentem induci, adeoque illud unum ut maxime inde colligi posse, Octavium quidem, non autem Minucium, causarum patronum egisse. Quis enim, inquit vir eruditus, probe non intelligat Octavium vel de se ipso, dcque Minucio simul, vel potius Minucii tantum nomine dixisse, « se aliquando sacrilegos et incestos, parricidas etiam, defendendos et tuendos suscepisse, Christianos vero nec audiendos in totum putasse? »
"He means," he says, "that those are understood to be collusive betrayers who are patrons of clients, whom we now call 'suscepti'." Furthermore, the rest of the passage of Minucius which we have copied out is recognized to agree so well with this sense of that word that whoever examines the author's whole meaning must admit that he at least at some time, namely at the time when he was still given over to heathen superstition, performed the office of an advocate. Nor could anyone rightly retort that Octavius is here introduced by Minucius as speaking thus, and that therefore at most this one thing can be gathered from it, that Octavius, and not Minucius, acted as a pleader of causes. For who, says a learned man, does not plainly understand that Octavius said either of himself and of Minucius together, or rather in the name of Minucius alone, "that he had at one time undertaken the defence and protection of sacrilegious and incestuous persons, even parricides, but had thought that the Christians were not even to be heard at all"?
Editors' notes and page, col. 203
Footnotes
(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 203
Heumann. Parerg. Gaetting. X, pag. 208-212.
Heumann, Parerga Gottingensia, X, pp. 208–212.
(printed under page 154)
(10) ‹anchor: igitur ille› · call in col 203
Minuc. Dialog., cap. 28.
Minucius, Dialogue, ch. 28.
(printed under page 154)
(11) ‹anchor: illud Virgilianum› · call in col 203
Virgil. Aeneid, VI, 609.
Virgil, Aeneid VI, 609.
(printed under page 154)
(12) ‹anchor: inquit vir eruditus› · call in col 203
Le Nourry, Apparat., tom. II, pag. 11.
Le Nourry, Apparatus, vol. II, p. 11.
(printed under page 154)
Page
- running head: 203 M. MINUCIUS FE (cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A ‹dum esse censuit›; B ‹vidit, alioque detorsit Heumannus›; C ‹« Vult, inquit, intelligi›; D ‹« se aliquando sacrilegos›
- old-edition numerals: 196 after ‹saltem,›
IV. — Quod si rem ita se habere perspicuum sit, illum ⟨q⟩uoque consequens fuerit, Minucium nostrum, etiam post christianae religionis professionem, in eodem munere obeundo perstitisse. Siquidem Octavium ad se Romam venisse scribit, « cum ad vindemiam feriae judiciariam curam relaxaverant; » id est, cum a forensi labore, quo per reliquum anni tempus distinebatur, incumbentibus autumnalibus feriis vacaret. Neque est demum cur quis miretur cum Balduino, « in tam profano et inimico foro consistere causidicum pium potuisse; » ac proinde non est cur inde potius colligat Heumannus Minucium causidicum Romani fori haudquaquam fuisse. « Hi enim si considerent, » verbis utor Mamachii viri cl., « neque semper imperatores cavisse ne qui nostrum publicis muneribus fungerentur, neque omnes, facile quidem certe confitebuntur tertio saeculo, quo Septimius Severus aequior aliquando quam decessores sui consueverant, nostris, et Alexander et Philippi Augusti, qui nihil adversum nos decernendum existimaverunt, regnum adepti sunt, fas fuisse Christiano viro in forum venire, patrociniumque eorum suscipere quos aut injuria affectos aut bonis injuste privatos fuisse arbitraretur. » Arnobius enimvero testatur » magnis ingeniis praeditos oratores et consultos juris magisteria christiana expetiisse, spretis quibus paulo ante fidebant. » Et quis vero dubitet Arnobium his verbis ad Minucium nostrum, imo suum, respexisse, quem inter ejusmodi oratores et jurisconsultos primas tulisse probe noverat? Quid, quod Tertullianus, « Hesterni sumus, inquiebat, et vestra omnia implevimus, urbes, insulas, castella, municipia, conciliabula, castra ipsa, tribus, decurias, senatum, forum: sola vobis reliquimus templa. » Deleat igitur ex suis Parergis Heumannus observationem illam qua Minucium albo jurisconsultorum eradendum statuebat: vigeatque Firmiani et Hieronymi auctoritas, asserentium Minucium Felicem non ignobilis loci, quin et insignem inter causidicos Romae exstitisse.
IV. — But if it is clear that the matter stands thus, it will also follow that our Minucius, even after his profession of the Christian religion, persisted in discharging the same office. For he writes that Octavius came to him at Rome "when the vintage holidays had relaxed my judicial care"; that is, when, the autumn holidays being at hand, he was free from the forensic labour by which he was kept occupied through the rest of the year. Nor, finally, is there any reason why anyone should wonder with Balduinus "that a pious advocate could have taken his stand in so profane and hostile a forum"; and accordingly there is no reason why Heumann should rather infer from this that Minucius was by no means an advocate of the Roman forum. "For if these men consider," I use the words of the distinguished Mamachi, "that the emperors did not always take care that none of our people should discharge public offices, nor did all of them, they will readily, at any rate certainly, acknowledge that in the third century, in which Septimius Severus, at times fairer to our people than his predecessors had been accustomed to be, and Alexander, and the Philips, Augusti, who judged that nothing should be decreed against us, obtained the rule, it was lawful for a Christian man to come into the forum and to undertake the patronage of those whom he judged either to have been wronged or to have been unjustly deprived of their goods." Arnobius indeed testifies that "orators endowed with great talents and men learned in the law sought the Christian teachings, scorning those in which shortly before they had trusted." And who indeed would doubt that Arnobius in these words had regard to our Minucius, nay rather his own, whom he well knew to have held first place among orators and jurists of that kind? What of the fact that Tertullian said: "We are of yesterday, and we have filled everything of yours, cities, islands, fortresses, municipalities, meeting-places, the very camps, tribes, decuries, the senate, the forum: we have left you only the temples"? Let Heumann therefore delete from his Parerga that observation by which he determined that Minucius was to be erased from the roll of jurists; and let the authority of Firmianus and Jerome prevail, who assert that Minucius Felix was of no ignoble rank, nay even was distinguished among the advocates of Rome.
V. — Minucius in paganismo ab incunabilis educatus fuerat, sed in provectiori aetate a gentilium superstitione defecit, et christianam fidem amplexus est; quemadmodum de seipso testatur, ubi de Octavio haec habet: « Cum, discussa caligine, de tenebrarum profundo in lucem sapientiae et veritatis emergerem, non respuit comitem, sed, quod
V. — Minucius had been brought up in paganism from the cradle, but at a more advanced age he fell away from the superstition of the Gentiles and embraced the Christian faith; as he testifies of himself, where he says this of Octavius: "When, the darkness having been dispelled, I was emerging from the depth of the shadows into the light of wisdom and truth, he did not spurn a companion, but, what
Editors' notes and page, col. 204
Footnotes
(13) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 204
Minuc. Dialog., cap. 2.
Minucius, Dialogue, ch. 2.
(printed under page 154)
(14) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 204
Balduin. Dissert. de Minuc. Fel., § 5.
Baudouin, Dissertation on Minucius Felix, § 5.
(printed under page 154)
(15) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 204
Heumann. loc. cit., pag. 212.
Heumann, at the place cited, p. 212.
(printed under page 154)
(16) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 204
Mamach. Orig. et Antiq. Christ., tom. III, pag. 299 seqq.
Mamachi, Origines et antiquitates christianae, vol. III, p. 299 ff.
(printed under page 154)
(17) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 204
Tertullian. ad Scapul., cap. 4.
Tertullian, To Scapula, ch. 4.
(printed under page 154)
(18) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 204
Euseb. H. E. lib. VI, cap. 16 et 28.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book VI, ch. 16 and 28.
(printed under page 154)
(19) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 204
Id. ibid. cap. 34.
The same, in the same place, ch. 34.
(printed under page 154)
(20) ‹anchor: Arnobius enimvero testatur› · call in col 204
Arnob. adv. Gent., lib. II, pag. 21, edit. Paris. 1656.
Arnobius, Against the Nations, book II, p. 21, Paris edition of 1656.
(printed under page 154)
(21) ‹anchor: sumus, inquiebat› · call in col 204
Tertull. Apologet. cap. 37, ed. Migne, t. I, col. 462.
Tertullian, Apology, ch. 37, Migne's edition, vol. I, col. 462.
(printed under page 154)
(22) ‹anchor: Romae exstitisse› · call in col 204
Videnda M. Minucii Felicis pro se et statu suo Epistola Apologetica ad F. O. M., id est, Fridericum Ottonem Menckenium, qua, adversus Heumanni observationem, monstratur Minucium Felicem inter jurisconsultos ac causarum patronos jure meritoque locum tueri. Haec epistola translata est in nova Acta Eruditor. 1738, pag. 210.
See the Apologetic Letter of M. Minucius Felix for himself and his standing, to F. O. M., that is, Friedrich Otto Mencke, in which, against Heumann's observation, it is shown that Minucius Felix rightly and deservedly holds his place among the jurists and advocates. This letter was carried over into the Nova Acta Eruditorum for 1738, p. 210.
(printed under page 154)
(23) ‹anchor: Octavio haec habet› · call in col 204
Minuc. in Dialog., cap. 1.
Minucius, in the Dialogue, ch. 1.
(printed under page 154)
Page
- running head: MINUCIUS FELIX. 204
- marginal letters: A IV. — Quod si rem ita se habere; B imperatores cavisse ne qui nostrum; C probe noverat? Quid, quod Tertullianus; D Octavio haec habet (23)
- old-edition numerals: 197 after albo
est gloriosius, praecurrit, » id est, Octavius me in christianae fidei professione praecessit: quod et Caecilius innuit, dum Dialogi initio Minucium rogat « ut, cum in utroque vitae genere versatus fueris, repudiaris alterum, alterum comprobaris, » nempe licet gentilium superstitionem ⟨r⟩epudiaveris, attamen fidem christianam comprobaveris ;« in praesentiarum tamen ita tibi informandus est animus, ut libram teneas aequissimi judicis, nec in alteram partem propensus incumbas, ne non tam ex nostris disputationibus nota sententia, quam ex sensibus prolata videatur. » Quam pie autem et sancte post conversionem suam Minucius vixerit, his Eucherius, Lugdunensis episcopus, docet verbis : « Et quando clarissimos facundia Firmianum, Minucium, Cyprianum, Hilarium, Joannem, Ambrosium ex illo volumine numerositatis evolvam? Dixerant, credo : Quid hoc est? surgunt indocti et coelum rapiunt ; et non eum doctrinis ecce tibi in errore volutamur et sanguine! Dixerunt istud, et idcirco postea vim intulerunt ipsi regno. »
is more glorious, runs ahead," that is, Octavius went before me in the profession of the Christian faith: which Caecilius also hints at when, at the beginning of the Dialogue, he asks Minucius "that, since you have been engaged in both kinds of life, you should reject the one and approve the other," that is to say, although you have rejected the superstition of the gentiles, yet you have approved the Christian faith; "for the present, however, your mind must be so disposed that you hold the balance of a most impartial judge and do not lean, inclined, towards either side, lest the verdict seem not so much born of our disputations as brought forth from [your] feelings." But how piously and holily Minucius lived after his conversion, Eucherius, bishop of Lyons, teaches in these words: "And when shall I unroll from that volume of multitude Firmianus, Minucius, Cyprian, Hilary, John, Ambrose, most illustrious in eloquence? They had said, I believe: What is this? The unlearned rise up and seize heaven; and we, with our learning, see, wallow in error and blood! They said this, and therefore afterwards they did violence to the kingdom itself."
VI. — Postquam Minucius Christo nomen dedit, « nominis hujus sacramentis institutus, » ut cum Arnobio loquar, jam veritatis vindicem assertoremque se praebuit. Dialogum itaque perscripsit duas in partes distinctum, quarum altera Caecilii pro Ethnicis, altera Octavii pro Christianis orationem complectitur ; eumque inscripsit OCTAVIUS, ut tradunt Lactantius et Hieronymus : imitatus nimirum Platonem, Ciceronem aliosque veteres, qui ejuscemodi libris in dialogi formam compositis illius nomen praefixerunt qui praecipuas in eis agit partes.
VI. — After Minucius gave his name to Christ, "instructed in the sacraments of this name," to speak with Arnobius, he at once showed himself a defender and champion of the truth. He therefore wrote out a Dialogue divided into two parts, of which the one contains the speech of Caecilius for the heathen, the other that of Octavius for the Christians; and he entitled it OCTAVIUS, as Lactantius and Jerome report: imitating, no doubt, Plato, Cicero and other ancients, who prefixed to books of this kind, composed in the form of a dialogue, the name of him who plays the chief part in them.
« Est autem Minucii dialogus, » inquit cl. Blackwallius, » acute, eleganter ac perspicue digestus. Tot fere in eo graves sententias quot periodos deprehendis, et sententiae quidem, sponte ex argumento profluentes, solerter orationi sunt intextae. Rationibus et pugnat et vincit, quantumque acuminis, tantum habet et salis. Ingenium a natura ipsi datum non ad fingendum, sed ad veritatem dicendam, quam adulterare nescit. Christianorum doctrinam criminibus liberat quae pagani eis objeceram ; adversariorumque calumnias in ipsorum religionem tam apte tamque evidenter retorquet, ut se cum malae causae fortissimum maximeque timendum
"Now the dialogue of Minucius," says the celebrated Blackwall, "is arranged acutely, elegantly and clearly. You find in it almost as many weighty sentences as periods, and the sentences, flowing of their own accord from the argument, are skilfully woven into the discourse. With reasons he both fights and conquers, and as much sharpness as he has, so much wit he has too. A talent given him by nature not for feigning but for speaking the truth, which he does not know how to adulterate. He frees the doctrine of the Christians from the crimes which the pagans had laid against them; and he turns the calumnies of the adversaries back upon their own religion so aptly and so evidently that he shows himself both of a bad cause the strongest and most to be feared
Editors' notes and page, col. 205
Footnotes
(24) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 205
Idem, cap. 5.
The same, ch. 5.
(printed under page 155)
(25) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 205
Euch. Lugdun. Epist ad Valerianum, tom. V Biblioth. PP., pag. 771.
Eucherius of Lyons, Letter to Valerianus, vol. V of the Bibliotheca Patrum, p. 771.
(printed under page 155)
(26) ‹anchor: ut cum Arnobio› · call in col 205
Arnob., loc. cit.
Arnobius, at the place cited.
(printed under page 155)
(27) ‹anchor: assertoremque se praebuit› · call in col 205
Le Nourry. Apparat. ad Biblioth. Max. PP., tom. IV, pag. 19.
Le Nourry, Apparatus to the Bibliotheca Maxima Patrum, vol. IV, p. 19.
(printed under page 155)
Page
- running head: 205 PROLEGOMEN[A] (cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A est gloriosius, praecurrit; B sium ex illo volumine; C positis illius nomen praefixerunt; D beside the foot of the text block, after timen-
- old-edition numerals: 198 after acuminis
oppugnatorem, tum bonae nobilissimum praestet patronum. »
assailant, and of a good one the most noble patron."
VII. — Caeterum de aliis Minucii vitae gestis. quamdiu vixerit, qualiterque mortuus sit, altum apud antiquos et recentiores scriptores silentium: neque de aetate qua Minucius Felix vixit, scriptorum habetur consensio, Henricus Dodwellus persuasit sibi eum extremis Marci Antonini temporibus floruisse, et David Blondellus illum aequalem fecit Frontoni, qui M. Antoninum docuit circa annum Christi 160. Plerique non sine ratione quidem eum numerant in scriptoribus saeculi tertii ecclesiasticis; non satis tamen certum et perspicuum est quibus aevi hujus annis floruerit. cujus potissimum imperatoris temporibus Romae vixerit. Guil. Caveus dicit: « De aetate ejus. qua vixit, nihil habeo quod pro certo affirmare ausim; si tamen in re obscura dubiaque hariolari liceat, conjiciam illum, utpote Tertulliano supparem, Cypriano antiquiorem circa annum 22 claruisse. Jo. Alb. Fabricius observat, quod omnes consentiant, Minucium a temporibus Antonini, Commodi ac Severi non longe abfuisse. Zephirini Pontificis Romani aetate Minucium Romae vixisse conjicit Ceillierius ex Hieronymo, qui in cataloge de Viris illustribus Minucium inter scriptores qui id temporis exstitere, recensuit. Ejusdem sententiae fuere viri doctissimi Baronius et Tillemontius. Nostra aetate vir cl. Jo. Daniel ad Hoven. in epistola ad Gerhardum Meermann, Minucium Athenagorae aequalem fuisse eidemque principem inter latinos scriptores christianos locum vindicare allaboravit.
VII. — As for the rest of the deeds of Minucius's life, how long he lived and in what manner he died, there is deep silence among the ancient and the more recent writers; nor is there agreement among writers about the age in which Minucius Felix lived. Henry Dodwell persuaded himself that he flourished in the last times of Marcus Antoninus, and David Blondel made him a contemporary of Fronto, who taught M. Antoninus about the year of Christ 160. Most, indeed not without reason, number him among the ecclesiastical writers of the third century; yet it is not sufficiently certain and clear in which years of this age he flourished, and in the times of which emperor in particular he lived at Rome. William Cave says: "Concerning the age in which he lived, I have nothing that I would dare to affirm for certain; but if one may guess in an obscure and doubtful matter, I would conjecture that he, as being close in time to Tertullian and older than Cyprian, flourished about the year 22. Jo. Alb. Fabricius observes that all agree that Minucius was not far removed from the times of Antoninus, Commodus and Severus. Ceillier conjectures from Jerome that Minucius lived at Rome in the age of Zephyrinus, the Roman Pontiff, since Jerome, in the catalogue On Illustrious Men, listed Minucius among the writers who appeared at that time. Of the same opinion were those most learned men Baronius and Tillemont. In our own age that renowned man Jo. Daniel van Hoven, in a letter to Gerhard Meerman, laboured to show that Minucius was a contemporary of Athenagoras, and to claim for him the first place among the Latin Christian writers.
VII. Praeter dialogum hunc, alium Minucii librum de Fato vel contra Mathematicos Hieronymus, de Viris illustribus capite 58, ita enarrat: » Sed et alius sub nomine ejus fertur de Fato, vel contra Mathematicos, qui cum sit et ipse diserti hominis, non mihi videtur cum superioris libri stylo convenire. » Liber hic, cujus Hieronymus etiam in epistola ad Magnum mentionem facit, hodie non exstat. Ejus Minucium fuisse auctorem, non certum quidem, simile tamen vero est, ipse enim indicat se de fato commentari voluisse, his verbis « Ac de fato satis, vel si pauca pro tempore, disputari alias, et uberius et plenius. » Verum, observante
VII. Besides this dialogue, Jerome, in chapter 58 of On Illustrious Men, describes another book of Minucius, On Fate or Against the Astrologers, thus: "But another also is circulated under his name, On Fate, or Against the Astrologers, which, although it too is the work of an eloquent man, does not seem to me to agree with the style of the former book." This book, which Jerome also mentions in his letter to Magnus, is not extant today. That Minucius was its author is not indeed certain, yet it is likely; for he himself indicates that he wished to write about fate, in these words: "And enough about fate, even if only a little for the occasion; it will be discussed elsewhere, both more abundantly and more fully." But, as
Editors' notes and page, col. 206
Footnotes
(28) ‹anchor: praestet patronum› · call in col 206
Blackwal., de Praestantia Classicor. Auctor., cap. 10, § 9, pag. 195.
Blackwall, On the Excellence of the Classical Authors, ch. 10, § 9, p. 195.
(printed under page 155)
(29) ‹anchor: Henricus Dodwellus› · call in col 206
Douvwel.. Dissertat. Cyprianica III, § 16, pag. 12.
Dodwell, Dissertationes Cyprianicae III, § 16, p. 12.
(printed under page 155)
(30) ‹anchor: David Blondellus› · call in col 206
Blondell., de Eucharistia., pag. 119.
Blondel, On the Eucharist, p. 119.
(printed under page 155)
(31) ‹anchor: Guil. Caveus› · call in col 206
Cave, Hist. litterar. script. Eccle., tom. I, p. 101.
Cave, Literary History of Ecclesiastical Writers, vol. I, p. 101.
(printed under page 155)
(32) ‹anchor: Jo. Alb. Fabricius› · call in col 206
Fabric. Not. Ad Hieronymum, de Viris illustribus, cap. 58, pag. 153. Biblioth ecclesiast.
Fabricius, Notes on Jerome's On Illustrious Men, ch. 58, p. 153, Bibliotheca ecclesiastica.
(printed under page 155)
(33) ‹anchor: conjicit Ceillierius› · call in col 206
Remi Ceillier, Hist. des auteurs Ecclés., tom. II. chap. 23, pag. 222.
Rémi Ceillier, Histoire des auteurs ecclésiastiques, vol. II, ch. 23, p. 222.
(printed under page 155)
(34) ‹anchor: doctissimi Baronius› · call in col 206
Baron, ad ann. 211, § 3 et 4.
Baronius, at the year 211, §§ 3 and 4.
(printed under page 155)
(35) ‹anchor: et Tillemontius› · call in col 206
Tillemont., Mémoir., tom. III, Note sur Minuce pag. 295.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, note on Minucius, p. 295.
(printed under page 155)
(36) ‹anchor: vindicare allaboravit› · call in col 206
Quae primum locum occupat in V D. Campensibus sive spicilegiis critico antiquariis, Campis, 1766. Exstat etiam in Lindneri secunda Minucii Felicis editione, 1773.
It takes first place in V. D.'s Campensia, or critical-antiquarian gleanings, Kampen, 1766. It is also found in Lindner's second edition of Minucius Felix, 1773.
(printed under page 155)
(37) ‹anchor: mentionem facit› · call in col 206
« Minucius Felix in libro cui titulus est Octavius, et in altero contra Mathematicos, si tamen inscriptio non mentitur auctorem, quid gentilium scripturarum dimisit intactum? » Hieronym. Ep. ad magnum 83.
"Minucius Felix, in the book entitled Octavius, and in the other, Against the Astrologers (if indeed the title does not lie about the author), what of the pagans' writings did he leave untouched?" Jerome, Letter 83, to Magnus.
(printed under page 155)
(38) ‹anchor: his verbis› · call in col 206
Minuc,, in Octav. Dialog., cap. 36.
Minucius, in the Octavius dialogue, ch. 36.
(printed under page 155)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA. (column number 206 at right)
- marginal letters: A dum oppugnatorem, tum bonae; B vixerit. Guil. Caveus; C principem inter latinos; D beside the head of the footnotes, line (33) Remi Ceillier
- old-edition numerals: 199 after exstat.
- other: misprints kept as printed: "cataloge" (for catalogo); the second section numeral "VII." (for VIII.)
servante cl. Dupinio, utrum in alio libro de Fato amplius disseruerit, et an tractatus, qui Hieronymi temporibus extabat, is esset quem promiserat, an potius inde ansam arripuisset auctor aliquis quemdam Minucii nomine supponendi, incertum est. Cum vero satis apertum sit hoc ingenii monumentum interiisse, mirum sane quod Sebast, Nanus Tillemontius, de Minucio ejusque Dialogo erudite disserens, addat illud legi typis exscriptum in quadam Arnobii editione.
as the celebrated Dupin observes, whether he discoursed more fully in another book, On Fate, and whether the treatise which existed in the times of Jerome was the one he had promised, or rather some author had seized from it the occasion of passing off a certain [treatise] under the name of Minucius, is uncertain. But since it is plain enough that this monument of his genius has perished, it is surely strange that Sébastien Le Nain de Tillemont, discoursing learnedly on Minucius and his Dialogue, adds that it is read printed in type in a certain edition of Arnobius.
FRANCISCI BALDUINI JC.
OF FRANÇOIS BAUDOUIN, JURISCONSULT,
DISSERTATIO
A DISSERTATION
DE MINUCII FELICIS OCTAVIO.
ON THE OCTAVIUS OF MINUCIUS FELIX.
Ut hunc sive libellum, sive dialogum, qui multis jam saeculis falso creditus est dictusque esse octavus Arnobii adversus Gentes, et inscriberem, et esse plane liquidoque affirmarem M. Minucii Felicis Octavium, facile mihi persuaserunt duo et boni, et antiqui, et graves testes auctoresque, Lactantius atque Hieronymus. Ille enim suarum Inslitutionum lib. I, cap. 11, citat « Minucium Felicem in eo, ut ait, libro, qui Octavius inscribitur. » Et ex eo verba quaedam descripta recitat quae non patiuntur nos aut alium aliquem, aut alterius cujusquam, Octavium fingere. Idem lib. V, cap. 1, loquens de Christianorum quos legerit eloquentia, primo loco hunc Minucium laudat. « Minucius, inquit, Felix, non ignobilis inter causidicos loci fuit. Hujus liber, cui Octavius titulus est, declarat quam idoneus veritatis assertor esse potuisset, si se totum ad id studium contulisset. » Testis alter est Hieronymus, qui hunc, sicuti ipse fatetur, Lactantium secutus, in catalogo Scriptorum ecclesiasticorum ait: « Minucius Felix, Romae insignis causidicus, scripsit Dialogum Christiani et Ethnici disputantium, qui Octavius inscribitur. » Idem in epistola ad Magnum, oratorem Romanum, « Minucius, inquit, Felix, causidicus Romani fori, in libro, cui titulus Octavius est, quid gentilium scripturarum dimisit intactum? » Jam autem non esse hunc librum Arnobii satis patet, cum Minucii esse apparet. Et vero, quod Hieronymus in eadem epistola subjicit, indicare alioqui poterat Arnobii non esse, cum quidem non nisi septem, qui etiamnum exstant, libros adversus Gentes Arnobium scripsisse testetur. Cumque alterum quemdam librum Minucio nostro falso inscriptum fuisse narret, tanto miror doleoque magis hunc, qui ejus erat unicus καὶ γνήσιος, fuisse illi subreptum, alterique, non domino, injuste ascriptum, ut et plagio et partu supposito facta nostro Minucio duplex injuria esse videatur. Sed haec frequens est querela de librariorum nihil non temere miscentium facinoribns. Fortasse, ut hunc libellum Arnobio quidam ascriberent, quaedam styli et argumenti similitudo, quae imperitos
That I should both entitle this little book, or dialogue, which for many centuries now has been falsely believed and said to be the eighth [book] of Arnobius Against the Gentiles, and affirm plainly and clearly that it is the Octavius of M. Minucius Felix, I was easily persuaded by two witnesses and authorities, both good and ancient and weighty, Lactantius and Jerome. For the former, in Book I, chapter 11, of his Institutes, cites "Minucius Felix in that book," as he says, "which is entitled Octavius." And he quotes from it certain words copied out which do not allow us to imagine the Octavius to be either anyone else or anyone else's. The same, in Book V, chapter 1, speaking of the eloquence of the Christians whom he had read, praises this Minucius in the first place. "Minucius Felix," he says, "held no mean place among the advocates. His book, whose title is Octavius, shows how fit a defender of the truth he could have been, if he had given himself wholly to that pursuit." The second witness is Jerome, who, following Lactantius here, as he himself admits, says in the catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers: "Minucius Felix, a distinguished advocate of Rome, wrote a Dialogue of a Christian and a heathen disputing, which is entitled Octavius." The same, in the letter to Magnus, a Roman orator, says: "Minucius Felix, an advocate of the Roman forum, in the book whose title is Octavius, what of the writings of the gentiles did he leave untouched?" Now it is plain enough that this book is not Arnobius's, since it appears to be Minucius's. And indeed, what Jerome adds in the same letter could in any case have shown that it is not Arnobius's, since he testifies that Arnobius wrote only seven books Against the Gentiles, which still exist. And since he relates that a certain other book was falsely inscribed with the name of our Minucius, I wonder and grieve all the more that this one, which was his only and genuine one, was stolen from him and unjustly ascribed to another, not to its owner, so that a double wrong seems to have been done to our Minucius, both by plagiarism and by a supposititious birth. But this is a frequent complaint about the misdeeds of copyists, who rashly confuse everything. Perhaps what caused some to ascribe this little book to Arnobius was a certain likeness of style and argument, which very often deceives the inexperienced
Editors' notes and page, col. 207
Footnotes
(39) ‹anchor: servante cl. Dupinio› · call in col 207
Dupin. Biblioth. des auteurs. tom. I, pag. 189.
Dupin, Bibliothèque des auteurs, vol. I, p. 189.
(printed under col 207 above the mid-page band, page 156)
Page
- running head: 207 M. MINUCIUS FE (cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A ‹servante cl. Dupinio›; B ‹Ut hunc sive libellum›; C ‹fuit. Hujus liber›; D ‹exstant, libros adversus Gentes›
- old-edition numerals: 200 after ‹et an›
- other: a full-width band stands across cols 207/208 in mid-page: the 1 paragraph(s) above it in col 208 are set here, after the 1 above it in col 207 (reading order, moved on receipt); the band itself (its title lines) is not set by the volunteer page: set it here, at the move, with full_width
- running head: 207 M. MINUCIUS FELIX. 208
- marginal letters: A beside "servante cl. Dupinio"; B beside "Ut hunc sive libellum"; C beside "fuit. Hujus liber"; D beside "exstant, libros adversus Gentes"
- old-edition numerals: 200 after "et an"
- other: misprints kept as printed: "Inslitutionum" (for Institutionum); "facinoribns" (for facinoribus)
- other: the word "incer-|tum" is split at the column break (tail at the top of col 208, above the band) and is set whole here; "est." after it is col 208's
persaepe fallit, fecit: et cum legerent Octavium, statim somniarunt octavum aliquem esse librum. Ridicule profecto et inepte. Saltem Arnobio perpetua oratione utenti dialogum temere ascribendum non esse cogitasent. Verum inscitiae tam caeca quam confidens est audacia. Sane Hieronymus scribit Nepotianum suum tam in scriptoribus ecclesiasticis diligenter versatum fuisse, ut, si quid ex iis proferretur, statim agnosceret atque discerneret, quid Tertulliani, quid Cypriani, quid Lactantii, quid Minucii, quid Victorini, quid Arnobii esset. Caeterum, tanto magis miror Erasmum eo loco, illum dico Erasmum hominem accerrimo judicio praeditum, et tallium scriptorum nimine obtusum censorem, annotasse hujus Minucii nihil nunc exstare.
and when they read Octavius, they at once dreamed that it was some eighth book. Absurdly indeed and foolishly. At least they should have reflected that a dialogue was not to be rashly ascribed to Arnobius, who uses continuous discourse. But the boldness of ignorance is as blind as it is confident. Jerome, to be sure, writes that his Nepotian was so diligently versed in the ecclesiastical writers that, if anything were brought forward from them, he would at once recognize and distinguish what was Tertullian's, what Cyprian's, what Lactantius's, what Minucius's, what Victorinus's, what Arnobius's. For the rest, I wonder all the more that Erasmus in that place, that Erasmus, I mean, a man endowed with the keenest judgement and by no means a dull critic of such writers, noted that nothing of this Minucius now exists.
Cujus potissimum imperatoris temporibus Romae vixerit noster Minucius, nondum mihi satis liquet. Hieronymus in suo catalogo) quo scriptores ecclesiasticos eo quo vixerunt ordine recensere videtur, illum Origeni proximum, Cypriano priorem fuisse, obscure significat. Sed hujus alioqui vel saeculum vel aetatem non indicat. Certe in Cypriani de Idolorum vanitate libello plurima sunt quae tot idem verbis in Octavio Minucii leguntur; necesse ut sit aut hunc ab illo, aut illum ab hoc ea sumpsisse. Hieronymus vero in epistola ab Magnum, loquens de latinis scriptoribus Ecclesiae, etsi Minucium ante Cyprianum laudet, tamen illam de idolis orationem ascribere Cypriano magis videtur. Sed et in Apologia pro suis adversus Jovinianum libris, primo loco Tertullianum, secundo Cyprianum, tertio Minucium commemorat. Sabellicus, sed sine teste, affirmat eum Romae floruisse quo tempore Urbanus ibi erat episcopus, hoc est, temporibus Alexandri Severi imperatoris. Si ita esset, esset Minucius antiquior Cypriano, aequalis Tertulliano, nostrique adeo Juriscons. Ulpiano et Paulo. Verum etsi posteriorem fuisse credam, tamen proxima illa tempora secutum esse existimo: nostra vero non attingere nisi intervallo longissimo, hoc est, annorum prope CIƆ CCC.
In the times of which emperor in particular our Minucius lived at Rome is not yet clear enough to me. Jerome in his catalogue, in which he seems to review the ecclesiastical writers in the order in which they lived, obscurely indicates that he was next to Origen and earlier than Cyprian. But otherwise he does not indicate either his century or his age. Certainly in Cyprian's little book On the Vanity of Idols there are very many things which are read in so many identical words in the Octavius of Minucius; it must be that either the latter took them from the former, or the former from the latter. Jerome, however, in the letter to Magnus, speaking of the Latin writers of the Church, though he praises Minucius before Cyprian, nevertheless seems rather to ascribe that discourse on idols to Cyprian. And also in the Apology for his books against Jovinian he mentions Tertullian in the first place, Cyprian in the second, Minucius in the third. Sabellicus, but without a witness, affirms that he flourished at Rome at the time when Urban was bishop there, that is, in the times of the emperor Alexander Severus. If that were so, Minucius would be older than Cyprian, a contemporary of Tertullian, and so of our jurisconsults Ulpian and Paul. But even if I should believe that he was later, I still think that he followed close on those times, but reaches ours only at the longest interval, that is, of nearly 1300 years.
Minuciam gentem olim Romae nobilem fuisse
That the Minucian family was once noble at Rome
Editors' notes and page, col. 208
Page
- running head: MINUCIUS FELIX. (first letter cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A tum est. Cum vero satis; B persaepe fallit, fecit; C Cujus potissimum imperatoris; D tio Minucium commemorat
- old-edition numerals: 201 after orationem
- other: the 1 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 207 (reading order, moved on receipt)
- running head: 207 M. MINUCIUS FELIX. 208
- marginal letters: A beside "tum est. Cum vero"; B beside "persaepe fallit, fecit"; C beside "Cujus potissimum imperatoris"; D beside "tio Minucium commemorat"
- old-edition numerals: 201 after "orationem"
- other: the upper right lines ("tum est ... Arnobii editione") belong to the paragraph set whole in c207_a (reading order). In "non indicat" the o of non is battered on the page; read as non. A stray mark before "tempore" (quo tempore) not set. CIƆ CCC = 1300.
- misprints kept as printed: cogitasent (cogitassent); accerrimo (acerrimo); tallium (talium); nimine (minime); "catalogo)" (stray closing parenthesis); "ab Magnum" (ad Magnum)
memini, in qua quatuor consules Minucii Augurini intra annos quadraginta numerari possunt. Sed et Minucios Rufos, et Minucios Thermos in Fastis consularibus lego. Denique et Minucius Fundanus Asiae praeses fuit illustris, ad quem Hadrianus imperator non iniquam de Christianis legem misit: ut jam nihil dicam de eo cujus in Epistolis meminit Plinius, vel quem ille noster laudat Julianus, cujus ad Minucium Natalem libri de Jure civili laudantur.
I remember, in which four consuls, Minucii Augurini, can be counted within forty years. But I also read of Minucii Rufi and Minucii Thermi in the consular Fasti. Lastly, Minucius Fundanus too was a distinguished governor of Asia, to whom the emperor Hadrian sent a law concerning the Christians that was not unjust: to say nothing now of the one whom Pliny mentions in his Letters, or of the one whom that Julian of ours praises, whose books On Civil Law addressed to Minucius Natalis are commended.
His vero omnibus unum Minucium Felicem, etsi non fuerit ejusdem aut gentis aut familiae, facile antepono, aetate quidem posteriorem, doctrina tamen, virtute et, quod primo loco numerandum est, pietate multo superiorem. Fuit enim non modo jurisconsultus magnus, et excellens suo tempore orator: sed et, quod majus est, fuit serio Christianus. Afrum fuisse suspicor, licet id affirmare non ausim. Certe Frontonis Cirtensis (Cirta autem fuit nobilissima Numidiae civitas, cujus et in Pandectis mentio fit) ita meminit, ut in Africa versatum se esse significet. Estque genus dicendi scribendique secutus, quale Afri illi, Tertullianus, Cyprianus, Arnobius: ut jam de posterioribus non loquar, quos eadem olim aluit Africa; illa, inquam, felix fecundaque Africa, quae ut semper aliquid novi proferre dicebatur, sic etiam religionis nostrae vindices et patronos doctissimos acerrimosque protulit, et ad ipsius quoque Romanae Ecclesiae praesidium atque defensionem emisit; nam et ex eadem Africa prodibant hostes minime ignavi, neque improbi minus, quam vehementes calumniatores, qualis, ne longius abeam, fuit ille, cujus jam memini, Fronto; quem quidem tam impudentem rhetorem, quam impium Christianorum adversarium fuisse, ex Minucio intelligemus. Nollem hunc fuisse Papirium Frontonem, jurisconsultum, qui in Pandectis laudatur. Suspicor potius fuisse Cornelium Frontonem rhetorem, quem Capitolinus narrat fuisse praeceptorem M. Antonini philosophi, imperatoris, et ex cujus etiam schola oratoria accepimus prodiisse illum nostrum Melitonem, qui ad Christianorum defensionem eloquentiam suam convertit: ut quod illis impius praeceptor probrum asperserat maledicendo, bonus discipulus abstergeret respondendo.
But to all these I readily prefer one man, Minucius Felix, even if he was not of the same clan or family: later indeed in age, yet far superior in learning, in virtue and, what must be counted in the first place, in piety. For he was not only a great jurist and an outstanding orator in his own time, but also, what is greater, he was in earnest a Christian. I suspect that he was an African, though I would not dare to affirm it. Certainly he mentions Fronto of Cirta (Cirta, moreover, was a most noble city of Numidia, of which mention is also made in the Pandects) in such a way as to indicate that he himself had lived in Africa. And he followed a manner of speaking and writing such as those Africans did, Tertullian, Cyprian, Arnobius: to say nothing now of later men, whom the same Africa once nourished; that, I say, happy and fruitful Africa, which, just as it was said always to bring forth something new, so also brought forth most learned and most vigorous champions and defenders of our religion, and sent them out for the protection and defence of the Roman Church itself as well; for from the same Africa there also came forth enemies by no means sluggish, and no less wicked than vehement slanderers, such as, not to go further afield, was that Fronto whom I have already mentioned; whom we shall understand from Minucius to have been as shameless a rhetorician as he was an impious adversary of the Christians. I would not wish this man to have been Papirius Fronto, the jurist, who is praised in the Pandects. I rather suspect that he was Cornelius Fronto the rhetorician, whom Capitolinus relates to have been the teacher of Marcus Antoninus the philosopher, the emperor, and from whose school of oratory, as we have learned, there also came forth that Melito of ours, who turned his eloquence to the defence of the Christians: so that the reproach which the impious teacher had cast upon them by reviling, the good disciple might wipe away by answering.
Minucium nostrum Romae causas egisse, paulo ante ex Lactantio et Hieronymo dictum est: neque hoc ipse dissimulat, cum vindemiarum feriis curam judiciariam sibi remissam fuisse narrat. Sic enim et Ulpianus in Pandectis lege 1 de Feriis scribit, M. Antonini imperatoris oratione expressum fuisse « ne quis messium aut vindemiarum tempore adversarium cogeret ad judicium venire. » Sicuti et Suetonius (cap. 35) narrat Augustum statuisse, « ne Septembri Octobrive mense necesse esset,
That our Minucius pleaded cases at Rome has been stated a little earlier from Lactantius and Jerome: nor does he himself conceal this, when he relates that during the holidays of the vintage his judicial duties had been remitted to him. For thus Ulpian too writes in the Pandects, in law 1 On Holidays, that it had been laid down in an address of the emperor Marcus Antoninus « that no one should compel an adversary to come to court at the time of the harvests or the vintages. » Just as Suetonius too (chap. 35) relates that Augustus decreed « that in the month of September or October it should not be necessary,
Editors' notes and page, col. 209
Footnotes
(1) ‹anchor: illum nostrum› · call in col 209
Sardensem episcopum, auctorem Apologiae pro Christianis. Hieronym. Catalog.
The bishop of Sardis, author of an Apology for the Christians. Jerome, Catalogue.
(printed under page 157)
Page
- running head: 209 PROLEGOMEN (cut off at the image edge; page number in damaged type)
- marginal letters: A memini, in qua quatuor consules; B jurisconsultus magnus, et excellens; C improbi minus, quam vehementes; D Minucium nostrum Romae causas egisse
- old-edition numerals: 202 before Minucium (head of the third paragraph)
in senatum venire. » Imo vero et ipse Cyprianus, tanquam alter Minucius, in sua Epistola ad Donatum (Edit. Oxon. Tractatu de Gratia, pag. 1), meminit ejus temporis quo, ut ait, « indulgente vindemia solutus animus in quietem, solemnes et statas anni fatigantis inducias sortitur. » At tunc quidem secessus am⟨oe⟩nos captare se ait, ubi de rebus divinis cogitet. Non dissimilis est narratio nostri Minucii. Felices vero illae feriae, quibus a foro subselliisque abductus nobilissimus causidicus est ad religiosam sive commentationem sive disputationem. Cicero, quod abs nostro Scaevola accepit, narrat (lib. II de Oratore, cap. 6). « Laelium cum Scipione solitum esse rusticari; eosque incredibiliter repuerascere esse solitos, cum rus ex urbe, tanquam ex vinculis evolassent: conchas » etiam « et umbilicos ad Cajetam et ad Lucrinum legere consuesse, et ad omnem animi remissionem ludumque descendere. » Ejus vero exempli statim mihi in mentem venit, cum Minucium audirem, relicto strepitu forensi, cum suo Octavio rusticari, et in littore Ostiensi suaviter spectare puerilem, quem describit, ludum. Sed cum deinde audio quam in illo secessu et gravis et seria de religione disputatio fuerit, et quale sit in deserto fornice consilium, sentio nunquam coactum Romae fuisse senatum majori de re: nullumque forum, urbem nullam, nullum negotium, illi sive otio, sive solitudini praetulero: saepiusque ut jurisconsulti eo modo feriari, secedere atque rusticari aliquando velint, optare cogor. An in eorum animos cadere non potest sancta aliqua et religiosa et secreto suo digna rerum divinarum cogitatio? Lactantius innuit Minucium sese totum non contulisse ad studium rerum ecclesiasticarum. Sed tanto nobilior ejus jurisprudentia fuit, quae, qualis esse debet, in republica fuit: et rerum divinarum humanarumque curam et cognitionem conjunxit: tantoque propterea magis ejus exemplum nostri ordinis hominibus commendo, ut saltem diebus nefastis in otio melioris religionis fastos excolant, iisque se dent atque addicant. Habebant olim feriantes Romani suam « decursionem Tiberinam, » cujus meminit Cicero (lib. V de Fin. cap. 24), suamque, ut leges nostrae vocant, « Majumam » ad Ostiam. Sed excursio nostri Minucii quam minime aut otiosa aut ludicra fuit? Digna profecto, cujus vestigia libenter conspiceret Augustinus: et illum recessum, in quo habita est disputatio, salutaret, cum in ecclesia Ostiensi matrem suam Monicam sepeliret. Equidem religiosi ejus colloquii, quod sancta haec matrona cum filio suo habuit ad ostia illa Tiberina (sicuti ipse recitat lib. XI Confession.), meminisse soleo, quoties Dialogum hunc Minucianum lego.
to come into the senate." Indeed Cyprian himself too, like a second Minucius, in his Letter to Donatus (Oxford edition, treatise On Grace, p. 1), recalls that time in which, as he says, "while the vintage grants indulgence, the mind, released into rest, obtains the solemn and appointed truce of the wearying year." At that time, he says, he seeks out pleasant retreats where he may reflect on divine things. Not unlike this is the narrative of our Minucius. Happy indeed were those holidays by which a most noble advocate was drawn away from the forum and the benches to a religious meditation or disputation. Cicero relates what he had received from our Scaevola (On the Orator, bk 2, ch. 6): "that Laelius was accustomed to go into the country with Scipio; and that they were accustomed to become boys again to an incredible degree when they had flown from the city to the country as if from chains: that they were wont to gather" also "shells and pebbles at Caieta and at the Lucrine lake, and to descend to every relaxation of mind and play." That example came to my mind at once when I heard of Minucius, with the din of the courts left behind, staying in the country with his Octavius and on the shore of Ostia pleasantly watching the boys' game which he describes. But when I then hear how weighty and serious a disputation about religion took place in that retreat, and what kind of counsel is held under a deserted arch, I perceive that the senate was never convened at Rome on a greater matter: and I shall have preferred no forum, no city, no business to that leisure or solitude of his: and I am compelled to wish ever more often that jurists would sometimes be willing to keep holiday, withdraw and go into the country in that manner. Or can there not fall into their minds some holy and religious contemplation of divine things, worthy of its seclusion? Lactantius hints that Minucius had not devoted himself wholly to the study of ecclesiastical matters. But so much the nobler was his jurisprudence, which was in the commonwealth such as it ought to be: and he joined the care and knowledge of things divine and human: and so much the more therefore do I commend his example to the men of our order, that at least on the days when no court business is done they may at leisure cultivate the calendar of a better religion, and give and devote themselves to it. The Romans, when keeping holiday, once had their "Tiber run," which Cicero mentions (On Ends, bk 5, ch. 24), and, as our laws call it, their "Maiuma" at Ostia. But was not the excursion of our Minucius as far as possible from being either idle or sportive? Worthy indeed was it, a place whose traces Augustine would gladly have gazed upon; and he would have greeted that retreat in which the disputation was held, when he buried his mother Monica in the church of Ostia. Indeed I am accustomed to recall that religious conversation of theirs, which this holy matron had with her son at those mouths of the Tiber (as he himself recounts in Confessions, bk 11), whenever I read this Minucian Dialogue.
Quaenam esset Romani fori conditio, cum in
What the condition of the Roman forum was, when
Editors' notes and page, col. 210
Footnotes
(2) ‹anchor: ut leges› · call in col 210
Titulo utriusque Codicis de Majuma. Suidas Ostiae eos ludos celebratos addit, quorum summa fuit ἡδυπαθεῖν ἐν τοῖς θαλαττίοις ὕδασιν, ἀλλήλους ἐμβάλλοντες.
Under the title On the Maiuma in both Codes. Suidas adds that these games were held at Ostia, and that their chief part was to take their pleasure in the sea water, throwing one another in.
(printed under page 157)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA. 210
- marginal letters: A in senatum venire.; B ex urbe, tanquam ex vinculis; C potest sancta aliqua; D nime aut otiosa
- old-edition numerals: 203 after Digna
eo versaretur Minucius, quaeque Ecclesi⟨ae⟩ in ea urbe tunc facies esset, ejus aetatis memoria plane ostendit: et quae aliquando scripsi ad Edicta veterum Principum Rom. de Christianis, eam rem illustrant. Neque ignota est historia temporum, quibus Decius aut Valerianus imperavit. Bene vero habet: Jurisconsultis, quorum de jure civili responsa legimus, non solum ab religione alienis, sed et ejus acerrimis adversariis, successisse christianum causidicum: et illud sive forum sive collegium Rom. togae atque advocationis, quod tot jam annis conspersum fuerat sanguine et cineribus piorum hominum, tandem aliquando voce et vestigiis christiani jurisperiti expiatum atque consecratum fuisse. Arnobius libro primo gloriatur, et oratores et jurisconsultos, magnis, ut ait, ingeniis praeditos, transiisse ad Ecclesiam. Credo equidem, cum id scriberet, de Minucio eum suo cogitasse. Multos ejus ordinis fortasse numerare vix potuisset. Sed Minucii tamen exemplum quosdam secutos esse credo: ut et Minucius habuit, quos in eodem stadio sequeretur. Saltem Hieronymus ad Magnum, ubi Minucium laudat, meminit duorum Romanae urbis senatorum, Hippolyti et Apollonii, qui, ut et inter Scriptores ecclesiasticos referrentur, meriti sint. Quid dicam de illo Vettio Epagatho Lugdunensi, qui olim et multis quidem ante Minucium annis et fuit, et partim ignominiae, partim honoris causa (ut varia tunc erant hominum de religione judicia) publice appellatus est ADVOCATUS CHRISTIANORUM? An horum causam aliquando in foro Roman. Minucius egerit; nescio. Certe Tertullianus vix hoc licuisse significat. Tam odiosa tunc erat eorum sive religio, sive Ecclesia, cui status reipublicae imperiique Rom. adversabatur, totque jam erat publicis praejudiciis confossa, ut ipsius nominis Christiani confessio ad damnationem satis esset. Tantum abest, ut hujus religionis esset, quae libertatis erat, assertio. Sed tanto magis interea miror in tam profano et inimico foro consistere causidicum pium potuisse. Mirum vero, cum jam annis prope ducentis orbis Romanus et palam et publice et libere Christo nomen dedisset, auctoribus ipsis imperatoribus, visam esse legem necessariam, quae et tandem lata est, ut in nullo foro vel advocatus vel causidicus esset ullus, vel jus postulandi quisquam haberet, qui Christianus non esset. (Lege 8. Cod. de Postulando.) Quam fuit itaque nobile Minucii nostri exemplum, qui bonarum partium, quantum potuit, patronus Romae fuit, quo tempore nondum impune hoc licebat! certe Christianis tunc erat interdictum foro, neque iis jus postulandi praetor dabat. Verum etsi magis illi palliati quam togati esse solerent, tamen
Minucius was engaged in it, and what the face of the Church in that city then was, the record of that age plainly shows; and what I once wrote on the Edicts of the old Roman Emperors concerning the Christians illustrates the matter. Nor is the history of the times in which Decius or Valerian ruled unknown. But it is indeed well: that to the jurisconsults, whose responses on civil law we read, men not only estranged from religion but even its fiercest adversaries, a Christian pleader succeeded; and that that forum or college of the Roman gown and of advocacy, which for so many years now had been bespattered with the blood and ashes of pious men, was at long last expiated and consecrated by the voice and the footsteps of a Christian jurist. Arnobius in his first book boasts that both orators and jurisconsults, endowed, as he says, with great talents, had passed over to the Church. I for my part believe that when he wrote this he was thinking of his own Minucius. Many of that order he could perhaps scarcely have counted. But I believe that some nevertheless followed the example of Minucius, just as Minucius too had men whom he might follow on the same course. At least Jerome, writing to Magnus, where he praises Minucius, mentions two senators of the city of Rome, Hippolytus and Apollonius, who deserved to be reckoned even among the ecclesiastical writers. What shall I say of that Vettius Epagathus of Lyons, who lived long ago, indeed many years before Minucius, and who, partly in disgrace and partly in honour (so varied were men's judgements about religion at that time), was publicly called ADVOCATE OF THE CHRISTIANS? Whether Minucius ever pleaded their cause in the Roman forum, I do not know. Certainly Tertullian indicates that this was scarcely permitted. So hateful at that time was their religion, or Church, which the condition of the Roman state and empire opposed, and by so many public prejudices had it already been pierced through, that confession of the very name of Christian was enough for condemnation. So far was this religion from having the assertion that belongs to freedom. But all the more, meanwhile, do I marvel that a pious pleader could have taken his stand in so profane and hostile a forum. It is a marvel indeed that, when the Roman world had already for nearly two hundred years given its name to Christ openly, publicly and freely, with the emperors themselves leading the way, a law was thought necessary, and was at length passed, that in no forum should there be any advocate or pleader, nor should anyone have the right of pleading, who was not a Christian. (Law 8, Code, On Pleading.) How noble, then, was the example of our Minucius, who was at Rome the patron of the good cause, as far as he could be, at a time when this was not yet allowed with impunity! Certainly the forum was then forbidden to Christians, nor did the praetor grant them the right of pleading. But although they were wont to be men of the pallium rather than of the toga, yet
Editors' notes and page, col. 211
Footnotes
(3) ‹anchor: Quid dicam de illo› · call in col 211
Martyr Lugdunensis sub M. Antonino et L. Vero. Testes Euseb. H. E. lib. V, cap. 1, et Gregor. Turonensis, lib. I, cap. 29.
A martyr of Lyons under Marcus Antoninus and Lucius Verus. Witnesses: Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book V, ch. 1, and Gregory of Tours, book I, ch. 29.
(printed under page 158)
(4) ‹anchor: publice appellatus est› · call in col 211
Παράκλητος Χριστιανῶν. Euseb. d. l.
"Advocate of the Christians." Eusebius, at the place mentioned.
(printed under page 158)
Page
- running head: 211 M. MINUCIUS FE[LIX] (cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A ‹eo versaretur Minucius›; B ‹ingeniis praeditos, transiisse› (printed between this line and the one above); C ‹horum causam aliquando›; D ‹catus vel causidicus›
- old-edition numerals: 204 after ‹causidicus›
quia iis respublica saepe carere non poterat, aliquando togatos esse eos, et eorum quosdam aliquod in republ. munus obire passi subinde sunt ethnici principes. Christiani imperatores deinde multo fuere indulgentiores, qui eos et consules et praefectos urbi atque etiam praetorio interdum creabant, quos alioqui non ignorabant esse acerrimos hostes religionis, quod intelligi potest vel ex unius Symmachi conditione. Sed facti tandem aliquando sunt severiores, et senatum forumque Rom. perpurgarunt et Minucios quosdam esse jusserunt, quicunque vel jus dicerent, vel causas agerent. Aram Victoriae, quae in vestibulo curiae stabat, et ad quam senatus jurare atque sacrificare solebat, jampridem everterant, ipso etiam ⟨e⟩t Symmacho et senatu reclamante. Sed effecerunt postremo, nt non modo a tali superstitione liberi essent omnes togati, sed etiam ut nulla in foro nisi christiana esset illa jurisprudentia, cujus jam olim aliqua in Minucio nostro effigies fuerat.
because the state could often not do without them, the pagan princes from time to time permitted them to be at times men of the gown, and some of them to discharge some office in the state. The Christian emperors after that were much more indulgent, who sometimes created them both consuls and prefects of the City, and even of the praetorium, though they were not otherwise unaware that they were the bitterest enemies of religion, as can be understood even from the position of Symmachus alone. But at length they did at some point become more severe, and purged the Roman senate and forum, and ordered that whoever either administered justice or pleaded cases should be some sort of Minucii. The altar of Victory, which stood in the vestibule of the senate house, and at which the senate used to swear and sacrifice, they had long since overturned, even though Symmachus himself and the senate protested. But in the end they brought it about that not only were all men of the gown free from such superstition, but also that there should be no jurisprudence in the forum except that Christian one, of which some likeness had long ago existed in our Minucius.
Minuciani hujus libelli inscriptio, et dialogi forma, antiquum eruditumque scribendi morem refert. Genus dicendi est argutum, acre, vehemens: est pressum, densum, nervosum, crebris sententiis compactum, omniumque antiquitatum atque historiarum memoria refertum, et in quo plures sententias quam periodos numerare possis. Nam neque verbosi olim fuerunt Christiani, qui verba dare nondum didicerant: et eorum patroni erant homines docti, ac, ut uno verbo dicam, polyhistores. Quod ad falsa crimina attinet, non tam verbis et libellis, quam vita et re ipsa refellebant adversarios.
The title of this little book of Minucius, and the form of a dialogue, reflect the ancient and learned manner of writing. The style of speaking is pointed, sharp, vehement: it is compressed, dense, sinewy, packed with frequent maxims, and filled with the memory of all antiquities and histories, and one in which you could count more maxims than periods. For the Christians of old were not wordy, who had not yet learned to give words [that is, to deceive]: and their advocates were learned men, and, to say it in one word, polymaths. As regards the false charges, they refuted their adversaries not so much by words and pamphlets as by their life and by the deed itself.
Quaestio quae hic proponitur, et causa qua de agitur magna est, de religione nempe vera aut falsa. Acerrima utrinque est actio atque contentio. Exitus et victoria est qualis esse debet, ubi verum cum falso confligit. Malarum partium vehemens patronus et bonarum gravis hostis est Caecilius Natalis. Harum contra vindex et illarum accusator ace⟨r⟩rimus atque justissimus est Octavius Januarius. Medius sedet bonus judex atque arbiter Minucius Felix. Contentionis occasio fuit, quod cum hic cum duobus illis, quos nominavi, in littore Ostiensi ambularet, ab Octavio Christiano reprehensus sit Caecilius ethnicus, qui occurrens idolo Serapidis, illud colere se significasset. Sane olim, Pisone et Gabinio coss., Serapidis sacra Capitolio et urbe fuerant ejecta: sed postea fuerunt restituta, et in suburbiis facile haerebant. Reprehensus Caecilius fremit, et tanquam irritatus graviter in Christianorum religionem invehitur: suamque simul superstitionem defendens, Octavium veluti lacessit. Sed imprudens incurrit in adversarium fortem et acrem: et, ut ille ⟨a⟩it,
The question which is set forth here, and the case which is being argued, is a great one, namely concerning religion true or false. The pleading and contention on both sides is very sharp. The outcome and the victory are such as they ought to be where the true clashes with the false. The vehement advocate of the bad side and grave enemy of the good is Caecilius Natalis. The champion of the latter, on the other hand, and the sharpest and most just accuser of the former is Octavius Januarius. In the middle sits as good judge and arbiter Minucius Felix. The occasion of the dispute was that, when he was walking with the two whom I have named on the shore at Ostia, Caecilius the pagan was rebuked by Octavius the Christian, because on meeting an idol of Serapis he had signified that he worshipped it. Indeed, long ago, in the consulship of Piso and Gabinius, the rites of Serapis had been cast out of the Capitol and the City: but afterwards they were restored, and readily clung on in the suburbs. Caecilius, rebuked, growls, and as if provoked inveighs heavily against the religion of the Christians: and at the same time, defending his own superstition, as it were challenges Octavius. But unwittingly he runs up against a strong and sharp adversary: and, as he says,
Editors' notes and page, col. 212
Footnotes
(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 212
Symmachus lib. X, epist. 54, ed. Jureti, sive 61 ed. Scioppi, ad Valentinum, Theodosium et Arcadium A A A.
Symmachus, book X, letter 54 in Juret's edition, or 61 in Scioppius's, to Valentinian, Theodosius and Arcadius, the three Augusti.
(printed under page 158)
Page
- running head: MINUCIUS FELIX. 212
- marginal letters: A quia iis respublica saepe; B et senatu reclamante; C verbis et libellis; D idolo Serapidis
- old-edition numerals: 205 after Sane
Fragili cupiens illidere dentem Infregit solido. (Horat. lib. II, satir. 1.)
Wishing to strike his tooth on what was fragile, he broke it on what was solid. (Horace, Satires 2.1.)
Causae status non unus est. Caecilius varie et confuse agit de multis. Octavius pleraque et depellit sola inficiatione, et retorquet justa recriminatione. Quaedam ingenue confitetur: sed jure defendit. Itaque haec disceptatio partim facti, partim juris quaestionibus constat. Tertullianus antea, et ante Tertullianum Justinus et Athenagoras, quorum exstant apologetici, libelli, et postea Cyprianus partim contra Demetrianum, partim in libello de Vanitate Idolorum, et multo deinde magis Arnobius atque Lactantius hanc causam egerunt: et usi plerumque sunt non iisdem modo et sententiis et argumentis, sed et verbis et formulis. Sic enim majores nostri eadem de iisdem, ut ille olim dicebat, dicere solebant.
The issue of the case is not a single one. Caecilius treats of many matters in a varied and confused manner. Octavius both repels most of them by denial alone and turns them back with just recrimination. Certain things he frankly admits, but defends them by right. And so this debate consists partly of questions of fact, partly of questions of law. Tertullian earlier, and before Tertullian Justin and Athenagoras, whose apologetic books are extant, and later Cyprian, partly against Demetrianus, partly in the little book On the Vanity of Idols, and then much more Arnobius and Lactantius pleaded this case; and for the most part they used not only the same opinions and arguments, but also the same words and formulas. For thus our forefathers, as that man once said, were accustomed to say the same things about the same things.
Atque utinam posteritas tale observasset exemplum, ambitiosa novitas bonam antiquitatem non inquinasset. Velim sane Apologias eorum, quos dixi, cum hoc Minuciano libello conferri: ut alium nunc commentarium colligere non sit necesse. Multa ex veterum philosophorum disputationibus, et poetarum fabulis, et Romana Graecaque historia subtiliter et docte hic repetuntur. Verum ineptum esset iis de rebus annotationes multas et otiosas hoc loco inculcare. Mallem quae ad antiquitatum Christianarum memoriam pertinent, copiose explicare. Sed et harum commentariis alius dabitur liberior locus: nam iis, quos jam inchoavi, absolvendis aliquando me dedam. Jam vero praeter illos, quos dixi, libellos valde velim etiam hic legi et comparari adversarias orationes Symmachi et Ambrosii: ut quam causam acriter quidem, sed privatim tamen, quo tempore Christianis palam esse vix licebat, actam esse ex Minucio audiemus, eamdem multis post annis publice in aulico consistorio iterum iterumque agitatam: in eaque nobilem Romanorum sacrorum patronum, qui est Pontifex maximus et praefectus urbi erat, cum maximo et acerrimo Antistite Christianae religionis commissum, quo tempore nostri liberi erant, et bona aequaque conditione, audiamus: praesertim cum judex et arbiter sederet, non modo tam religiosus quam Minucius, sed multo majoris auctoritatis, et qui rem bene judicatam exsequi, et adversarii calumniatoris petulantiam reprimere atque coercere posset. Si quis denique hic adjungat Augustini libros de Civitate Dei, ad Octavii disputationem multum lucis et splendoris adjunxerit. Ego in talibus commentariis nunc describendis non immorabor; sed breviter tantum delibabo quaedam capita Minuciani libelli, ut lectorem praemoneam.
And would that posterity had observed such an example, and that ambitious novelty had not defiled good antiquity. I should indeed wish the Apologies of those whom I have named to be compared with this little book of Minucius, so that it would not now be necessary to compile another commentary. Many things from the disputations of the ancient philosophers, and from the fables of the poets, and from Roman and Greek history are here recalled with subtlety and learning. But it would be foolish to cram many idle annotations on these matters into this place. I would rather explain at length what pertains to the memory of Christian antiquities. But for commentaries on these too another, freer place will be given: for I shall at some time devote myself to completing those which I have already begun. Now besides those books which I have named, I should very much wish that the opposing speeches of Symmachus and Ambrose also be read and compared here: so that the case which we shall hear from Minucius was pleaded keenly indeed, but privately, at a time when it was scarcely permitted to Christians to show themselves openly, we may hear the same, many years later, debated again and again publicly in the imperial consistory, and in it a noble patron of the Roman rites, who was Pontifex Maximus and was prefect of the city, matched against the greatest and keenest prelate of the Christian religion, at a time when ours were free, and on a good and equal footing: especially since there sat as judge and arbiter one not only as religious as Minucius, but of much greater authority, and one who could carry out a matter well judged, and repress and restrain the insolence of the slanderous adversary. If anyone, finally, should add here Augustine's books On the City of God, he will have added much light and splendour to the disputation of Octavius. I shall not now dwell on writing out such commentaries; but I shall only briefly touch on certain chapters of Minucius's little book, so as to forewarn the reader.
Caecilius principio laudat nescio quam sive Academicam ἀκαταληψίαν sive Pyrrhonicam ἐποχὴν, quasi nulla esset religionis scientia; et Epicurea
Caecilius at the outset praises some sort of either Academic akatalepsia or Pyrrhonian epoche, as though there were no knowledge of religion; and with Epicurean
Editors' notes and page, col. 213
Footnotes
(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col not visible (upper part of page)
Transposita et confusa vocabula. C. enim Velleius, senator, est ille Epicureus, lib. I, de Orat. cap. VI, quid inde, ab VIII capite ad XXI, Providentiam impugnat: cuj. C. Cotta, Academicus, respondet a cap. illo XXI ad finem libri. Adde initium libri II. (LINDNER.)
The words are transposed and confused. For C. Velleius, a senator, is that Epicurean (book I, de Orat., ch. VI) who then, from chapter VIII to XXI, attacks Providence; to whom C. Cotta, the Academic, replies from that chapter XXI to the end of the book. Add the beginning of book II. (Lindner.)
(printed under page 159)
Page
- running head: 213 PROLEGOMEN[A] (cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A Fragili cupiens illidere dentem; B bat, dicere solebant; C los valde velim etiam hic legi; D petulantiam reprimere atque coercere posset. Si
- old-edition numerals: 20 before Caecilius principio (bold "206" at paragraph head, read as old numeral 20 plus footnote call (6); unsure)
audacia exagitat Dei providentiam, prope ut ille Cotta apud Ciceronem in libris de Natura deorum Octavius Providentiam defendit, neque iis etiam argumentis uti dedignatur, quibus Velleius apud eumdem Ciceronem refellit Cottae vanitatem. Caecilius exprobrabat, Christianos Deo, ut cuidam Fato, addicere, quidquid agitur geriturve. Abs verbo Fati. tametsi odioso propter ineptias Stoicorum, qui ea voce abutebantur, non abhorret Octavius. Sed longiorem ea de re disputationem in aliud tempus rejicit, et eum veluti scopulum caute refugit. Sane Hieronymus in Catalogo, et ad Magnum (Epist. LXXXIV), testis est quemdam de Fato librum olim Minucio inscriptum fuisse: sed falsam fuisse inscriptionem monet. Credo illi a quibusdam esse ascriptum, quia hic videbatur tale aliquid esse pollicitus. Arnobius, quem Minucii discipulum et imitatorem appellare soleo, modo adversarios de fato accusat, modo etiam Christianos eodem nomine accusatos fuisse ostendit: et in utraque tamen causa, cum ad rem ventum est, haeret et nescio quomodo attonitus ἐπέχει. Nam (juvat enim propter Minucium et quosdam alios obiter hic notare) lib. VII, posteaquam exagitavit fatum, praesertim quale Stoici fingebant: « Has tamen, inquit, partes, quia res nimium longi est multique sermonis, inexplicatas transcurrimus atque intactas. » Idem lib. II, cum scriberet Christianos urgeri rogatos, an sine voluntate Dei quidquam fieret? tam se utrinque premi sentit, ut, ad elabendum, deprecatione cujusdam ignorantiae utatur. » Si, inquit, cuncta ejus voluntate conficientur, nec citra ejus nutum quidquam potest in rebus vel provenire vel cadere, necessario sequitur ut mala etiam cuncta voluntate ejus intelligantur enasci; sin autem dicere voluerimus, pessimorum ab eo rejicientes causas, mali esse conscium, generatoremque nullius: incipient videri aut eo invito res pessimae fieri, aut, quod sit immane dixisse, nesciente, ignaro ac nescio. »
boldness assails the providence of God, almost as that famous Cotta does in Cicero in the books On the Nature of the Gods, [and] Octavius defends Providence, and does not disdain to use even those arguments by which Velleius in the same Cicero refutes the emptiness of Cotta. Caecilius reproached the Christians with assigning to God, as to some Fate, whatever is done or carried out. From the word Fate, although hateful because of the absurdities of the Stoics, who misused that term, Octavius does not shrink. But he puts off a longer discussion of that matter to another time, and cautiously flees from it as from a rock. Indeed Jerome, in the Catalogue and in the letter to Magnus (Letter 84), is witness that a certain book On Fate was once inscribed with the name of Minucius; but he warns that the inscription was false. I believe it was ascribed to him by certain people because he seemed to have promised something of the kind. Arnobius, whom I am accustomed to call the disciple and imitator of Minucius, at one moment accuses his adversaries on the subject of fate, at another shows that the Christians too had been accused on the same ground; and yet in both cases, when it comes to the point, he sticks fast and, somehow thunderstruck, suspends judgement. For (it is worth noting this here in passing, on account of Minucius and certain others) in book 7, after he has assailed fate, especially such as the Stoics imagined it, he says: « These parts, however, since the matter is one of excessively long and much discourse, we pass over unexplained and untouched. » The same man in book 2, when he was writing that the Christians were pressed by being asked whether anything happened without the will of God, feels himself so hard pressed on both sides that, to slip away, he makes use of the plea of a certain ignorance. » If, he says, all things are brought about by His will, and nothing in affairs can either come forth or fall out without His nod, it necessarily follows that all evils too are understood to arise by His will; but if we choose to say, removing from Him the causes of the worst things, that He is aware of no evil and the begetter of none, things of the worst kind will begin to seem to happen either against His will or, what would be monstrous to have said, with Him not knowing, unaware and ignorant. »
Quid igitur tandem, inter has veluti symplegadas constrictus, quaestioni respondet? « Respondeamus inquit, necesse est, nescire nos ista, etc » Justinus antea in sua Apologia non dubitaverat τὴν τῆς εἱμαρμένης ἀνάγκην, ut appellat, aperte inficiari, planeque rejicere, dum scopulum unum, quem imminere alioqui putat, vult effugere. Atqui tunc in alterum incurrit, quem non minus aut Minucius aut Arnobius reformidasse videtur. Tandem vero Augustinus in eadem Africa volens veluti persolvere, quod Minucius pollicitus esse dicebatur, et quod hic praestare fortasse vix potuisset, cumulate dependere, subtiliter exposuit in hac quaestione medium quidpiam, quo satisfieri posse judicavit utrique difficultati. Sciebant et Minucius et Arnobiu quaenam olim fuisset dissensio disputatioque inter
What then at last does he answer to the question, hemmed in as it were between these Symplegades? « We must answer, he says, that we do not know these things, etc. » Justin before him, in his Apology, had not hesitated openly to deny and plainly to reject the necessity of destiny, as he calls it, while he seeks to escape the one rock which he thinks otherwise threatens. Yet then he runs into the other, which neither Minucius nor Arnobius seems to have dreaded any less. At last Augustine, in the same Africa, wishing as it were to pay in full what Minucius was said to have promised, and what he could perhaps scarcely have accomplished, and to discharge it abundantly, subtly set forth in this question a certain middle way, by which he judged that both difficulties could be satisfied. Both Minucius and Arnobius knew what dissension and dispute had once existed between
Editors' notes and page, col. 214
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA. 214
- marginal letters: A audacia exagitat Dei providentiam; B ptum, quia hic videbatur; C ejus voluntate conficientur; D minere alioqui putat
- old-edition numerals: 207 after fortasse
Chrysippum et Diodorum περὶ δυνατῶν καὶ εἱμαρμένης, sive de Fato. Nam et nos ex Cicerone atque Plutarcho illam utcunque cognoscimus. Sed ne in hujus quidem judicibus et arbitris nostri quidquam deprehendebant, quod omnino sequerentur. Itaque quamdiu non liquebat, amplius pronuntiare quam temere aliud statimque definire maluerunt.
Chrysippus and Diodorus, "On Possibles and Fate", that is, on Fate. For we too know of it after a fashion from Cicero and Plutarch. But not even among the judges and arbiters of this question did our people find anything that they could follow entirely. So, as long as the matter was not clear, they preferred to pronounce "more time is needed" rather than to define something else rashly and at once.
Redeo Caecilium. Is suorum numinum antiquitatem, passimque receptam auctoritatem, quantum potest, tuetur. Christianorum Deum verum et unicum exagitat; et eos interea tanquam ἀθέους proscindit. Octavius idolorum fabulam et vanitatem salse traducit, iisdem etiam verbis usus quibus Cyprianus in eodem argumento utitur. Neque vero difficilis fuit reprehensio, cum quidem et ipsius Ciceronis libri de Natura deorum veluti suffragarentur. Nam et Arnobius, lib III, post principium, testis est, propterea quosdam Christianorum hostes aliquando « mussitasse, libros illos jussu senatus abolendos atque concremandos esse. » Quid? res ipsa quae abs suis quoque cultoribus est irrisa (nulla enim unquam stultior atque ineptior fabula ullius superstitionis fuit), ultro sese refellebat. Sed et quod huc pertinebat, facile describere potuit Minucius ex Tertulliano, Justino, Athenagora, Theophilo: ut et postea ex Minucio Arnobius, Lactantius, Ambrosius, Augustinus, cum eamdem causam agerent. Certe quod Octavius de Saturno narrat, Lactantius ipsum Minucium auctorem laudans repetit, latiusque exponit lib. I, cap 11. Ut autem Octavius totam fabulam Romanae superstitionis salse subsannat, sic et ipsorum oraculorum, quibus tantopere gloriabantur ethnici, vanitatem eleganter ostendit: ac ante suam quidem aetatem oraculum Appollinis Pythii desiisse significat, sicuti et Plutarchus fatetur temporibus Adriani imperatoris plane defecisse. Sic enim, cum Christianae religionis veritas invalesceret, necesse fuit evanescere imposturam illorum τῶν χρηστηρίων. Porro Octavius de daemonibus et eorum, cum abs Christianis adjurantur, trepidatione narrat, quod antea Justinus et Tertullianus in Apolog. et Cyprianus contra Demetrianum et post ea Lactantius lib. quarto, cap. vicesimo septimo. Itaque facile refellit ipsum quoque Ulpianum, Christanos, ut impostores, hujus, ut vocant, exorcizationis causa, irridentem Lege 1, de Extraord. Cognit. Imaneo non fuisse exorcismos posterioribus quoque temporibus, et fuisse frequentes in Ecclesia, intelligi quoque potest ex Optato Afro et Augustino, scriptoribus a Minucio minime alienis.
I return to Caecilius. He defends, as far as he can, the antiquity of his deities and their authority received everywhere. He assails the true and only God of the Christians, and meanwhile reviles them as "godless". Octavius wittily exposes the fable and vanity of idols, using the very words that Cyprian uses on the same subject. Nor was the refutation difficult, since even the books of Cicero himself On the Nature of the Gods lent it, as it were, their support. For Arnobius too, in book 3, after the beginning, testifies that for this reason certain enemies of the Christians once "muttered that those books ought to be abolished and burnt by order of the senate." What then? The thing itself, which was mocked even by its own worshippers (for there was never a more foolish and absurd fable of any superstition), refuted itself of its own accord. And what pertained to this point Minucius could easily copy out from Tertullian, Justin, Athenagoras and Theophilus, just as afterwards Arnobius, Lactantius, Ambrose and Augustine did from Minucius when they pleaded the same cause. Certainly what Octavius relates about Saturn, Lactantius repeats, citing Minucius himself as his authority, and sets out more fully in book 1, chapter 11. And as Octavius wittily mocks the whole fable of Roman superstition, so too he elegantly shows the vanity of the oracles themselves, in which the heathen gloried so greatly; and he indicates that the oracle of Pythian Apollo had ceased even before his own age, just as Plutarch also admits that it had wholly failed in the times of the emperor Hadrian. For thus, as the truth of the Christian religion grew strong, the imposture of those oracles had to vanish. Further, Octavius speaks of the demons and of their trembling when they are adjured by Christians, which Justin and Tertullian had spoken of earlier in their Apologies, and Cyprian against Demetrian, and after them Lactantius in book 4, chapter 27. So he easily refutes even Ulpian himself, who mocks the Christians as impostors on account of this "exorcization", as they call it, in Law 1, On Extraordinary Hearings. That exorcisms did not [cease] in later times also, and that they were frequent in the Church, can also be understood from Optatus the African and from Augustine, writers by no means foreign to Minucius.
Sed et de Deo unico multa Octavius inculcat, non dissimilia iis, quae Justinus περὶ Μοναρχ. et Clemens Alexandrinus collegerant. Nam et utrum que legisse noster potuit. Neque vero praeterit, quod Cyprianus urget, ipsum quoque vulgus naturaliter appellare Deum unum et singularem, cum
Octavius also urges much concerning the one God, not unlike what Justin, in "On the Sole Rule [of God]", and Clement of Alexandria had collected. For our author could have read both. Nor does he pass over the point Cyprian presses, that even the common people by nature call God one and unique, when
Editors' notes and page, col. 215
Footnotes
(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 215
Pausanias Aeliac. I, cap. 14 ἀγνώστων θεῶν βωμός.
Pausanias, Elis I, ch. 14: "an altar of unknown gods."
(printed under page 160)
Page
- running head: 215 M. MINUCIUS FE[LIX] (cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A ‹Chrysippum et Diodorum›; B ‹rentur. Nam et Arnobius›; C ‹sic et ipsorum oraculorum›; D ‹Imaneo non fuisse exorcismos›
- old-edition numerals: 298 after ‹Deum›
Numen invocat: sicuti et Lactantius lib. II, cap 1, ait ethenicos, cum jurarent, Deum potius, quam Jovem nominasse. In antiqua formula jurisjurandi Rom. nominatur Diespiter. Sed ⟨C⟩icero, lib. VII Epist. ap Trebat., dixit, « jurare Jovem lapidem. » Saepe etiam Jovis meminisse olim jurantes constat, et apud Graecos Ζεὺς ὅρκιος est appellatus. Mirum vero, quod Caecilius gloriatur, ignotis etiam numinibus Romanos aras exstruxisse. Nam quid hoc hoc aliud est, quam errorem confiteri? Talem aram Paulus Athenis vidisse se ait, et ex ea sumit argumentum conviencendae hujus ignorantiae, docendorumque Atheniensium. Neque in Attica modo, sed et in Elide fuisse aras ita inscriptas, testis est Pausanias. Et fortasse postea Octavius, cum docere Caecilium instituit, Pauli exemplo inde repetiit suae catecheseos de veri Dei cognitione principium.
calls upon the Deity: just as Lactantius too, book 2, chapter 1, says that the heathen, when they swore, named God rather than Jupiter. In the ancient Roman formula of the oath Diespiter is named. But Cicero, book 7 of the Letters, to Trebatius, said "to swear by Jupiter the stone." It is agreed that those swearing once often made mention of Jupiter as well, and among the Greeks he was called Zeus Horkios. But it is remarkable that Caecilius boasts that the Romans built altars even to unknown deities. For what else is this than to confess error? Paul says that he saw such an altar at Athens, and from it he takes an argument for refuting this ignorance and for teaching the Athenians. And that not only in Attica but also in Elis there were altars so inscribed, Pausanias is witness. And perhaps Octavius afterwards, when he undertook to teach Caecilius, following Paul's example drew from there the beginning of his instruction concerning the knowledge of the true God.
Illud quoque mirum videri posset. Caecilium gloriari, « quae apud alios populos singula numina coluntur, universa Romae coli: » nihil ut supersit, quam ut suum Pantheon gloriose ostentet. Atqui obstabat lex Romuli, quae peregrinos deos coli vetabat. Obstabat Ciceronis sententia, qui confusionem religionum alioqui fore pronuntiat. Sed peregrinos fortasse non judicabant, quia jam erant publice acciti, et veluti civitate donati. Sic urbs illa, quae ab Athenaeo (lib. I, cap. 17) scite dicta erat ἐπιτομὴ τῆς οἰκουμένης, salse abs Theophilo nostro ante Minucii aetatem, appellata est ἐπιτομὴ τῆς δεισιδαιμονίας. Nam et Tertullianus (de Spectaculis, c. 6) dixerat, « in ea consedisse conventum daemoniorum, » curiamque deorum. Interea non temere adjecit, illic quidvis colere, jus fuisse, praeter Deum verum. Estque profecto memorabile, quod Augustinus lib. I de Consensu Evangelistarum, cap. 18, scribit, cur illum unum non coluerint Romani, qui colebant omnes alios. Quia, inquit, solum se coli voluerit, illos autem deos Gentium, quos isti jam colebant, coli prohibuerit. Cum autem de ipso Christo quaereretur, alia etiam causa fuit, cur senatus reclamaret. Porro, ut Augustinus in eo libro multa inculcat, quae ex nostro Octavio repetita videri possent; sic et, quod eleganter respondet de excidio Hierosolymitono, Octavii de eadem re responsionem confirmat. Sed singula nunc describere nihil attinet. Redeo ad Minucianum auditorium.
This too might seem remarkable: that Caecilius boasts that "the deities which are worshipped singly among other peoples are all worshipped at Rome," so that nothing remains but for him to display his Pantheon gloriously. Yet the law of Romulus stood in the way, which forbade foreign gods to be worshipped. The opinion of Cicero stood in the way, who declares that otherwise there would be a confusion of religions. But perhaps they did not judge them foreign, because they had already been publicly summoned and, as it were, presented with citizenship. Thus that city, which had been cleverly called by Athenaeus (book 1, chapter 17) "the epitome of the inhabited world," was wittily named by our Theophilus, before the age of Minucius, "the epitome of superstition." For Tertullian too (On the Spectacles, chapter 6) had said "that an assembly of demons had settled in it," and a senate of gods. Meanwhile he not without reason added that there it was lawful to worship anything whatever, except the true God. And it is certainly memorable, what Augustine writes in book 1 of On the Agreement of the Evangelists, chapter 18, as to why the Romans, who worshipped all others, did not worship that One alone: Because, he says, He willed that He alone be worshipped, and forbade that those gods of the Gentiles, whom they were already worshipping, be worshipped. But when the question was about Christ Himself, there was also another reason why the senate protested. Further, just as Augustine in that book urges many things which might seem to be drawn from our Octavius, so too what he elegantly answers concerning the destruction of Jerusalem confirms Octavius's answer on the same matter. But there is no point in describing each thing now. I return to the Minucian audience.
Caecilius Christianos accusat, quod « templa tanquam busta despiciant. » Fatetur Octavius. Nam et Clemens Alexandrinus in Προτρεπτικῷ antea probaverat, illa esse sepulcra. Sed Arnobius lib. VI « templa busti superlata » fuisse ait. Caeterum Christiani alia postea ratione ex suorum martyrum sepulcris, non modo templa, sed et altaria effeceruut. Neque non potuit Minucius ea vidisse. Sed ita est profecto. Et si majores nostri religionis nomine multa facerent in speciem similia iis, quae
Caecilius accuses the Christians of "despising temples as if they were tombs." Octavius admits it. For Clement of Alexandria too, in the Protrepticus, had earlier proved that they were sepulchres. But Arnobius, book 6, says that the temples "were built over a tomb." However, the Christians afterwards, on another principle, made from the sepulchres of their martyrs not only churches but also altars. Nor is it impossible that Minucius saw these. But so indeed it is. And if our forefathers in the name of religion did many things similar in appearance to those which
Editors' notes and page, col. 216
Footnotes
(8) ‹anchor: illa esse› · call in col 216
Clemens Protreptrico ad Gentes, p. 58: Δεικνύντες τῶν εἰδώλων τὰ τεμένη, τάφους τινὰς ἢ δεσμωτήρια.
Clement, Protrepticus to the Gentiles, p. 58: "showing the precincts of the idols to be certain tombs or prisons."
(printed under page 160)
Page
- running head: MINUCIUS FELIX. 216
- marginal letters: A ‹Numen invocat›; B ‹doceret Caecilium instituit›; C ‹tum daemoniorum›; D ‹Caecilius Christianos accusat›
- old-edition numerals: (none)
ab ethnicis fiebant: tamen, quia alius erat finis aliusque usus, sua sacra defendi posse sciebant, etsi aliorum κακοζηλίαν damnarent. Sacrificiorum Romanorum ritus quam valde irrident! Atqui non dissimilis olim eorum, quae lege divina Judaeis mandata erant, forma fuit.
were done by the heathen: yet, because the end was different and the use different, they knew that their own sacred rites could be defended, even though they condemned the misguided imitation of others. How greatly they mock the rites of the Roman sacrifices! And yet not dissimilar was once the form of those that had been commanded to the Jews by divine law.
Estsi autem Christiani aetate nostri Minucii sua templa superbe attollere ad exemplum ethnicorum non possent: tamen suas saltem habebant cryptas, et quasdam etiam aedes et domus sacras in apertis et editis locis, ut Tertullianus ait, et lubenter conveniebant ad illa suorum martyrum sepulcra: quae κοιμητήρια vocabant. Nam et haec illis permisisse Gallienum imperatorem (qui Minucii aetatem non longo intervallo attigit) Eusebius scribit. Ridet autem Caecilius, quod Christiani suos jam vita functos non tam mortuos esse quam dormire dicerent et crederent corporumque resurrectionem jactarent. Atqui et apud suum Homerum (Iliad. Ω v. 344) legerat, ὑπνώοντας ἐγείρειν, et apud Virgilium (Aeneid. IV, vers. 244) « somnos adimere, » cum de mortuis in vitam revocandis agitur. Quid praeterea hic responderit Octavius conferri potest cum iis, quae antea Theophilus, Athenagoras, Justinus, Tertullianus eadem de re scripsere. Nam hoc secutus Minucius est. Ridet Caecilius (cap. 12) Christianos, quod cadavera ungant, non coronent. Atqui et Romani, etsi quid agerent ignorarent, unguenta funebria habebant. Notus est ille Ennii versiculus:
But although the Christians in the age of our Minucius could not proudly raise their own temples after the example of the heathen, yet they at least had their crypts, and also certain sacred buildings and houses in open and elevated places, as Tertullian says, and they gladly gathered at those tombs of their martyrs, which they called κοιμητήρια [sleeping-places]. For Eusebius writes that the emperor Gallienus (who came not long after the age of Minucius) permitted these things to them. Caecilius, moreover, mocks the Christians because they said and believed that their own who had departed this life were not so much dead as asleep, and boasted of the resurrection of bodies. And yet he had read in his own Homer (Iliad 24.344) 'to wake the sleeping', and in Virgil (Aeneid 4.244) 'to take away sleep', where the calling back of the dead to life is concerned. What Octavius answered here besides can be compared with what Theophilus, Athenagoras, Justin and Tertullian had earlier written on the same matter. For Minucius followed this. Caecilius (ch. 12) mocks the Christians because they anoint corpses and do not crown them. And yet the Romans too, although they did not know what they were doing, had funeral ointments. Well known is that little verse of Ennius:
Tarquinii corpus bona femina lavit et unxit.
A good woman washed and anointed the body of Tarquinius.
Et licet Leges XII Tabb. servilem uncturam cadaverum, ut ait Cicero (de Legib. lib. II, cap. 24), tollerent, aliam tamen relinquebant: et ipsi jurisconsulti inter justos funeris sumptus unguenta referunt (L. tricesima septima, de Relig. et Sumpt. fun.). Quod ad « coronas cadaverum » attinet, fatetur Octavius Christianis ineptas videri: et eos propterea in eo genere ethnicos imitari nolle. Tertullianus in libro de Corona (cap. 13), ait « a saeculo coronari et ipsas Libitinas: » et ipse Cicero pro Flacco (cap. 31) meminit « aureae coronae impositae mortuo » cuidam « Castricio. » Verum quid antiquae leges Rom. de coronis cadaverum statuerent, dixi ad Duodecim Tabb. Denique ridet et indignatur Caecilius, apud Christianos « cadavera humari, » non « uri. » Verum est vetus illud, « Risu inepto nihil est ineptius. » Quid Octavius? Simpliciter respondet, antiquam esse suam et meliorem sepeliendi consuetudinem. Quod et Arnobius respondit. Nam et post Minucium mota iterum haec quaestio est. Atqui Romani poterant sui saltem Ciceronis librum secundum de Legibus (cap. 22) legisse, qui hunc morem defendit et confirmat. Et Plinius lib. VII, cap. 54. « Ipsum, inquit, cremare apud Romanos non fuit veteris instituti: terra condebantur. » Sane Tertullianus de Corona (cap. 12) ait Christiano
And although the Laws of the Twelve Tables, as Cicero says (On the Laws, book 2, ch. 24), did away with the anointing of corpses by slaves, yet they left another kind: and the jurists themselves list ointments among the lawful expenses of a funeral (Law thirty-seven, On Religious Places and Funeral Expenses). As regards the 'crowns of corpses', Octavius admits that they seem foolish to Christians, and that for this reason they are unwilling to imitate the heathen in this kind of thing. Tertullian in the book On the Crown (ch. 13) says that 'even the Libitinae themselves are crowned by the world'; and Cicero himself in For Flaccus (ch. 31) mentions 'a golden crown placed on the dead' of a certain 'Castricius'. But what the ancient Roman laws laid down about the crowns of corpses I have said on the Twelve Tables. Finally Caecilius mocks and is indignant that among the Christians 'corpses are buried', not 'burned'. True is that old saying, 'Nothing is more foolish than foolish laughter.' What does Octavius say? He simply answers that their custom of burial is ancient and better. Which Arnobius also answered. For after Minucius too this question was raised again. And yet the Romans could at least have read the second book On the Laws (ch. 22) of their own Cicero, who defends and confirms this custom. And Pliny, book 7, ch. 54: 'Burning itself,' he says, 'was not an ancient institution among the Romans: they were laid in the earth.' Indeed Tertullian, On the Crown (ch. 12), says that for a Christian
Editors' notes and page, col. 217
Page
- running head: 217 PROLEGOMENA (cut off at the image edge; rest of the running head not visible)
- marginal letters: A ab ethnicis fiebant; B bius scribit. Ridet autem Caecilius; C Tarquinii corpus bona femina; D decim Tabb. Denique ridet
- old-edition numerals: 209 after tamen,
- other: editors' matter set: Prolegomena on Minucius Felix (ab ethnicis fiebant); Greek κακοζηλίαν printed with blurred letters, read as κακοζηλίαν; ὑπνώοντας printed with initial resembling δ, read as ὑπνώοντας; attollere printed with a damaged l (atto!lere); last word Chri- broken at the column break; right-hand column not set
non licuisse cremare, et (ineunte) libro de Resurr. carn. ridet eos, qui « atrocissime, » ut ait, « exurunt defunctos. »
it was not lawful to cremate, and (at the beginning of) the book On the Resurrection of the Flesh he laughs at those who, as he says, "most atrociously burn up the dead."
Porro Augustinus lib. XI Confess. significat in ecclesia Ostiensi peculiarem aliquem etiam fuisse morem humandorum corporum. An is quoque jam tum in usu esset, cum ibi ageret Minucius, nescio. Ridiculum vero, quod Caecilius, severus scilicet censor, Christianos accusat, quia neque unguentis delibuti, neque sertis redimiti essent. Mirum, quod interea non miratur, eos tamen usos jam tum fuisse oleo et chrismate. Sane sobriam, siccam frugalemque vitam, hoc est ab unguentis alienam, ipsi etiam ethnici laudare solebant: et Plato ex sua Republica, quam optimam suo judicio fingit, Homerum non ejicit nisi unguento perfusum et vittis redimitum, et, ut hic noster Octavius ait, « coronatum: » cum significaret sese habere nolle cives tam molles. Ac ne longius abeam, Vespasianus quemdam unguentis madentem, et gratias agentem pro impetrata praefectura, aversatus, « Mallem, inquit, allium oleres. » Sed quid non objiceret Caecilius, cum etiam Christianos accuset, quia flores naribus supponerent, nec capiti coronando imponerent? Atqui ipse Lucianus in suo Nigrino ipsos Romanos rectius irridet, quod Christianos hic non imitentur, et faciant contra naturam, planeque nihil aut sapiant, aut sentiant. Adde Tert. de Cor. mil.
Moreover, Augustine in book 11 of the Confessions indicates that in the church of Ostia there was also a certain peculiar custom of burying bodies. Whether this too was already in use at the time when Minucius was staying there, I do not know. But it is ridiculous that Caecilius, a stern censor forsooth, accuses the Christians because they were neither anointed with ointments nor crowned with garlands. It is strange that he does not meanwhile marvel that they nevertheless already at that time used oil and chrism. Indeed even the heathens themselves were accustomed to praise a sober, dry and frugal life, that is, one estranged from ointments; and Plato does not expel Homer from his Republic, which he fashions as the best in his judgement, except as one drenched with ointment and bound with fillets, and, as our Octavius here says, "crowned", since he meant that he did not wish to have citizens so soft. And, not to stray too far, Vespasian, turning away from a certain man dripping with ointments and giving thanks for the prefecture he had obtained, said, "I would rather you smelled of garlic." But what would Caecilius not object, when he even accuses the Christians because they put flowers under their noses and did not place them on the head to crown it? Yet Lucian himself in his Nigrinus more rightly mocks the Romans themselves, because in this they do not imitate the Christians, and act against nature, and plainly neither taste nor perceive anything. Add Tertullian, On the Soldier's Crown.
Caeterum Caecilius, ut alter Lucianus in Peregrino, Christianos irridet, quod colant hominem crucifixum. Octavius breviter negat hominem tantum esse, quem colant: et regerit, adversarios potius esse ἀνθρωπολάτρας, qui reges tanquam deos colant, et per eorum etiam genium jurent: quin imo gravius puniant ita pejerantem, quam si quis suum Jovem jurando sciens falleret. Suspicor hic notari quamdam constitutionem Alexandri Severi: quae tamen relata est in libros Juris L. II, C. de Rebus credit. Sane olim Christianos nol⟨ui⟩sse uti tali formula jurisjurandi, testis est Te⟨rtu⟩llianus in Apologetico. Sed tanto magis miror eam posteriorum Caesarum Christianorum legibus commendari.
But Caecilius, like a second Lucian in the Peregrinus, mocks the Christians because they worship a crucified man. Octavius briefly denies that He Whom they worship is a man only; and he retorts that it is rather the adversaries who are man-worshippers, since they worship kings as gods and even swear by their genius; nay rather, they punish one who perjures himself in this way more heavily than if someone knowingly deceived his own Jupiter in swearing. I suspect that a certain constitution of Alexander Severus is being alluded to here, which however has been entered in the books of the Law, law 2 of the Code, title On Things Lent. Certainly Tertullian in the Apology is witness that the Christians of old were unwilling to use such a formula of oath. But all the more do I wonder that it is commended in the laws of the later Christian Caesars.
Caecilius contumeliose objicit Christianos etiam « ipsam crucem adorare. » Negat Octavius. Adversarius iis, ut furciferis, maledicit. Noster (non enim eum pudet crucis Christianae) cruciferos suo modo dici non recusat, et de suae crucis signo religioso (quod certe majoribus olim nostris familiare fuit) respondet, quod antea Justinus et Tertullianns scripserant, et postea Lactantius lib. IV, cap. 27. Nam et quanti illud fecerit Constantinus, notum est: certe ut vulgo res minus esset ignominiosa, edixit ne deinceps facinorosi cruci affigerentur. Non desiit tamen Julianus Apostata, ut Caecilius, Christianis ignominiae causa exprobrare crucis cultum, sicuti ex Cyrillo intelligi potest.
Caecilius insultingly charges that the Christians even "adore the cross itself." Octavius denies it. The adversary reviles them as gallows-birds. Our author (for he is not ashamed of the Christian cross) does not refuse that they be called cross-bearers in his own way, and concerning the religious sign of his cross (which was certainly familiar to our forefathers of old) he replies what Justin and Tertullian had written before, and Lactantius afterwards, book 4, chapter 27. For how highly Constantine too esteemed it is well known: certainly, so that the thing might be less ignominious in common opinion, he decreed that henceforth criminals should not be fastened to the cross. Yet Julian the Apostate did not cease, like Caecilius, to reproach the Christians with the worship of the cross for the sake of disgrace, as can be understood from Cyril.
Editors' notes and page, col. 218
Page
- running head: ROLEGOMENA. 218 (first letter cut off at the left edge of the image)
- marginal letters: A ‹stiano non licuisse cremare›; B ‹cio fingit, Homerum non ejicit›; C ‹no, Christianos irridet›; D ‹sarius iis, ut furciferis›
- old-edition numerals: 210 after ‹morem›
- other: whole column is editors' matter (Prolegomena to Minucius Felix's Octavius), set in full; first word "stiano" is the end of a word (Chri-stiano) broken from the previous column; Greek printed with a blurred letter, read ἀνθρωπολάτρας (final alpha looks like χ), UNSURE whether a misprint; ink blot damages "nol⟨ui⟩sse" and "Te⟨rtu⟩llianus"; Roman numerals XI, II, IV printed in small capitals; no full-width line
Mira est impudentia calumniae. Eo tandem evasit, ut nescio quae sacrorum monstra Christianis objicerent adversarii, « et qualia demens (ut quidam poeta dixit) Aegyptus portenta colit. » Audet etiam Caecilius fingere illos « adorare caput asini, » quanquam primus hoc non finxerit. Octavius tam putidam calumniam inficiatione depellit, et id potius de adversariis vere dici posse, recriminando probat, secutus suum Tertullianum (Apolog. c. XVI), qui et Christianos vulgo dictos esse asinarios, et Christum ipsum auribus asininis tanquam aliquem Midam ab impio pictore expressum fuisse narrat. Talem autem confictam fabulam esse significat, quod Cornelius Tacitus mentiendo tale quidpiam de Judaeis recitasset. Verum et ante Tacitum multis annis Api⟨n⟩ Alexandrinus tempore Caligulae in Judaeis accusaverat quamdam ὀνολατρείαν. Caeterum, cum Josephus tale mendacium jam refutasset, minus ignoscendum est Tacito, qui in eo perstat, minime vero illis, qui majori etiam impudentia Christianis hoc probrum aspergunt.
The shamelessness of the calumny is remarkable. It went so far at last that the opponents charged the Christians with I know not what monstrosities of rites, "and such portents as mad Egypt worships" (as a certain poet said). Caecilius even dares to pretend that they "worship the head of an ass," although he was not the first to invent this. Octavius drives off so rotten a calumny by denial, and proves by recrimination that this could rather be truly said of the opponents, following his own Tertullian (Apol. ch. 16), who relates both that the Christians were commonly called ass-worshippers, and that Christ Himself had been portrayed by an impious painter with an ass's ears, like some Midas. He indicates, moreover, that such a fable was fabricated because Cornelius Tacitus had, by lying, related some such thing about the Jews. But many years before Tacitus, too, Apion of Alexandria, in the time of Caligula, had accused the Jews of a certain ass-worship. However, since Josephus had already refuted such a lie, Tacitus, who persists in it, is the less to be pardoned, and least of all those who with even greater shamelessness bespatter the Christians with this disgrace.
Turpius est quod Caecilius eodem pudore clamitat, eos « colere nescio quae pudenda. » Ecquo ruit impura maledicentia? Octavius suae verecundiae esse intelligit, id longiori oratione non refellere: interea audire cogitur alia non minus nefanda, cum Caecilius declamaret nefarios esse Christianorum coetus antelucanos, incesto et parricidio pollutos, prope ut olim erant Romae Bacchanalia. Octavius talia crimina non solum abs suis depellit, sed etiam retorquet in adversarios. Quam incesta essent Romanorum sacra non est ignotum. Nam et eorum poeta, « Nota Bonae, inquit, secreta deae. » Diu etiam humanas victimas immolarunt: etsi in aliis gentibus hanc, non jam dico sanctam, sed sanguinariam et sceleratam feritatem reprehenderent. Est autem memorabile, quod Plutarchus in Problem. narrat, eos obtendisse ad hoc suum factum excusandum, aliorumque damnandum. ⟨M⟩irum vero Christianis sacra talia objecta fuisse⟨; fu⟩it tamen vetus et diuturna haec calumnia: et quidem promiscuae libidinis suspicionem facile augebat quorumdam credulitas, qui alios ex suo ingenio aestimant, et nocturna promiscuae multitudinis coitio, et quia Christiani sese fratres sororesque appellarent, atque etiam osculo sese invicem exciperent. Quid dicam, osculo quosdam impudice abusos esse? ut et fatetur et conqueritur Clemens Alexandrinus in Paedag. Christiani satis multa castissimi sui pudoris testimonia opponebant. Sed nihil aut impudens malevolentia, quae ut linguam habet intemperantem, sic neque frontem neque aures habet. Sane et olim Apionem tale quidpiam de Judaeorum coetibus confinxisse narrat Josephus. Ergo nihil nostris tali infamia oppressis aliud superfuit, quam, quod scite et eleganter
Fouler is what Caecilius cries out with the same shame, that they "worship I know not what private parts." Whither does impure slander rush? Octavius understands that it befits his modesty not to refute this in a longer speech; meanwhile he is forced to hear other things no less abominable, when Caecilius declaimed that the pre-dawn assemblies of the Christians were wicked, polluted with incest and parricide, almost as the Bacchanalia once were at Rome. Octavius not only drives such crimes away from his own people, but also turns them back upon the opponents. How unchaste the rites of the Romans were is not unknown. For their poet too says, "The secrets of the Good Goddess are well known." For a long time also they sacrificed human victims, although in other nations they censured this savagery, I will not now say holy, but bloody and criminal. It is, moreover, worth remembering what Plutarch relates in the Problems, namely what they put forward to excuse this deed of their own and to condemn that of others. It is astonishing indeed that such rites were imputed to the Christians; yet this calumny was old and long-lasting: and indeed the suspicion of promiscuous lust was readily increased by the credulity of certain people, who judge others by their own character, and by the nocturnal gathering of a mixed multitude, and because the Christians called one another brothers and sisters, and also received one another with a kiss. What shall I say of the fact that some abused the kiss shamelessly? as Clement of Alexandria both admits and complains in the Paedagogus. The Christians set against this a good many testimonies of their most chaste modesty. But shameless malevolence heeds nothing, which, just as it has an unbridled tongue, so has neither forehead nor ears. Indeed Josephus relates that Apion too once invented some such thing about the assemblies of the Jews. Therefore nothing else was left to our people, oppressed by such infamy, than what skilfully and elegantly
Editors' notes and page, col. 219
Footnotes
(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 219
Juvenal. Satir. 15 ineunte.
Juvenal, Satire 15, at the beginning.
(printed under page 162)
(10) ‹anchor: eorum poeta› · call in col 219
Id., Satir. 6, vers. 313.
The same, Satire 6, line 313.
(printed under page 162)
Page
- running head: 219 M. MINUCIUS FE (cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A ‹Mira est impudentia calumniae›; B ‹drinus tempore Caligulae›; C ‹sed etiam retorquet in adversarios›; D ‹resque appellarent, atque etiam›
- old-edition numerals: 211 after ‹adversariis›
Aeschylus ait, τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἀνατιθέναι τῷ χρόνῳ. Non erant impostores, qui verba darent: non homines clamosi et impotentes, qui conviciis, maledictis, libellis famosis adversarios vicissim opprimere vellent. Rebus ipsis falsam refellere, et eo tandem modo vincere sedendo et silendo malebant: el bona interea conscientia sese sustentabant atque consolabantur. Sic bonam causam agebant bene.
Aeschylus says, "to entrust truth to time." They were not impostors, to deceive with words; not clamorous and unrestrained men, who would wish to crush their adversaries in turn with abuse, curses and defamatory pamphlets. They preferred to refute the false [charge] by the facts themselves, and so at length to win by sitting still and keeping silent; and meanwhile they sustained and consoled themselves with a good conscience. Thus they pleaded a good cause well.
Mirum rursus, Caecilio tam insolentem visam esse illam inter eos « fraterni nominis communionem, » cum et ipse Ulpianus scripserit, eum, qui fraeterna charitate diligitur, etsi frater non sit, recte tamen Fratrem simpliciter appellari, quod et in libros juris relatum est L. quinquagesima octava de Haered. instit. Quin imo et olim ipsos Essaeos, ante tempora Christianorum, ita sese invicem compellasse, didici ex qnodam Philonis fragmento quod exstat apud Eusebium ερὶ προπαρασκευῆς (lib. VIII, cap. 12).
It is strange, again, that that "fellowship of the name of brother" among them seemed so unusual to Caecilius, since Ulpian himself wrote that one who is loved with brotherly charity, even if he is not a brother, is nevertheless rightly called simply Brother, which was also entered in the books of law, law fifty-eight, On the Institution of Heirs. Indeed, I have learned from a certain fragment of Philo which survives in Eusebius's On the Preparation (book 8, chapter 12) that the Essenes themselves also, long ago, before the times of the Christians, addressed one another in this way.
Horribilius est alterum, quod objiciebatur, « crimen infanticidii: » coepitque haec calumnia paulo post tempora Trajani, et ad Constantini aetatem perduravit, et quidem cum tragica suspicione cujusdam coenae Thyesteae. Sed unde haec suspicio? An quia Christiani dicere solerent se vesci corpore et sanguine Christi? sicut e diverso narrat Augustinus quosdam aliquando existimasse ab Christianis adorari Cererem et Bacchum, cum audirent in eorum mysteriis tanti fieri panem et vinum, neque alioqui rem intelligerent. Quid dicam, quod Epiphanius narrat, quondam haereticos, qui Gnostici et Cataphryges et Pepuziani appellabantur, se vero Christianos esse mentiebantur, commisisse quod hic Caecilius omnibus Christianis objicit? Sed an aequum fuit, ut viris bonis propterea affingeretur, quod ab iis erat alienissimum? Adversarii loco probationis obtendebant famam et rumorem. Sed nullo quoque jure id fieri, leges civiles pro nostris respondebant, et ipse Quintilianus dixit, « nulli non etiam innocentissimo accidere posse fraude inimicorum, falsa vulgantium, ut sinistro rumore laboret. » Quam vero procul abessent Christiani ab omni homicidio, satis Octavius ostendit, cum ne homicidium quidem in ludis gladiatoriis spectare eos per suam religionem potuisse narrat, quod et antea Theophilus dixit ad Autolycum; et eodem tempore Athenagoras in Apologia, et latius Tertullianus in libro de Spectac., et postea Lactantius lib. VI, cap. 20. Sed neque caesae pecudis sanguinem gustasse nostros Minucius affirmat, sicuti et Tertullianus. Sic enim, quam apostoli repetitam Nohae legem rursus tulerant, multis saeculis nostri diligenter observarunt, non minus quam apostolicum in eadem Synodo decretum περὶ πορνείας. Certe quam honestum, religiosum, pudicum castumque fuerit
More horrible is the other thing that was charged against them, "the crime of infanticide"; and this calumny began a little after the times of Trajan and lasted until the age of Constantine, and indeed with the tragic suspicion of a sort of Thyestean banquet. But whence this suspicion? Was it because Christians were accustomed to say that they fed on the body and blood of Christ? Just as, conversely, Augustine relates that some once supposed that Ceres and Bacchus were worshipped by the Christians, since they heard that bread and wine were made so much of in their mysteries, and did not otherwise understand the matter. What shall I say of what Epiphanius relates, that certain heretics once, who were called Gnostics and Cataphrygians and Pepuzians, and falsely claimed to be Christians, committed what Caecilius here charges against all Christians? But was it fair that, on that account, there should be attributed to good men what was utterly foreign to them? In place of proof the adversaries put forward report and rumour. But the civil laws answered on behalf of our people that this was done by no right whatever, and Quintilian himself said, "it can happen to anyone, even the most innocent, through the fraud of enemies spreading falsehoods, that he suffers under an evil rumour." But how far the Christians were removed from all homicide Octavius shows sufficiently, since he relates that by their religion they could not even watch homicide in the gladiatorial games, which Theophilus also said earlier, To Autolycus; and at the same time Athenagoras in his Apology, and more fully Tertullian in the book On the Spectacles, and later Lactantius, book 6, chapter 20. But Minucius affirms that our people did not even taste the blood of a slaughtered beast, as Tertullian does too. For thus our people diligently observed for many centuries the law of Noah which the apostles had renewed and enacted again, no less than the apostolic decree in the same Synod concerning fornication. Certainly how honourable, religious, modest and chaste was
Editors' notes and page, col. 220
Footnotes
(11) ‹anchor: quod Epiphanius› · call in col 220
Epiphanius, Haeresi XLVIII, sect. XIV, p. 416.
Epiphanius, Heresy 48, sect. 14, p. 416.
(printed under page 162)
(12) ‹anchor: ipse Quintilianus› · call in col 220
Quintilianus, lib. V Instit. Orat., cap. 3.
Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria, book V, ch. 3.
(printed under page 162)
Page
- running head: MINUCIUS FELIX. 220
- marginal letters: A ‹Aeschylus ait›; B ‹de Haered. instit. Quin imo›; C ‹cam, quod Epiphanius›; D ‹suam religionem potuisse›
- old-edition numerals: 212 after ‹communionem, »›
- misprints kept as printed: ‹el› for et (el bona interea); ‹fraeterna› for fraterna; ‹qnodam› for quodam; ‹ερὶ› for περὶ (ερὶ προπαρασκευῆς)
Christianorum solemne convivium, quod ἀγάπην appellabant, Caecilius, si verum ingenue dicere, quam improbe mentiri maluisset, intelligere potuerat non solum ex Tertulliani nostri Apologia, sed et sui Plinii quadam ad Trajanum Epistola. Sed petulantiam projectae maledicentiae quid refrenare posset? Dixi de eo convivio plura in annotationibus ad illam Epistolam, quae jam repetere nihil attinet. Utut autem nocturni Christianorum coetus innoxii essent, tamen obstabat lex Duodecim Tabb. multis decretis confirmata, et gravia erant judicia de collegiis illicitis. Nostri vero respondebant, nihil reipublicae esse periculi a suis coitionibus, quia essent alienissimi ab omni vel ambitione, vel ullius dignitatis cogitatione, nihilque esset in republica, quod affectarent, sed sua essent privata conditione contenti, ut Tertullianus in Apolog. respondet.
the solemn banquet of the Christians, which they called the agape, Caecilius could have understood, had he preferred to speak the truth candidly rather than to lie shamelessly, not only from the Apology of our Tertullian but also from a certain Epistle of his own Pliny to Trajan. But what could rein in the wantonness of abandoned slander? I have said more about that banquet in the annotations on that Epistle, which there is no point in repeating now. However harmless the nocturnal gatherings of the Christians were, the law of the Twelve Tables, confirmed by many decrees, nevertheless stood in the way, and the judgements concerning unlawful associations were severe. Ours, however, answered that there was no danger to the commonwealth from their meetings, because they were utterly removed from all ambition and from any thought of office, and there was nothing in the commonwealth that they aspired to, but they were content with their own private condition, as Tertullian answers in the Apology.
Caeterum ut jam praeteream reliqua capita vel accusationis Caecilianae vel Octaviae defensionis, illud observare juvat: cum calumniator ingeniosus et acer nihil non vel confingat vel exaggeret, et majestatis quaedam leviora crimina adjungat: praeteriisse crimen perduellionis, quod et alii autea objecerant, ed ad reos statim opprimendos in primis idoneum esse videbatur. An id dissimulavit, quia ne tenuis quidem ejus esset suspicio? Fuit certe perpetua haec majorum nostrum gloria, quod nullis injuriis tam irritati potuerint, ut in principes aut tyrannos, etsi ab iis indignissime vexarentur, hostili animo essent, aut ullis adversus eos conjuratis conspirationibus (quae tamen alioqui et speciosae et frequentes tunc erant) assentirentur, aut, quid sua patientia, tolerantia, modestia, contiuentia dignum esset, non meminissent. Tantum abest ut essent aut turbulenti aut seditiosi, aut immani cupiditate ultionis abriperentur. Nam etsi ea multitudine septi essent, ut facile possent conficere, quod in hoc genere instituissent, tamen fas non esse putabant. Et vero suae alioqui religionis et principia sustulissent, et fundamenta evertissent. Imo vero humanae societatis vincula omnia dissolvissent. Quid multi etiam philosophi ambitiose praedicarent de tyrannicidis, notum erat. Sed nostri talibus flabellis incendi se non patiebantur: tantum abest, ut religionis nomine ad publicum parricidium incitarentur. Nihil est praetermissum, quod eos inflammare posset, et furor fieri dicitur laesa saepius patientia. Sed eos religio continuit, et ad invietam modo patientiam armavit. Id vero, de quo etiam quaeri hoc tempore audio et miror, perpetua plurium saeculorum historia nos alias confirmabimus. Illud modo breviter attingam, quod Minucius dicere potuit, ac paulo ante ejus aetatem accidit.
But, to pass over now the remaining heads either of Caecilius's accusation or of Octavius's defence, it is worth observing this: although a clever and keen slanderer leaves nothing un-invented or un-exaggerated, and adds certain lighter charges of treason, he passed over the charge of high treason, which others too had brought before and which seemed especially suited to crushing the accused at once. Did he conceal it because there was not even the slightest suspicion of it? Certainly this was the constant glory of our forefathers, that they could be provoked by no injuries so far as to be of hostile mind towards princes or tyrants, even though they were most shamefully harassed by them, or to give assent to any conspiracies sworn against them (which were nonetheless both plausible and frequent at that time), or to forget what was worthy of their patience, forbearance, modesty and self-restraint. So far were they from being either turbulent or seditious, or from being carried away by a monstrous desire for vengeance. For although they were hedged about by such a multitude that they could easily have accomplished whatever they had set about in this kind, yet they did not think it lawful. And indeed they would otherwise have removed the principles and overturned the foundations of their own religion. Nay rather, they would have dissolved all the bonds of human society. What many philosophers too proclaimed with ambition about tyrannicides was well known. But ours did not allow themselves to be kindled by such fans: so far were they from being incited to public parricide in the name of religion. Nothing was left out that could inflame them, and patience too often wounded is said to turn into fury. But religion restrained them, and armed them for a patience simply unconquered. This, however, about which I hear with wonder that there is complaint even at this time, we shall confirm elsewhere from the continuous history of many centuries. I shall now touch briefly only on what Minucius could have said, and what happened a little before his age.
Tertullianus ad Scapulam (cap. 2). « Circa majestatem, inquit, imperatoris infamamur: tamen
Tertullian, To Scapula (ch. 2): "In the matter of the emperor's majesty," he says, "we are defamed: yet
Editors' notes and page, col. 221
Page
- running head: 221 PROLEGOMEN[A] (cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A Christianorum solemne convivium; B ne, nihilque esset in republica; C conspirationibus (quae tamen alioqui; D tur. Nihil est praetermissum
- old-edition numerals: 212 after dignitatis
nunquam Albiniani, nec Nigriani vel Cassiani inveniri potuerunt Christiani.» Juvat et alterum ejusdem Tertulliani locum, cujus memoriam veterem hisce temporibus renovari plurimum interest, ascribere. « Unde, » inquit in Apolog. (cap. 35), « et Casii et Nigri et Albini? unde qui inter duas lauros obsident Caesarem? unde qui faucibus ejus exprimendis palaestricam exercent? unde qui armati palatium irrumpunt, omnibus Stephanis atque Partheniis audaciores? De Romanis, nisi fallor, id est, de non Christianis. » Ne hunc quidem locum ex historia illustrare gravabor. Avidius Cassius, Syriae legatus, adversus M. Antonium imperatorem surrexerat, cum pretexeret se rempublicam restituere atque conservare velle, quam Marci dissoluta indulgentia pessumdaret. Christiani tamen, qui in Marci exercitu adversus Marcomannos tam frequentes fuerunt, Cassianae factionis nulli fuerunt. Commodum, impurum tyrannum et nostris infestissimum, domi strangulari Romani curarunt, qui illi maxime erant familiares. An bis Christianus ullus adfuit? Septimio Severo, qui ad imperium gladiatorio animo viam affectabat, sese opposuit Pescennius Niger in Lyria, et deinde Clodius Albinus in Bratania Galliaque, cum uterque tam bono jure armatus, quam Severus sibi esse videretur. Nam et ipse Tertullianus in libro de Pallio (cap. 2) hosce non minus, quam Severum, Augustos aliquando agnovit atque appellavit. Christiani tamen in eorum vel exercitu. vel factione nulli inventi sunt. Plautianus, qui principi proximus erat, et post cum maximae auctoritatis, ut Severus et Caracalla, a quibus fiebant multa crudeliter, jugularentur, immittit in curiam suum praefectum, et eodem paulo post irrumpit. An Plautianum Christiani secuti sunt, quorum interesse videbatur tyrannos illos tolli? Imo vero potius Severum jam decumbentem illi suo etiam oleo curarunt sanaruntque, ut testis est Tertullianus ad Scapulam, ubi et solemnes Ecclesiae preces pro principibus commemorat. Tum addit: « Ex regula patientiae divinae agere nos satis manifestum est, cum tanta hominum multitudo pars pene major civitatis cujusque, in silentio et modestia agimus. Absit enim, ut indigne feramus ea nos pati, quae optamus; aut ultionem a nobis aliquam machinemur, quam a Deo exspectamus. » Non dissimilia sunt, quae repetit in Apologetico, et digna sunt, quae his quoque temporibus inculcentur. Certe ait Christianos facile « paucis faculis vel una nocte » potuisse sese ulcisci, si aut fuissent, aut esse voluissent (quod tamen jam a temporibus Neronis dicebantur) incendiarii. « Seb absit, inquit, ut aut igni humano vindicetur divina secta; aut doleat pati. in quo probatur.» Ait, illis, si aperte agere et vim vi repellere voluissent, minime defuisse « vim numerorum et copiarum.» Sed, inquit, « apud istam
never could Christians be found to be Albinians, nor Nigrians or Cassians." It is fitting also to add another passage of the same Tertullian, whose old record it is of the greatest importance to renew in these times. "Whence," he says in the Apology (ch. 35), "came both the Cassii and the Nigri and the Albini? whence those who besiege Caesar between the two laurels? whence those who practise wrestling in order to squeeze his throat? whence those who burst armed into the palace, more daring than all the Stephani and Parthenii? From the Romans, unless I am mistaken, that is, from those who are not Christians." Nor shall I be reluctant to illustrate even this passage from history. Avidius Cassius, legate of Syria, had risen against the emperor M. Antoninus, pretending that he wished to restore and preserve the commonwealth, which Marcus's lax indulgence was ruining. Yet the Christians, who were so numerous in Marcus's army against the Marcomanni, were none of them of Cassius's faction. Commodus, a foul tyrant and most hostile to our people, was strangled at home at the instigation of Romans who were most intimate with him. Was any Christian present at these deeds? To Septimius Severus, who with a gladiator's spirit was making his way towards the empire, Pescennius Niger set himself in opposition in Syria, and afterwards Clodius Albinus in Britain and Gaul, since each seemed to himself armed with as good a right as Severus. For Tertullian himself too, in the book On the Pallium (ch. 2), at one time acknowledged and called these men, no less than Severus, Augusti. Yet no Christians were found either in their army or in their faction. Plautianus, who was next to the prince, and after him of the greatest authority, sent his own prefect into the senate-house so that Severus and Caracalla, by whom many cruel things were being done, might be slain, and shortly afterwards burst in there himself. Did the Christians follow Plautianus, to whose interest it seemed that those tyrants should be removed? No indeed, rather they tended and healed Severus, when he was already lying ill, with that oil of theirs too, as Tertullian is witness in To Scapula, where he also mentions the solemn prayers of the Church for the princes. Then he adds: "It is quite manifest that we act according to the rule of divine patience, since, though so great a multitude of men, almost the greater part of every city, we conduct ourselves in silence and modesty. For far be it from us to take it ill that we suffer the things which we desire; or to contrive some vengeance on our own part, which we await from God." Not unlike these are the things which he repeats in the Apology, and they are worthy to be impressed upon these times also. Certainly he says that the Christians could easily have avenged themselves "with a few little torches or in a single night," if they had been, or had wished to be, incendiaries (which nevertheless they were said to be already from the times of Nero). "But far be it," he says, "that a divine sect should be avenged by human fire, or that it should grieve to suffer that in which it is proved." He says that, if they had wished to act openly and to repel force by force, they would by no means have lacked "the strength of numbers and forces." But, he says, "with that
Editors' notes and page, col. 222
Footnotes
(13) ‹anchor: nos facile› · call in col 222
Tertullianus Apolog. cap. XXXVII: « Vel una nox panculis faculis largiter ultiones posset operari, si malum malo dispungi penes nos liceret. » Mentem Balduinus magis, quam verba Tertulliani expressit: at in mox sequentibus ipsa verba ex eodem loco Apologetici, (LINDNER).
Tertullian, Apology, ch. 37: "Even a single night with a few little torches could work vengeance in plenty, if among us it were lawful to repay evil with evil." Baudouin has expressed Tertullian's meaning rather than his words; but in what follows shortly he gives the very words from the same place of the Apology. (Lindner.)
(printed under page 163)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA. 222
- marginal letters: A nunquam Albiniani, nec Nigriani; B pessumdaret. Christiani tamen; C tatis, ut Severus et Caracalla; D quae repetit in Apologetico
- old-edition numerals: 214 after impurum
disciplinam magis occidi licet, quam occidere. » Ait illos etiam sine armis potuisse vincere secedendo, et vacuum Romanis suum orbem relinquendo, si alio migrare voluissent. Tum enim defuissent, quibus imperasset Romanus imperator. Adeo pauci supererant, qui non essent Christiani. Sed nostros et cives manere voluisse, et ad hostes Romanorum transire noluisse significat, et interca tamen a Romanis appellatos esse non hostes modo sed et principum et humani generis hostes. Caeterum tam injusta et aperta fuit haec injuria, ul ipsos tandem hostes Christianorum puderit tam et ingrate agere, et loqui impudenter.
discipline it is permitted rather to be killed than to kill." He says also that they could have conquered even without arms by withdrawing, and by leaving their world empty to the Romans, if they had wished to migrate elsewhere. For then those would have been lacking over whom the Roman emperor might rule; so few remained who were not Christians. But he indicates that ours both wished to remain citizens and were unwilling to go over to the enemies of the Romans, and that meanwhile they were nonetheless called by the Romans not only enemies but enemies both of the emperors and of the human race. Moreover, so unjust and so open was this wrong that at length the very enemies of the Christians were ashamed to act so ungratefully and to speak so shamelessly.
Ergo Caecilius, quantumvis esset impudens, erubuit iis aliquod perduellionis crimen affingere. Quidvis aliud objicere, carpere, mentiri, calumniari maluit. Sed neque Christianis « ascribit causam publicarum calamitatum : » quod tamen eo tempore alii adversarii odiose facere imprimis solebant. Tristissima sane aetate Minucii erat facies Romani imperii, horribilisque dilaceratio atque confusio. Quid dicam genus omne malorum tunc inundasse ? orbemque el concussum et permistum bellis, incendiis, inundationibus terrae motu, civitatum ruinis, gentium regnorumque excidiis, denique confectum et fame, et peste publica ? Non commitit tamen Caecilius, ut (quod vulgus tunc clamitabat, et ante postque multis saeculis jactatum est calumniaretur, Christianis totum illud chaos acceptum fieri debere, eorumque sanguine esse expiandum. Ante Minucii aetatem Tertullianus. » Si, inquit, Tiberis ascendit in arva.si coelum stetit, si terra movit, si fames, si lues, statim, Christianos ad Leonem. » acclamatur. Non minus odiosa et immanis erat acclamatio tempore Cypriani.ut ex hujus ad Demetrianum Epistola satis apparet. Eadem et tempore Arnobii. Nam et hic in suis adversus Gentes libris laborat, ut hac publici odii et invidiae flamma nostros liberet. Quid ipse postea Symmachus ? nonne audet talem rursus cantilenam eanere? Certe dignus erat, qui audiret, quod aliquando Romae post mortem Commodi acclamatum est, Delatores ad Leonem. Sed nostri ab sanguine et ultionis cupiditate erant alieni. Ambrosius non passus est eum in crimine tam falso diutius exsultare.Sed cum non multo post urbs ipsa capta atque direpta fuisset,non erubuerunt impii calumniatores talem postremo eladem religioni Christianae ascribere : coactusque est rursus Augustinus tam tetrae maledicentiae occurrere. Nam et propterea se suos de Civitate Dei libros scripsisse fatetur. Agit ergo minus malitiose Caecilius, qui aliorum exemplo talem facem in nostros non contorquet, neque eorum innocentiam tam indigne onerat. Imo vero iis. ut miseris, ut victis, ut servis, ipse tanquam mag⟨n⟩is victoriis elatus, et summa felicitate cumulatus, superbe
Therefore Caecilius, however shameless he was, blushed to fasten on them any charge of treason. He preferred to object, to carp, to lie, to slander anything else whatever. But neither does he "ascribe to the Christians the cause of the public calamities", which nevertheless other adversaries at that time were especially accustomed to do in their hatred. In Minucius's age the face of the Roman empire was indeed most grievous, and its tearing apart and confusion horrible. What shall I say of how every kind of evil then flooded in, and of how the world was both shaken and thrown into turmoil by wars, fires, floods, earthquake, the ruin of cities, the destruction of peoples and kingdoms, and at last worn down both by famine and by public pestilence? Yet Caecilius does not go so far as to slander (as the mob was then shouting, and as was flung about for many centuries before and after) that all that chaos ought to be laid to the account of the Christians and must be expiated by their blood. Before Minucius's age Tertullian: "If," he says, "the Tiber rises onto the fields, if the sky stands still, if the earth moves, if there is famine, if plague, at once 'The Christians to the lion!'" is shouted. No less hateful and savage was the cry in the time of Cyprian, as is clear enough from his Letter to Demetrianus. The same too in the time of Arnobius. For he also labours in his books Against the Gentiles to free ours from this flame of public hatred and ill will. What of Symmachus himself later? Does he not dare to sing such a song again? Surely he deserved to hear what was once shouted at Rome after the death of Commodus: "The informers to the lion!" But ours were strangers to bloodshed and to the desire for vengeance. Ambrose did not suffer him to exult any longer in so false a charge. But when not long afterwards the City itself had been captured and plundered, the impious slanderers did not blush at last to ascribe such a disaster to the Christian religion; and Augustine was again compelled to meet so foul a calumny. For he admits that it was for this reason that he wrote his books On the City of God. Caecilius therefore acts less maliciously, since he does not, after the example of others, hurl such a firebrand at ours, nor so unworthily burden their innocence. Nay rather, towards them as wretched, as conquered, as slaves, he himself, as though elated by great victories and heaped with the highest felicity,
Editors' notes and page, col. 223
Footnotes
(14) ‹anchor: Si, inquit› · call in col 223
Desunt quaedam ex Tertulliani Apolog. cap. 40. ita supplenda: Si Tiberis ascendit ad maenia, si Nilus non ascendit in arca, si coelum stetit, et sic reliqua. (LINDER.)
Some words of Tertullian's Apology, ch. 40, are missing, to be supplied thus: "If the Tiber rises to the walls, if the Nile does not rise over the fields, if the sky stands still," and so on. (Lindner.)
(printed under page 164)
(15) ‹anchor: acclamatum est› · call in col 223
Lampridius Vita Commodi cap. 18, et hanc et similes acclamationes prodidit. (LINDER.)
Lampridius, Life of Commodus, ch. 18, has recorded both this acclamation and others like it. (Lindner.)
(printed under page 164)
Page
- running head: 223 M. MINUCIUS FE[LIX] (page number blurred, apparently 223 over 222; head cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A disciplinam magis occidi licet; B vis aliud objicere, carpere; C inquit (14), Tiberis ascendit; D direpta fuisset,non erubuerunt
- old-edition numerals: 215 after calumniari
- other: the word superbe was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 224
insultat; et hoc nomine tam illorum religionem fastidiose deprimit, quam suam gloriose attollit superstitionem. Sic enim profani homines ex fortuna et rerum successu pendent. Sic ipse Cicero pro Flacco contumeliose exagitat Judaeorum et gentem et sacra. Sed et Apionem Judaeis servitutem et aerumnas, tanquam falsae religionis testimonia, confidenter objecisse, ex Josepho intelligimus. Mirum vero, post tempora quoque Constantini, Julianum imperatorem nostros eadem ratione impetiisse sicuti ex Cyrilli responsionibus cognoscimus. Quanto id magis potuit Caecilius, qui Christianos. nisi afflictos, miseros, pauperes, nullos viderat? itaque magno supercilio et fastu et contemptu in eos despuit, et tanquam καθάρματα καὶ περιψήματα (utor Apostoli verbis) proculcat. Sed Thrasonicos ejus spiritus altiori animo despicit Octavius, iisque sanctam quamdam superbiam opponit, qua et in paupertate divites, et in servitute liberi, et in media denique morte victores essent nostri. Utut autem Caecilius initio despumans, et intemperanter convicia profunderet, et minas efflaret, et ampullas horribiles projiceret, denique Christo insultaret: tamen veris victus paulo post cedit, neque arbitri judicisque Minucii sententiam exspectat, sed ultro illi occurrit. Admirabilis profecto conversio, praesertim tam repentina. Sed ea ostendit, sanabiles multos Romae fuisse, qui videbantur alioqui depositi et deplorati: veritati vero errorem facile cedere. Ergo Caecilius quadam veluti in jure cessione Octavio vindicanti addici poterat. Certe vinci dedique non recusat, et Octavianae orationis quodam quasi fulmine perculsus, tanquam alter quidam Paulus, subito religionem, quam ignorans oppugnaverat, admonitus complectitur.
haughtily insults them; and on this ground he depresses their religion as disdainfully as he gloriously exalts his own superstition. For thus do profane men hang upon fortune and the success of affairs. Thus Cicero himself, in the Pro Flacco, insultingly assails both the race and the sacred rites of the Jews. And we learn from Josephus that Apion, too, confidently cast servitude and hardships in the teeth of the Jews as evidences of a false religion. And it is remarkable that even after the times of Constantine the emperor Julian attacked our people on the same reasoning, as we learn from the replies of Cyril. How much more could Caecilius do so, who had seen no Christians except the afflicted, the wretched, the poor? And so with great haughtiness and pride and contempt he spits upon them, and tramples them underfoot as "the refuse and offscouring" (I use the Apostle's words). But Octavius looks down with loftier mind upon his boastful airs, and sets against them a certain holy pride, by which our people were rich even in poverty, free even in servitude, and finally victors even in the midst of death. But although Caecilius at the outset, foaming, poured out abuse intemperately, breathed out threats, hurled forth dreadful bombast, and finally insulted Christ, yet, conquered by the truth, he yields a little later, and does not wait for the verdict of Minucius as arbiter and judge, but goes to meet him of his own accord. An admirable conversion indeed, especially one so sudden. But it shows that there were many at Rome capable of being healed who otherwise seemed given up and despaired of, and that error readily yields to truth. Therefore Caecilius could be assigned to Octavius, as claimant, by a kind of cession in court. Certainly he does not refuse to be conquered and to be surrendered, and, struck as though by a thunderbolt of Octavius's speech, like another Paul, being admonished, he suddenly embraces the religion which in ignorance he had attacked.
Vellem autem, Minucius nobis quoque exposuisset totam hujusce μετανοίας historiam: et ut, qua lege, qua conditione, quibus sponsoribus, quo ritu, qua caeremonia, Caecilius Romam reversus, in Ecclesiae collegium et communionem coaptatus fuerit, intelligeremus. Nam et antiqui illius moris memoria expetenda est. Sed quod Hieronymus ad Chronica Eusebii, et Augustinus lib. VIII Confession. (cap. 2) narrat de duobus aliis ejusdem et conditionis, et ordinis, et gentis, et ingenii viris, Arnobio et Victorino. cogitemus factum quoque esse de Caecilio. Imo vero hic Caecilius fatetur sese, posteaquam intellexit quid non sit vera religio, desiderare intelligentiam, cognitionem, institutionem religionis verae; eam vero catechesin in diem sequentem fuisse rejectam Minucius scribit. Sed tanto magis doleo, alteram hanc scholam, quae Minuciani libri optima et maxima pars fuisset, non editam esse, saltem non exstare. Nam neque satis est falsum refellere, verum etiam docere oportet: ut et, quid non sit, et quid sit Deus aut religio, exponatur.
I could wish, however, that Minucius had also set out for us the whole history of this repentance, and that we might understand by what law, on what condition, with what sponsors, by what rite, with what ceremony Caecilius, having returned to Rome, was joined to the fellowship and communion of the Church. For the memory of that ancient custom too is worth seeking. But what Jerome in his additions to the Chronicle of Eusebius, and Augustine in Book 8 of the Confessions (ch. 2), relate of two other men of the same condition, rank, nation and talent, Arnobius and Victorinus, let us suppose was done in the case of Caecilius also. Indeed, this Caecilius confesses that, after he has understood what true religion is not, he desires understanding, knowledge and instruction in the true religion; but Minucius writes that this catechesis was put off to the following day. But I grieve all the more that this second school, which would have been the best and greatest part of Minucius's book, was not published, or at least does not survive. For it is not enough to refute what is false; one must also teach what is true, so that both what God or religion is not, and what it is, may be set forth.
Editors' notes and page, col. 224
Page
- running head: MINUCIUS FELIX. 224
- marginal letters: A perbe insultat; et hoc nomine; B ψήματα (utor Apostoli; C Certe vinci dedique non recusat; D Imo vero hic Caecilius fatetur
- old-edition numerals: 216 after Apostoli
Sed bene habet: quod hic desideramus, sarcire potest Augustini liber de Catechizandis rudibus, qui et leges et formulam veteris catecheseos eleganter describit: et quomodo sit agendum cum doctis et litteratis, etiam monet: neque dissimilem Minucii aetate credo catechesin fuisse, et his quoque temporibus non observari miror. Juvat autem, ut Caecilium audivimus accusatorem et adversarium, nunc rebus conversis spectare catechumenum. Catechumeni tunc etiam appellabantur « auditores » vel audientes, » sicuti ex multis Tertulliani locis apparet: erantque imprimis dociles, minimeque refractarii: quod et ipse Lucianus in Philopat. indicat. Contentiosae itaque disputationes nullae cum iis erant; sed placidis monitionibus religio docebatur. Post catechesin qui jam sua nomina Ecclesiae dederant, ut Baptismo initiarentur, appellati sunt « competentes: » eorumque rursus in ordine Caecilium jam nostrum conspicere juvat. Post Baptismum candidatus denique particeps flebat τῶν μυστηρίων, a quibus antea procul abesse jubebatur. Neque sane de iis, aut promiscue disputare, aut coram profanis hominibus disserere, majores nostri solebant. Testis est Theodor. in Eran. Nam illa religiosius atque adeo timidius tractanda esse sentiebant: et quorsum alioqui res evaderet, longe prospicibant. Itaque licet, cum accusarentur eorum συνάξεις, magna causa esse videretur, cur exponere deberent quidquid in iis ageretur, tamen de mysteriis nihil dicunt in foro, neque de iis cum adversariis aut contendunt aut litigant.
But it is well: what we miss here can be made good by Augustine's book On Catechizing the Uninstructed, which elegantly describes both the rules and the form of the ancient catechesis, and also advises how one must proceed with the learned and the lettered; and I believe that the catechesis in Minucius's age was not unlike it, and I am surprised that it is not observed in these times too. But it is pleasing, since we have heard Caecilius as accuser and adversary, now, the situation reversed, to behold him as a catechumen. Catechumens were at that time also called "hearers" or "listeners", as appears from many passages of Tertullian; and they were above all docile and not at all refractory, which Lucian himself also indicates in the Philopatris. There were therefore no contentious disputations with them, but religion was taught by gentle admonitions. After the catechesis, those who had now given their names to the Church in order to be initiated by Baptism were called "competents"; and again it is pleasing to behold our Caecilius now in their rank. After Baptism the candidate at last became a partaker of the mysteries, from which he had previously been ordered to keep far away. Nor indeed were our forefathers accustomed either to dispute about them indiscriminately or to discourse on them in the presence of profane men. Theodoret is witness in the Eranistes. For they felt that those things were to be treated more reverently and indeed more fearfully, and they foresaw from afar where otherwise the matter would end. And so, although, when their assemblies were accused, there seemed to be great reason why they ought to set forth whatever was done in them, nevertheless they say nothing of the mysteries in the forum, nor do they contend or dispute about them with their adversaries.
Atque haec quidem hactenus breviter praemonere visum fuit, ut ad Octavii Minuciani lectionem viam veluti praemunirem, quae et Christianarum antiquitatum memoriam nobis commendet, et ad eam renovandam nos excitet, quid et alioqui Romanas tanto studio persequimur. Atque utinam qui Romae sunt docti homines, et nullum non etiam lapidem revolvunt, nullamque non in ipsis lapidibus litteram observant, ut antiquae reipublicae aliquid eruant, veteris quoque Ecclesiae monimenta (quibus eadem urbs abundat) colligerent, pluresque, qui in ea et vixerunt, et sepulti sunt, Minucios excitarent. Satis jam, satis est novorum de religione libellorum. Veteribus potius in lucem revocandis hujus generis reliquiis operam demus: et simus aliquando doctae antiqnitatis potius, quam inanis novitatis studiosi: majorumque nostrorum imagines et intueamur, et aliis, ne novi homines esse forte videamur, ostentemus. Neque tamen, et si eadem eorum religio animusque idem fuerit, eadem quoque semper facies fuit, idemve status. Non enim semper vexati abjectique jacuerunt, neque tam aut ingrati aut inepti
And this much it seemed good to set out briefly by way of preface, so that I might, as it were, prepare the way to the reading of Minucius's Octavius, which both commends to us the memory of Christian antiquities and rouses us to renew it, since otherwise we pursue the Roman ones with such great zeal. And would that the learned men who are at Rome, who leave no stone unturned and examine every letter on the very stones in order to dig out something of the ancient republic, would also gather the monuments of the ancient Church (in which that same city abounds), and would raise up more Minuciuses, who both lived and were buried in it. Enough now, there is enough of new booklets on religion. Let us rather devote our effort to recalling into the light the old remains of this kind, and let us at last be devotees of learned antiquity rather than of empty novelty; and let us both gaze upon the images of our forefathers and display them to others, lest we perhaps seem to be new men. Yet, even if their religion was the same and their spirit the same, their appearance was not always the same too, nor their condition. For they did not always lie harassed and cast down, nor were they so either ungrateful or inept
Editors' notes and page, col. 225
Footnotes
(16) ‹anchor: Testis est Theodor.› · call in col 225
Theoderetus, Gyrensis episcopus, in Dialogis, quibus Eranistae nomen dat, Dialogo 2, pag. 159, ed. Lips. ita Orthodoxum inducit Eranistae, de S. Eucharistia interroganti respondentem: Οὐ χρὴ σαφῶς εἰπεῖν· εἰκὸς γάρ τινας ἀμυήτους παρεῖναι. Non decet aperte loqui: fortassis adsunt mysteriis nondum initiati. Refert Eranistes: Αἰνιγματωδῶς ἡ ἀπόκρισις ἔστω. Proponatur ergo in forma aenigmatis responsio.
Theodoret, bishop of Cyrrhus [printed "Gyrensis"], in the Dialogues to which he gives the name Eranistes, Dialogue 2, p. 159 of the Leipzig edition, brings in the Orthodox answering Eranistes, who asks about the Holy Eucharist, thus: "It is not fitting to speak openly; perhaps some are present not yet initiated into the mysteries." Eranistes replies: "Then let the answer be put in the form of a riddle."
(printed under page 165)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA (cut off at the right edge of the image)
- marginal letters: A ‹Sed bene habet: quod hic›; B ‹ligio docebatur. Post catechesin›; C ‹litigant.›; D ‹reliquiis operam demus›
- old-edition numerals: 217 after ‹τῶν›
fuerunt, ut optimo jure optimaqua conditione esse recusarint, cum hoc iis licuit per principes. Chrisstianos: neque tam fatui, ut hoc beneficio non uterentur: neque tam iniqui, ut si quid in suis imperatoribus desiderarent, paganorum (ut loquimur tyrannorum loco eos haberent: neque tam morosi, ut pnblicae tranquillitati nihil quidquam condonarent. Loquor de iis, qui non fuerunt degeneres. Sed liberae Ecclesiae splendorem non vidit Minucius: servientis modo squalorem vidit. Nostrum vero est, utrumque statum et utriusque temporis conditionem recte considerare atque discernere, et hoc externae, ut ita loquar, formae temporumque discrimen prudenter observare, ut et antiquitatis memoria, et majorum nostrorum exemplis recte utamur. Hic enim et prudentia magna et cautione maxima opus esse fateor: et cum lex nova rogatur, fertur saepe illud Uti rogas, saepius istud Antiquo, nobis ut occurrat atque placeat, necesse est, resque postulat. Insculptum Romae in veteri marmore esse dicitur, CANDIDA FULVO NOBILIOR AURO FELIX ANTIQUITAS. Sed ejus praejudiciis infeliciter abuteremur, nisi liberum integrumque judicium in iis discernendis atque diligendis adhibeamus: ne vel confuse omnia misceamus, vel malitiose praetereamus. quae imitari nos oportet; vel etiam, quae huic aetati non conveniunt, intemperanter urgeamns. Cum olim de testamentis ageretur, lex quaedam civilis respondit, « retinendum esse morem fidelissimae vetustatis. » L. XVIII, Cod. de Testam. Cumque de finibus et ordine gubernationis ecclesiasticae quaereretur, audita in Nicaeno concilio est illa vox: ΤΑ ΑΡΧΑΙΑ ΕΘΗ ΚΡΑΤΕΙΤΩ.. Nulla tamen fuit superstitio, quae intemperanter atque impotenter urgeret, quod reipublicae salus repudiaret. Et ut sapientes jurisconsulti, ubi de magistratuum jure quaestio esset, graviter respondebant, non solum spectandum esse, quid Romae factum sit sed etiam quid fieri debeat (Lege duodecima de Offi. Praes.), sic etiam spectare debemus, non solum quid majores nostri fecerint, sed et quo tempore, quave conditione, aut quali fine: neque non meminisse quoque oportet, quod lex quaedam monet, non tam exemplis quam legibus judicandum esse, Ergo facio perlubenter, ut et jurisprudentiam et historiam conjunctim aut colam, aut saltem colendam esse saepe profitear: et quidem utramque in utroque genere, humanarum dico et divinarum rerum, sive civilium et ecclesiasticarum. Nam et earum intelligentia atque memoria talem horum studiorum conjnnctionem requirit: ut, si Tiberius imperator recte judicavit, militarem disciplinam (quod ait Suetonius) ex antiquitate esse repetendam, nos multo magis sentiamus rectiusque dicamus,
as to have refused to be in the best right and on the best terms, when this was permitted them by Christian princes, neither so foolish as not to use this benefit: nor so unjust as, if they found anything wanting in their emperors, to hold them in the place of pagan tyrants, as we say, nor so peevish as to concede nothing whatever to public tranquillity. I speak of those who were not degenerate. But Minucius did not see the splendour of the free Church: he saw only the squalor of [the Church] in servitude. It is ours, however, rightly to consider and distinguish both states and the condition of both times, and prudently to observe this difference of outward form, so to speak, and of times, so that we may rightly use both the memory of antiquity and the examples of our ancestors. For here indeed I confess that there is need of great prudence and the greatest caution: and when a new law is proposed, often that "As you propose" is cast, more often this "I hold to the old"; that it should occur to us and please us is necessary, and the matter demands it. It is said to be carved at Rome on an old marble, WHITE, NOBLER THAN TAWNY GOLD, HAPPY ANTIQUITY. But we should misuse its prejudgements unhappily, unless we apply a free and whole judgement in discerning and choosing among them: lest we either confusedly mix all things together, or maliciously pass over what we ought to imitate; or even immoderately press what does not suit this age. When once there was a question about testaments, a certain civil law answered that "the custom of most faithful antiquity is to be retained." Law 18, Code, On Testaments. And when inquiry was made about the boundaries and order of ecclesiastical government, that voice was heard in the Council of Nicaea: LET THE ANCIENT CUSTOMS PREVAIL. Yet there was no superstition that immoderately and violently pressed what the safety of the commonwealth rejected. And as the wise jurisconsults, when the question was about the right of magistrates, gravely answered that one must look not only at what was done at Rome but also at what ought to be done (Law 12, On the Office of the Governor), so we too must look not only at what our ancestors did, but also at what time, or under what condition, or for what end: nor ought we to fail to remember also what a certain law warns, that judgement is to be given not so much by examples as by laws. Therefore I very gladly either cultivate jurisprudence and history jointly, or at least often profess that they ought to be cultivated: and indeed both of them in both kinds, of human things, I mean, and of divine, or civil and ecclesiastical. For both the understanding and the memory of these require such a conjunction of these studies: that, if the emperor Tiberius judged rightly that military discipline (as Suetonius says) was to be sought again from antiquity, we may much more feel and more rightly say
Editors' notes and page, col. 226
Footnotes
(17) ‹anchor: quod ait› · call in col 226
Suetonius Tiber. cap. 19: Disciplinam acerrime exegit, animadversionum et ignominiarum generibus ex antiquitate repetitis.
Suetonius, Tiberius, ch. 19: "He enforced discipline most strictly, reviving from antiquity kinds of punishment and public disgrace."
(printed under page 165)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA. 226 (left edge cut off: "ROLEGOMENA.")
- marginal letters: A ‹fuerunt, ut optimo jure›; B ‹utamur. Hic enim et›; C ‹siasticae quaereretur, audita›; D ‹dam esse saepe profitear›
- old-edition numerals: 218 after ‹Hic enim et›
- other: the word dicamus, was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 227
- other: misprints kept as printed: "optimaqua" (for optimaque); "Chrisstianos" (Chris-|stianos, for Christianos); "pnblicae" (for publicae); "urgeamns" (for urgeamus); "conjnnctionem" (for conjunctionem)
civilem et ecclesiasticam bona fide judicioque bono inde repeti debere. Interea vero, quia varie et periculose hic errari posse sentio, iterum iterumque obtestabor omnes bonos et cordatos, ut a factionibus aversi, et a studio partium alieni, primum vetustati tantum auctoritatis tribuant, quantum illi debetur: deinde placide cogitent atque observent, non solum quid veteres Christiani, tempore Minucii, facerent, cum aliud non possent: sed et quid optarent, et ubi possent faciendum esse statuerent: et vero, quid tantem, cum liberi fuerunt, fecerint, ut et rempublicam et ecclesiam recte constituerent.
that the civil and the ecclesiastical ought to be sought from there in good faith and with sound judgement. In the meantime, however, since I perceive that one can err here in various and dangerous ways, I shall again and again entreat all good and sensible men that, turned away from factions and strangers to partisan zeal, they first attribute to antiquity as much authority as is owed to it; then calmly consider and observe not only what the ancient Christians did in the time of Minucius, when they could do nothing else, but also what they wished, and what they determined should be done where they could; and indeed what at length they did, when they were free, in order to order rightly both the commonwealth and the church.
AD PRIMAM LINDNERI EDITIONEM
TO LINDNER'S FIRST EDITION
JOANNIS AUGUSTI ERNESTI PRAEFATIO.
THE PREFACE OF JOHANN AUGUST ERNESTI.
Docto et christiano lectori salutem
To the learned and Christian reader, greeting
In institutis eorum, per quos bonarum litterarum omnium imprimisque sacrarum, intelligentiam atque scientiam Deus reddidit generi humano, hoc reperio fuisse, ut et ipsi sacra cum humanis conjungerent, nec minus studiosi essent legendorum veteris Ecclesiae, Graecae Latinaeque, scriptorum, quam quae ab antiquioribus Graecis et Romanis accepta tenerent, et ejusdem conjunctionis auctores suasoresque essent iis, qui se ad eorum disciplinam auctoritatemque contulissent. Ne exempla e longinquo repetamus, externisque de populis, Erasmus, quem in principibus instauratoribus humanitatis eruditae numerant omnes, non minus curaverat, ut in scriptis antiquorum Ecclesiae Doctorum versatus esset, quam in profanis Graecorum et Latinorum, nec plus ei debet antiquitas Graeca et Romana, quam Ecclesiastica, ut qui haud paulo plura volumina Ecclesiae veteris Doctorum, quam classicorum auctorum, ad fidem codicum recensuit, castigavit, illustravit. In nostris autem terris, primum, qui in hac Lipsia nostra fundator bonarum litterarum exstitit, Petr. Mosellanus, ita Graecos et Latinos scriptores interpretatus est, ut pariter ad intelligentiam et lectionem PP. interpretandis Scripturis S. et praelegendis poetis ecclesiasticis, adolescentes aemulantes ejus studia, hoc est, florem juventutis, adduceret. Quam disciplinam ab eo acceptam retinuit et suis tradidit Casparus Bornerus, vir et ipse, ut judicat Joach. Camerarius (in Vit. Ph. Melanchth. p. 71) ad disciplinas fundandas natus, cui Lutherus et Melanchthon tantum in hac Academia tribuerunt, quantum nemini. Cujus rei auctorem idoneum habemus Georgium Fabricium, scholae Bornerianae alumnum, qui eamdem ab eo disciplinae formam accepit. Nam in epistola, qua Alexandro Martisburgensis praesulatus administratori commendat corpus poetarum Christianorum, ait: « Se Leipsae audivisse Casp. Bornerum, hymnos Prudentii interpretantem eruditissime: eamquc lectionem illum, a viro clarissimo Petro Mosellano sibi
Among the practices of those through whom God restored to the human race the understanding and knowledge of all good letters, and above all of sacred letters, I find this to have been one: that they themselves joined sacred things with human, and were no less zealous in reading the writers of the ancient Church, Greek and Latin, than [in reading] what they held as received from the more ancient Greeks and Romans, and that they were authors and advocates of this same union to those who had betaken themselves to their teaching and authority. Not to fetch examples from far off and from foreign peoples: Erasmus, whom all number among the chief restorers of learned humane letters, had taken no less care to be versed in the writings of the ancient Doctors of the Church than in the profane writings of the Greeks and Latins; nor does Greek and Roman antiquity owe him more than ecclesiastical antiquity, since he revised, corrected and illustrated, according to the testimony of the manuscripts, not a few more volumes of the Doctors of the ancient Church than of the classical authors. In our own lands, moreover, the first who stood forth as founder of good letters in this our Leipzig, Peter Mosellanus, so interpreted the Greek and Latin writers that he drew the young men who emulated his studies, that is, the flower of youth, equally to the understanding and reading of the Fathers, by interpreting the Holy Scriptures and lecturing on the ecclesiastical poets. This discipline, received from him, Caspar Börner retained and handed on to his own, himself also a man born, as Joachim Camerarius judges (in the Life of Philip Melanchthon, p. 71), for founding studies, to whom Luther and Melanchthon attributed more in this University than to anyone. We have a fit witness of this in Georg Fabricius, a pupil of Börner's school, who received from him the same form of discipline. For in the letter in which he commends the corpus of the Christian poets to Alexander, administrator of the see of Merseburg, he says: "That he had heard Caspar Börner at Leipzig interpreting the hymns of Prudentius most learnedly; and that he had
Editors' notes and page, col. 227
Footnotes
(18) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col not visible (upper part of page; note set across both columns)
A Bornero etiam Prudentium editum esse Lipsiae discas licet e G. Fabricii Comment. in Poet. Christ. p. 30 init.
That Prudentius too was edited at Leipzig by Börner you may learn from G. Fabricius's Commentary on the Christian Poets, p. 30, at the beginning.
(printed under page 166)
Page
- running head: 227 M. MINUCIUS F (cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A camus, civilem et ecolesiasticam; B 219 Docto et christiano lectori salutem; C esset, quam in profanis Graecorum; D Lutherus et Melanchthou tantum
- old-edition numerals: 219 before ‹Docto›
- other: a full-width band stands across cols 227/228 in mid-page: the 1 paragraph(s) above it in col 228 are set here, after the 1 above it in col 227 (reading order, moved on receipt); the band itself (its title lines) is not set by the volunteer page: set it here, at the move, with full_width
- running head: 227 M. MINUCIUS FELIX. 228
- marginal letters: A beside "camus, civilem et ecclesiasticam"; B beside "Docto et christiano lectori"; C beside "esset, quam in profanis"; D beside "Lutherus et Melanchthon"
- old-edition numerals: 219 before "Docto et christiano lectori salutem"
- other: reading order: the upper paragraph runs from the left column ("camus ... cogitent atque") into the right column ("observent ... recte constituerent"); it is set whole here, followed by the title band and the lower left column; the lower right column is in c228_a. The column opens mid-word ("camus", completing "di-|camus" from col 226, where the word is set whole; the tail is not repeated here). "Prudentii" has battered type on the page; read as Prudentii.
- other: misprints kept as printed: "eamquc" (for eamque)
quasi per manus traditam, fideli possessione ad usum publicum multos annos retinuisse. Nec ab ea ratione recessit Joachimus Camerarius, tertius de numero eorum, qui litteras apud nos fundarunt, quem studiose diligenterque tractasse scriptores ecclesiasticos, et disciplina Mosellani arguit, et clare docent Notationes figurarum sermonis Domini J. C. et Apostolorum, et alii libelli, ad rem ecclesiasticam pertinentes. Quid dicam de illo Germaniae praeceptore Philippo? quem. quis nescit, cum summus esset litteris in Graecis Latinisque, quoad e poetis, oratoribus, historicis et philosophis non Christianis discuntur, eumdem principem illis temporibus in his praesertim terris, fuisse litterarum ecclesiasticarum, ita versatum in omni genere scriptorum veteris Ecclesiae, ut nihil aliud, nisi hos tractasse videri posset? Atque quod magia mirere, in eo genere prope adhuc juvenis ita profecerat, ut in colloquio, quod in hac urbe de religione, auctore Georgio, duce, an. MDXIX fuit, disputantibus cum Eccio Theologis, Carolostadio et Luthero, etiam loca Patrum subjiceret inter disputandum, quibus illi adversus Eccium uterentur. Ex quo intelligi potest, hanc tum disciplinae formam in Germaniae locis, quae bonis litteris plurimum tribuerent, fuisse, ut utrumque genus litterarum, a prima prope pueritia, conjungeretur. Ejus porro disciplinae diligentem custodem et auctorem ac commendatorem patria nostra habuit Georgium Fabricium, ut illa ipsa, quam ante commemoravimus, Epistola declaret, in qua graviter queritur eos, qui latinae elegantiae studiosi esse ac videri velint, negligere plerumque scripta antiquorum Ecclesiae Doctorum. quorum lectio egregiam doctrinam Ecclesiaeque utilem suppeditet, pietatemque alat, cujus haud paulo major esse debeat, quam elegantiae, cura. Quid? Barthium, Reinesium, Rivinum, Rittershusium et haud paucos alios, qui satis cognitos habet, quin sciat, eos in caetera, latinarum imprimis litterarum, scientia, etiam hoc genus diligentissime tractasse, coluisse atque ornasse? Quam
retained that reading, handed to him as it were from hand to hand by that most distinguished man Peter Mosellanus, in faithful possession for public use for many years." Nor did Joachim Camerarius, the third of the number of those who founded letters among us, depart from that method; that he handled the ecclesiastical writers zealously and diligently, both the discipline of Mosellanus shows and his Notes on the Figures of Speech of the Lord Jesus Christ and of the Apostles, and other little books pertaining to ecclesiastical matters, clearly teach. What shall I say of that teacher of Germany, Philip? Who does not know that he, while he was supreme in Greek and Latin letters, so far as they are learned from non-Christian poets, orators, historians and philosophers, was likewise in those times, especially in these lands, the prince of ecclesiastical letters, so versed in every kind of writer of the ancient Church that he could seem to have handled nothing else but these? And, what you would wonder at more, in that field, while still almost a youth, he had made such progress that in the colloquy on religion held in this city at the instance of Duke George in the year MDXIX, when the theologians Karlstadt and Luther were disputing with Eck, he even supplied passages of the Fathers during the disputation, for them to use against Eck. From this it can be understood that this was then the form of discipline in the places of Germany which attributed most to good letters: that both kinds of letters were joined from almost earliest boyhood. Further, our country had a diligent guardian, promoter and commender of that discipline in Georg Fabricius, as that very Letter which we mentioned before declares, in which he gravely complains that those who wish to be and to seem devoted to Latin elegance for the most part neglect the writings of the ancient Doctors of the Church, the reading of which supplies excellent learning, useful to the Church, and nourishes piety, the care of which ought to be not a little greater than that of elegance. What then? Who that knows well enough Barth, Reinesius, Rivinus, Rittershusius and not a few others does not know that, besides their other learning, above all in Latin letters, they also most diligently handled, cultivated and adorned this kind? How
Editors' notes and page, col. 228
Page
- running head: MINUCIUS FELIX. 228
- marginal letters: A observent, non solum; B quasi per manus traditam; C scriptorum veteris Ecclesiae; D elegantiae studiosi esse
- old-edition numerals: 220 after ecclesiasticos,
- other: the 1 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 227 (reading order, moved on receipt)
- running head: 227 M. MINUCIUS FELIX. 228
- marginal letters: A beside "observent, non solum"; B beside "quasi per manus traditam"; C beside "scriptorum veteris Ecclesiae"; D beside "elegantiae studiosi esse"
- old-edition numerals: 220 after "ecclesiasticos,"
- footnote call (Q3): the call (18) stands in this column, after "retinuisse" in the first line ("multos annos retinuisse (18)"). The note itself, printed across the page foot, is set in n227, where its call is given as "not visible"; it belongs to this anchor.
- misprints kept as printed: "quem." (stray full stop: "quem. quis nescit"); "magia" (for magis: "quod magia mirere"); "Doctorum." (full stop before lower-case "quorum")
multos alios de recentioribus litteratoribus possum commemorare, qui plurimum huic generi scriptorum legendo tribuerunt: in his Jo. Frid. Gronovium, unum omnium elegantissum Romanorum scriptorum interpretem, qui non minus bonis observationibus antiquos scriptores ecclesiasticos illustravit et castigavit, quam Romanos.
many others from among the more recent men of letters I could mention, who gave a great deal of their time to reading this class of writers: among them Jo. Frid. Gronovius, the single most elegant interpreter of all the Roman writers, who illustrated and emended the ancient ecclesiastical writers with no less good observations than the Roman ones.
Eam autem rationem multas et magnas utilitates habere, plurimum etiam delectationis non illiberalis, facile doceri potest. Ac primum, quod litterarum Graecarum et Latinarum instaurationem pr⟨o⟩fuisse ad instaurandam doctrinae sacrae puritatem at integritatem, una et consentiente voce, litteratores pariter atque theologi eruditi praedicant, id profecto hac maxime de causa contigit, quod earum litterarum studium cum divinorum primum, deinde vero etiam veterum Ecclesiae librorum lectione et interpretatione ⟨c⟩onjunctum est. Etenim illae litterae et si hanc vim habere potuere, ut ingenia ad elegantiae sensum acuerent, et ejus amorem incenderent, tamen, si in iis, hoc est, in profanorum librorum lectione se continuissent earum studiosi, nihil aliud nisi contemptum eorum suscipere potuissent, qui rerum divinarum scientiam traderent, propterea, quod eorum disciplina barbariae sordibus contaminata et obscurata esset. Ac quod traditum est de nonnullis illius temporis litteratoribus, eos abhorruisse a religione, et divina contempsisse atque risisse, id si ita est, et non potius criminandi et invidiae faciendae causa tum a barbaris hominibus, qui contemptum sui ulcisci cuperent, confictum est, quod doctissimi quidam viri existimant, nescio, an iis acciderit propterea, quod in legendis tractandisque libris gentilium acquiescerent, eorumque elegantia et suavitate ita capti tenerentur, ut nihil aliud attingere cuperent aut sustinerent. In quo facile accidere potuit, ut disciplinam religionis judicarent e stupore et stultitia eorum vel hominum qui eam tum profiterentur, vel librorum de religione, qui in manibus hominum essent. Enimvero cum quidam his litteris imbuti ad veteres Ecclesiae Doctorum libros Graecos Latinosque cognoscendos se dedissent, quorum intelligendorum facultatem illarum litterarum scientia dederat, tum vero et ipsos Libros sacros rectius intelligere discebant, et quod vulgaris disciplina theologiae habebat stultitiae et inscitiae, id ei vitio hominum indoctorum et barbarorum additum intelligebant. Qua re incensi sunt animi ad studium liberandae divinae doctrinae a sordibus errorum et ineptiarum scholasticarum, quibus per tot saecula contaminata et oppressa jacuerat.
That this course, moreover, has many great advantages, and also a very great deal of not ungentlemanly delight, can easily be shown. And first, the fact that the restoration of Greek and Latin letters was of benefit for restoring the purity and integrity of sacred doctrine, as men of letters and learned theologians alike proclaim with one and a consenting voice, came about surely for this reason above all, that the study of those letters was joined with the reading and interpretation first of the divine books, and then also of the ancient books of the Church. For although those letters were able to have this power, to sharpen minds to a sense of elegance and to kindle a love of it, yet if their students had confined themselves to them, that is, to the reading of profane books, they could have conceived nothing other than contempt for those who taught the knowledge of divine things, because their teaching was defiled and obscured by the filth of barbarism. And as for what is reported of some men of letters of that time, that they shrank from religion and despised and laughed at divine things, if that is so, and it was not rather invented by barbarous men of that time for the sake of accusing them and stirring up ill will, men who wished to avenge the contempt shown them, as certain most learned men think, I do not know whether it befell them because they rested content with reading and handling the books of the gentiles, and were so held captive by their elegance and charm that they neither wished nor could bear to touch anything else. In this situation it could easily happen that they judged the teaching of religion from the dullness and folly either of the men who then professed it or of the books on religion that were then in men's hands. But indeed, when certain men imbued with these letters had devoted themselves to getting to know the ancient Greek and Latin books of the Doctors of the Church, the ability to understand which the knowledge of those letters had given them, then they also learned to understand the sacred Books themselves more correctly, and they understood that whatever folly and ignorance the common teaching of theology contained had been added to it through the fault of unlearned and barbarous men. By this their minds were fired with zeal for freeing divine doctrine from the filth of the errors and absurdities of the schoolmen, by which it had lain defiled and oppressed through so many centuries.
Atque ut litterae humaniores hac ratione profuerunt religioni, sic iis vicissim religio earumque cum scriptorum ecclesiasticorum lectione cunjunctio plurimum profuit. Etenim cum Sophistae et Theologistae barbari ante clamassent, litteras illas obesse religioni, aut certe in verbis, fabulis, inanibus historiis versari totas, nihil prodesse disciplinis majoribus,
And just as humane letters benefited religion in this way, so in turn religion, and their conjunction with the reading of the ecclesiastical writers, benefited them very greatly. For whereas barbarous Sophists and Theologists had previously cried out that those letters were harmful to religion, or at any rate were wholly occupied with words, fables and empty stories, were of no benefit to the higher disciplines,
Editors' notes and page, col. 229
Page
- running head: 229 PROLEGOMENA (cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: A multos alios de recentioribus; B earum litterarum studium / primum, deinde vero (letter stands between these two lines); C rent, confictum est; D theologiae habebat stultitiae
- old-edition numerals: 221 after studium
- other: editors' matter: Prolegomena, continued from the previous column (multos alios de recentioribus); pr⟨o⟩fuisse and ⟨c⟩onjunctum have a damaged letter; "suscipere" is printed and kept (possibly meant for suspicere); last word majo- is hyphenated across the column break (majoribus, with disciplinis); the English for it is rendered "higher"
- other: the word majoribus, was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 230
a rebus magnis et utilibus ad religionem vacuas esse, eamque ob causam inutiles, nec dignas studio juventutis, quod jactatum etiam in hac Academia traditur, cum Rhagius Aesticamplanus eas docere coepisset, Andrea Delitiano eum quintam in curru rotam vocante, os iis obturatum est tum, cum eae litterae ad sacrorum Librorum, ad Ecclesiae Patrum intelligentiam translatae essent, intelligereturque, per eas aditum dari ad veram sacrorum Librorum interpretationem et ad veram theologiae scientiam. Itaque cum P. Mosellanus interpretari caepisset Epistolas Pauli, in quo maxime, ut tum erant tempora, adjuvabatur Patrum Graecorum et Latinorum lectione, tanti concursus juventutis sunt facti, et ad illas ipsas, et ad caeteras ejus lectiones ut jam victi ja⟨c⟩erent, qui bonis litteris ante essent adversati. Ac nescio, an nuno quoque vendibilior litterarum humaniorum bona merx foret in Accademiis, si earum disciplina cum sacris tali modo cunjungeretur ab eorum doctoribus, qui in plerisque locis prope soli sedent in scholis Nam et per se utilior disciplina humanitatis redderetur, et facile intelligerent juvenes, eas litteras sibi non modo, quae nunc vulgaris opinio est, ad qualemcunque Latine scribendi fabultatem profuturas, quam permulti ne expetunt quidem, quod ejus sibi pro institutae vitae rationibus exiguum aut nullum usum vident fore, sed etiam, et multo quidem magis, ad doctrinae utilis copiam, ad quam ipsam et expetendam paulatim allicerentur, et comparandam adducerentur.
and were empty of great matters useful for religion, and for that reason are useless and unworthy of the study of youth (a charge which, it is reported, was bandied about even in this Academy when Rhagius Aesticampianus had begun to teach them, Andreas Delitianus calling him the fifth wheel on the cart), their mouth was stopped at the time when those letters were applied to the understanding of the sacred Books and of the Fathers of the Church, and it was understood that through them access is given to the true interpretation of the sacred Books and to the true science of theology. Accordingly, when P. Mosellanus had begun to interpret the Epistles of Paul, in which, as the times then were, he was helped above all by the reading of the Greek and Latin Fathers, such crowds of youth gathered, both at those very lectures and at his other lectures, that those who had formerly been opposed to good letters now lay defeated. And I am inclined to think that now too the good merchandise of the humaner letters would be more saleable in the Academies, if their study were joined with sacred studies in such a manner by their teachers, who in most places sit almost alone in the schools. For the study of humanity would both be rendered more useful in itself, and young men would easily understand that those letters would profit them not only, as is now the common opinion, towards some sort of skill in writing Latin, which very many do not even seek, because they see that it will be of little or no use to them for the purposes of the way of life they have taken up, but also, and indeed much more, towards a store of useful learning, which they would gradually be both enticed to seek and led to acquire.
Neque enim profecto dici hoc vere petest, non habere Doctorum veteris Ecclesiae libros, quo possimus in omni genere doctrinae, quod habeat aliquam vel cum religione conjunctionem, vel ad sacram scientiam bene tractandam utilitatem, juvari. Longum foret demonstrare, quid ab iis praesidii ad theologiam, ad interpretationem Scripturarum sacrarum, ad sacram civilemque historiam, ad geographiam utramque, ad alias artes ac disciplinas, et quomodo, peti possit. Integri commentarii hoc argumentum est, quem nunc non scribimus. Ad eloquentiam eam, qua in templis uti convenit quantam copiam rerum, argumentorum, imprimis popularium, sententiarum maxime optimarum, etiam acutarum et venustarum, suppeditabit ea lectio recte instituta, hoc est, si doctor, in hoc genere librorum versatus, indicaverit, quid in uno quoque sit ad hanc rationem utile. Sunt enim in hoc genere sane multi egregii et copiosi, ut nihil dicam de Chrysostomo et aliis Graecis, eloquentiae nomine claris, Tertullianus, Cyprianus, Angustinus, imprimisque Ambrosius cum Salviano, Petro Chrysologo, et quod quidem ad copiam bonarum, acutarum et venustarum sententiarum attinet, quarum in eloquentia ecclesiastica usus sit, omnium principe, Bernardo qui nullam aliam ob causam mellifluus dictus est. Atque hanc sententiarum copiam ex talibus tanto salubrius hauserint studiosi, quod de
For indeed it certainly cannot truly be said that the books of the Doctors of the ancient Church lack that by which we can be helped in every kind of learning which has any connection with religion or any usefulness for handling sacred science well. It would take long to show what help may be sought from them for theology, for the interpretation of the sacred Scriptures, for sacred and civil history, for both kinds of geography, for the other arts and disciplines, and how. That is the subject of a whole commentary, which we are not writing now. For that eloquence which it is fitting to use in churches, what a store of matter, of arguments, especially popular ones, of sentences of the very best kind, sharp and graceful too, that reading will supply if it is rightly ordered, that is, if the teacher, versed in this kind of books, points out what in each one is useful for this purpose. For there are in this kind very many excellent and copious writers, to say nothing of Chrysostom and other Greeks famous for eloquence: Tertullian, Cyprian, Augustine, and especially Ambrose with Salvian, Peter Chrysologus, and, as far as concerns a store of good, sharp and graceful sentences such as may be used in ecclesiastical eloquence, the chief of all, Bernard, who for no other reason was called mellifluous. And students would draw this store of sentences from such writers all the more wholesomely because about
Editors' notes and page, col. 230
Page
- running head: [P]ROLEGOMENA. 230 (left edge cut off in image)
- marginal letters: A ribus, a rebus magnis; B ante essent adversati; C Neque enim profecto; D recte instituta, hoc est
- old-edition numerals: 222 after adversati
- other: editors' matter: Prolegomena continued from the previous column (‹ribus, a rebus magnis›); column begins with the word fragment "ribus" broken from col. 229; ja⟨c⟩erent has a letter lost to a gap in the type; "caepisset" (vs "coepisset" earlier) and "scholis Nam" (no stop) set as printed; "ta-ib us" joined as talibus; "quo possimus" set as printed (perhaps for "quibus"), unsure; column ends mid-sentence at "quod de"
- misprints kept as printed: ‹Aesticamplanus› for Aesticampianus; ‹nuno› for nunc; ‹Accademiis› for Academiis; ‹cunjungeretur› for conjungeretur; ‹fabultatem› for facultatem; ‹petest› for potest; ‹Angustinus› for Augustinus
- English: the fragment "ribus" (of majoribus, set whole in col. 229) carries no English here; its sense belongs to col. 229's English (checked 2026-10-25, Q1: "ribus," removed from the start of this column's English)
religione vera scripti sunt, iisque legondis etiam sensus pietatis excitabitur, aletur et confirmabitur, quod in Christianorum veterum, etiam poetarum lectione imprimis spectabat Georgius Fabricius. « Non enim, » inquit (Praefat, ad Poet. Christ. p. 4), « finis studiorum et doctrinae unicus est, ut linguam perpolitam et volubilem habeas, sed ut colatur et abundet rerum magnarum et utilium scientia animus. Omnino autem nullae res majores, fructuosiores et digniores sunt, quam pietatis et religionis scientia, quae peti ex his scriptoribus potest, in quibus etiamsi alia non excellunt, tamen lectorem meliorem et sanctiorem possunt dimittere. » Sed profccto inscitia nostrorum temporum et ignavia, quae etiam apud theologos in hac parte longe lateque dominatur, nimis humiliter sentit de hoc toto genere scriptorum, quod tamen aut omnino non novit, aut vix aliquando per leves et raras occasiones quaedam (hoc est, ad testimonium citandi causa, sed fere ex indieio novitiorum scriptorum) inspexit. Ego, ut in ea parte me contineam, quae ad eloquentiae studia maxime pertinet, unam Cypriani Epistolam de longioribus et accuratius scriptis, velut secundam. Ambrosii item eam, quam Symmacho, paganicae religionis conservationem ab imperatoribus disertissima epistola petenti, opposuit, vel Bernardinam, qua S. Theoderici abbati Guillielmo, apud quem delatus erat, quod studiose detraheret de Cluniacensibus monachis, ita se purgat, ut eorum vitia omnia exprimat: has igitur, ut alia similia taceam, longe praetulerim omnibus latinis Panegyricis, qui Pliniano subjiciuntur: parum abest, quin etiam ipsius Plinii ambiguis argutiis et assentationibus erudi⟨t⟩is, propter quas Panegyricum ejus admirantur, Venit in mentem, dum Bernardi mentionem facio, librorum ejus de Consideratione, ad Eugenium III, P. R., scriptorum, quos nuper in historiae Eccl. lectionibus commendavi studiosis. Sunt ii sane, ut caetera istius viri, et Patrum Eccl fere omnium, scripta, de Lud. Vivis verissimo judicio, non pellucidae, sed perturbatioris aquae, hoc est, non omnino purae latinitatis et elegantis, at scripti, ut puto, ad imitationem nobilissimae Epistolae Ciceronis ad Quintum Fr. de bene administrada provincia, cujus etiam sententias quasdam habet, quanquam alia veste indntas; at in iis non minori arte, nec minus molli articulo, tractat Fugenium, quam Marcus fratrem, hortans per laudem, et ita praescribens bene gerendi Pontificatus ration⟨e⟩m, ut omnia Pontificum, quales illis temporibus erant. Eugenii ipsius, aulaeque Pontificiae, et cleri universi vitia clarissime describat, servans ubique decorum, et offensionem vitans. Itaque cum primum illos libros legere coepi, quanquam assuetus purioribus et elegantioribus, tamen ita me tenuerunt, ut ab eis non ante, quam ad finem perlegissem, discesserim. Quod si talibus legendis ipse teneri potui, cum tam studiose principe eloquentiae Graecae Latinaeque, nec, ut opinor, sine
true religion they were written, and by reading them the sense of piety too will be roused, nourished and strengthened, which Georg Fabricius had above all in view in reading the ancient Christians, the poets as well. "For," he says (Preface to the Christian Poets, p. 4), "the sole end of studies and learning is not that you should have a polished and fluent tongue, but that the mind should be cultivated and abound in the knowledge of great and useful things. And altogether no matters are greater, more fruitful and more worthy than the knowledge of piety and religion, which can be sought from these writers, who, even if they do not excel in other respects, can nevertheless send the reader away better and holier." But assuredly the ignorance and sloth of our times, which in this respect holds sway far and wide even among theologians, thinks too lowly of this whole class of writers, which it nevertheless either does not know at all, or has scarcely ever looked into in certain places on slight and rare occasions (that is, for the sake of citing them as testimony, and mostly on the judgement of more recent writers). I, to confine myself to that part which pertains most to the studies of eloquence, one letter of Cyprian, of the longer and more carefully written ones, such as the second; likewise that of Ambrose which he set against Symmachus when in a most eloquent letter he was asking the emperors for the preservation of the pagan religion; or that of Bernard, in which he so clears himself before William, abbot of St Theodoric, to whom he had been denounced for zealously disparaging the Cluniac monks, that he sets out all their vices: these, then, to say nothing of other similar ones, I would far prefer to all the Latin Panegyrics which are appended to Pliny's; it is little short of [my preferring them] even to the ambiguous subtleties and learned flatteries of Pliny himself, on account of which men admire his Panegyric, There comes to mind, while I make mention of Bernard, his books On Consideration, written to Eugene III, Roman Pontiff, which I recently commended to students in lectures on ecclesiastical history. They are indeed, like the other writings of that man and of almost all the Fathers of the Church, in the very true judgement of Ludovicus Vives, not of clear but of rather troubled water, that is, of a Latinity not altogether pure and elegant, yet written, as I think, in imitation of Cicero's most noble letter to his brother Quintus on governing a province well, some of whose sentiments they also contain, though clothed in another garment; and in them he handles Eugene with no less art, and with no less gentle a touch, than Marcus did his brother, exhorting him through praise, and so prescribing the manner of conducting the pontificate well that he describes most clearly all the vices of the pontiffs, such as they were in those times, of Eugene himself, and of the papal court, and of the whole clergy, everywhere preserving decorum and avoiding offence. And so when I first began to read those books, although accustomed to purer and more elegant ones, they nevertheless held me so fast that I did not leave them before I had read them through to the end. But if I myself could be held by reading such things, when I was handling so zealously the chief writers of Greek and Latin eloquence, and not, as I think, without
Editors' notes and page, col. 231
Page
- running head: 231 M. MINUCIUS FE[LIX] (cut off at right edge)
- marginal letters: A ‹religione vera scripti sunt›; B ‹que dominatur, nimis humiliter›; C ‹tinis Panegyricis, qui Pliniano›; D ‹in iis non minori arte›
- old-edition numerals: 223 after ‹quaedam›
- other: editors' matter: ‹religione vera scripti sunt› (preface/dissertation prose continued from the previous column, quoting Fabricius); column printed as one paragraph; several h's look like b (habeas, theologos, hac, hoc) through worn type and are set as h; "erudi⟨t⟩is" and "ration⟨e⟩m" have damaged letters; "admirantur, Venit" and "erant. Eugenii" punctuation kept as printed; "studiose principe" uncertain sense, set as printed (perhaps studioso principes intended); right-hand column (232) cut off and not set
- misprints kept as printed: legondis (legendis), profccto (profecto), indieio (indicio), administrada (administranda), indntas (indutas), Fugenium (Eugenium)
sensu elegantiae, tractarem, et inde fructum doctrinae capere, qui mihi nequaquam contemnendus videretur: alios, minus istis humanitatis studiis deditos, minus etiam in iis provectos, non delectari, non adjuvari posse ad doctrinam putem?
a feeling for elegance, and was gathering from it a fruit of learning that seemed to me by no means to be despised: am I to think that others, less devoted to these humane studies and also less advanced in them, cannot be delighted, cannot be helped towards learning?
Sed sicut in antiquioribus Graecis et Latinis, quos classicos vocamus, ordo quidam, accommodatus aetati profectibusque discentium, praescribi a magistris humanitatis solet: sic etiam in hoc genere ratio quaedam talis adhiberi debet. Neque enim omnla omnibus apta sunt, aut omni tempori studiisque omnibus. Alia juvenilis aetas desiderat, cum litteris Graecis et Latinis maxime vacat, alia cum in altioribus theologiae studiis versatur, alia in principiis, alia cum longius in iis progressa est, cum ad perfectionem quamdam et copiam doctrinae aspirat. Ac mihi non hoc jam est institutum, ut de universa legendorum Patrum ratione et ordine universo disseram: de initiis ejus studii satis erit monuisse. In quibus mihi rectissimum videtur, proponi et commendari eos libros, qui maximam habeant conjunctionem cum caeteris istius aetatis studiis, vel rebus, vel genere dicendi. Dubitari autem non potest, quin ejus generis sint maxime libri ii, qui religionis Christianae veritatem demonstrant, et superstitionem paganicam oppugnant. Nam rerum, primum, mogna pars vel nota est ei aetati e gentilium scriptorum, poetarum maxime, lectione, quod efficit intelligentiam eorum librorum faciliorem, vel lucem vicissim affundit illis libris, in quibus cognoscendi tum maxime versari debet. Est etiam aetate ipsa classicis scriptoribus conjunctissimum hoc genus cum maxima pars ex eo sit tempore quo superstitio gentilis dominabatur. Ipsi vero auctor⟨e⟩s eorum librorum, etiam qui serius vixere, ut Augustinus. Orosius et alii, vel magistri eloquentiae fuere, quod de plerisque traditum est: vel ejus et humaniorum litterarum omnium studiosi imprimis Itaque in iis cura dictionis et artificium dicendi ac disserendi magis fere quam in caeteris apparet. Nam si qui habent aliquid impuritatis in verbis, aut in dicendi genere duri et horridi, ut Arnobius, id fere a patria traxere. In quo potest caveri juventuti, ne inde aliquid trahat, si differantur ad id tempus, cum in bene scribendi ratione, saltem quoad puritatem verborum, aliquid firmitatis sunt consecuti. Mihi initium talium librorum legendorum fuit Minucii Octavius, in quem primum incidi in schola Portensi, in qua tum huic lectioni aliquid tribuebatur, de magistrorum commendatione, nec facile erat de provectioribus, qui non unum et item alterum talem scriptorem, poetas etiam aliquot Christianos, haberet, quos per dies Dominicos aliosque festos legeret. Atque hinc mihi primum injectus est amor scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum, qui post etiam confirmatus est, cum et litteratores maximos viderem iis multum tribuisse, et principes theologorum, primum a praeceptoribus audirem, deinde ipse viderem, inde a Lutheri temporibus, Patrum
But just as with the older Greeks and Latins, whom we call classics, a certain order, suited to the age and progress of the learners, is customarily prescribed by the teachers of the humanities, so also in this kind a certain plan of the same sort ought to be applied. For not all things are suited to all people, or to every time and to all studies. Youth requires one thing when it is chiefly occupied with Greek and Latin letters, another when it is engaged in the higher studies of theology, another at the beginnings, another when it has advanced further in them, when it aspires to a certain perfection and abundance of learning. And it is not now my purpose to discourse on the whole method of reading the Fathers and on the whole order of it: it will be enough to have given advice on the beginnings of that study. In these it seems to me most correct that those books be set forth and recommended which have the greatest connection with the other studies of that age, either in their matter or in their manner of speaking. Now it cannot be doubted that of this kind are above all those books which demonstrate the truth of the Christian religion and attack pagan superstition. For, first, a great part of their matter is either known to that age from the reading of the gentile writers, above all the poets, which makes the understanding of those books easier, or in turn sheds light on those books in the knowing of which it ought at that time chiefly to be engaged. This kind is also most closely joined to the classical writers in its very date, since the greatest part of it is from the time when gentile superstition held sway. And the authors themselves of those books, even those who lived later, such as Augustine. Orosius and others, were either teachers of eloquence, as is related of most of them, or especially devoted to it and to all the more humane letters Accordingly in them care for diction and the art of speaking and arguing appear almost more than in the rest. For if any have some impurity in their words, or are harsh and rough in their manner of speaking, as Arnobius is, they generally drew this from their native country. In this matter care can be taken for the young, lest they draw something from it, if [these books] are put off until the time when they have attained some firmness in the method of writing well, at least as regards purity of words. For me the beginning of reading such books was the Octavius of Minucius, on which I first came in the school of Pforta, in which at that time some weight was given to this reading on the recommendation of the masters, nor was it easy to find among the more advanced anyone who did not have one or another such writer, and also some Christian poets, to read on Sundays and other feast days. And from this a love of the Ecclesiastical writers was first instilled in me, which was afterwards also confirmed, when I saw both that the greatest men of letters had attributed much to them, and that the chief theologians, as I first heard from my teachers and then saw for myself, from the times of Luther onwards, had devoted very much study
Editors' notes and page, col. 232
Page
- running head: MINUCIUS FELIX. 232
- marginal letters: A ‹sensu elegantiae, tractarem›; B ‹fectionem quamdam et copiam›; C ‹scendi tum maxime / ipsa classicis›; D ‹Mihi initium talium›
- old-edition numerals: 224 after ‹rectissimum›
- other: editors' matter: ‹sensu elegantiae, tractarem› (an editor's prefatory discussion of reading the Fathers, continued from col. 231); column begins and ends mid-sentence; "mogna" reading slightly unsure; auctor⟨e⟩s has a damaged letter; worn type makes "fuere" and "est" (before "vel ejus") look like "fucre" and "cst", set as fuere, est; no full stop printed after "imprimis"; left-column fragments belong to col. 231 and are not set
scriptis cognoscendis plurinum studii tribuisse.
to getting to know the writings of the Fathers.
Quo magis probavi Viri doctissimi. Jo. Gottlieb Lindneri, scholae Salzensis in Thuringis Conrectoris dignissimi, consilium Minucii rursus edendi, et cum aliorum doctorum virorum, tum suis animadversionibus talibus illustrandi, per quas facilior esset lectio ejus et utilior juventuti scholasticae. Ipsis autem notis Viri perspiciendis vidi, non modo multa bene de verbis rebusque tradita esse, sed etiam crisin adhibitam esse modestam et accuratam quae defendenda magis et explicanda lectione vulgata, quam conjecturis exercendis occuparetur. quas nimis multas expertus est Minucius. Itaque confido hunc libellum utilem fore et accomodatum multis nominibus juventuti, vehementerque opto, ut Vir doctissimus, cum alia praemia docti hujus laboris, omnioque doctrinae suae, capiat, tum maxime hoc, ut intelligat, se eo utilem juventuti Christianae operam navasse: quod et ipsum maxime in hoc labore suscipiendo spectasse confido. Scr. Lipsiae a. d. IV Kal. Martias.
All the more did I approve the plan of that most learned man, Johann Gottlieb Lindner, most worthy Conrector of the school of Salza in Thuringia, to edit Minucius again and to illustrate him both with the annotations of other learned men and with his own, such that through them the reading of him might be easier and more useful to the youth of the schools. And on examining the man's notes themselves I saw not only that much has been well set down concerning words and things, but also that a modest and careful criticism has been applied, which is occupied in defending and explaining the received reading rather than in exercising conjectures, of which Minucius has suffered all too many. I am confident, therefore, that this little book will be useful and suited to the young on many counts, and I earnestly wish that the most learned man may reap other rewards of this learned labour, and of all his learning, but above all this: that he may know that by it he has rendered useful service to Christian youth; which I am confident he himself had chiefly in view in undertaking this labour. Written at Leipzig on the fourth day before the Kalends of March.
JOAN. GOTTLIEB LINDNERI
OF JOHANN GOTTLIEB LINDNER
ANALYSIS LOGICA DIALOGI.
A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE DIALOGUE.
ΠΑΡΑΣΚΕΥΗ.
PREPARATION.
CONSTAT:
IT CONSISTS:
1° ANTECEDENTE, ubi excurrit in laudes Octavii Christiani, a quo Caecilius, cultor deorum, qui Minucium salutatum Romam venerat, interambulandum ad veram religionem fuit revocatus. C. I, II,
1. OF AN ANTECEDENT, where he digresses into the praises of Octavius the Christian, by whom Caecilius, a worshipper of the gods, who had come to Rome to greet Minucius, was recalled while walking to the true religion. Ch. I, II,
2° CONCOMITANTIBUS, ubi docet quid in via acciderit, et quomodo Minucium Octavius admonuerit ne familiarem pateretur diutius, errare. C II, — III tot.
2. OF ATTENDANT CIRCUMSTANCES, where he tells what happened on the way, and how Octavius warned Minucius not to allow his intimate friend to err any longer. Ch. II, — III entire.
3° CONSEQUENTE, quod exponit occasionem, natam ex objurgatione modo dicta, disputandi de religione. C. IV.
3. OF A CONSEQUENT, which sets out the occasion, arising from the rebuke just mentioned, for disputing about religion. Ch. IV.
ΑΓΩΝ.
CONTEST.
TRANSITIO, continet Caecilii admonitionem ad M. Minucium praesidem de officii partibus rite tuendis. C. V.
TRANSITION: it contains Caecilius's admonition to M. Minucius, as umpire, about duly upholding the parts of his office. Ch. V.
THESIS
THESIS
ANTITHESIS.
ANTITHESIS.
I. Fieri non potest ut Christiani certi aliquid afferant in introducenda religione nova.
I. It cannot be that the Christians bring forward anything certain in introducing a new religion.
I. Via perveniendi ad certitudinem est in proclivi, quia
I. The way to arrive at certainty is easy, because
I. — Non in articulo de Deo, quod probatur.
I. — Not in the article concerning God, which is proved
(a) A conditione veritatis, quae est certa, V.
(a) from the condition of truth, which is certain, V.
I. — Incertitudo illa non est in veritate, sed in judiciis hominum veritatem indagantium, et oritur ex obscuritate non objectiva, sed subjectiva, XVI;
I. — That uncertainty is not in the truth, but in the judgements of men searching out the truth, and it arises from an obscurity not objective but subjective, XVI;
Editors' notes and page, col. 233
Footnotes
<!-- The letters (a), (c), (d) and α β γ in the outline above are the analysis's own divisions, not footnote calls. --> (printed under page 169)
(1) ‹anchor: not visible (probably the title of the analysis)› · call in col 233
Analysin hujus dialogi jam dedit Abr. Scultetus in Medulla Théologiae Patrum. p. I, l. X, c. 9, p. 357, quam vero ne retinerem, variae persuaserunt rationes. Equidem impetrare a me nunquam potui ut Caecilium crederem tam varium tamque parum sibi constantem fuisse, ut argumenta protulerit parum cohaerentia et ad certam aliquam propositionem non redigenda: ideoque cogitavi de argumentis Caecilii in syllogismi formas redigendis. Nec fuit hoc multi laboris reputanti duo fere fuisse quae ab eodem exigerentur: quorum primum fuit ut supertitionem cui innutritus erat, missam faceret; alterum, ut Christianorum sacris initiandum se traderet. Christianam religionem declinare studuit, hoc usus ratiocinio: Quaecunque religio est incerta et minus proficua, illa utique non est amplectenda; jam vero religio Christiana nec certa est nec proficua; ergo R. C. non est amplectenda. Pro religione vernacula retinenda hunc formavit syllogismum: Quaecunque religio est certa et utilis, in illa utique est permanendum: atqui religio a Romanis recepta certa est et utilis: ergo in religione tradita permanendum In his duobus ratiociniis omnis disputatio Caecilii continetur.
Abraham Scultetus already gave an analysis of this dialogue in his Medulla Theologiae Patrum, part I, book X, ch. 9, p. 357; but various reasons persuaded me not to keep it. I for my part could never bring myself to believe that Caecilius was so changeable and so little consistent as to bring forward arguments that hang together poorly and cannot be reduced to some definite proposition; and so I thought of reducing Caecilius's arguments to the forms of the syllogism. Nor was this much labour, once I reflected that there were essentially two things being asked of him: first, that he give up the superstition in which he had been raised; second, that he give himself to be initiated into the Christians' rites. He sought to decline the Christian religion, using this reasoning: Whatever religion is uncertain and of little profit is certainly not to be embraced; but the Christian religion is neither certain nor profitable; therefore the Christian religion is not to be embraced. For keeping his native religion he framed this syllogism: In whatever religion is certain and useful one must certainly remain; but the religion received by the Romans is certain and useful; therefore one must remain in the religion handed down. In these two reasonings the whole of Caecilius's disputation is contained.
(printed under page 169)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMEN[A …] (cut off at the right edge of the image); column number 233
- marginal letters: A scriptis cognoscendis plurinum studii tribuisse.
- old-edition numerals: 225 before ΠΑΡΑΣΚΕΥΗ
- other: a full-width band stands across cols 233/234 in mid-page: the 1 paragraph(s) above it in col 234 are set here, after the 2 above it in col 233 (reading order, moved on receipt); the band itself (its title lines) is not set by the volunteer page: set it here, at the move, with full_width
- running head: 233 PROLEGOMENA. 234
- marginal letters: A beside "scriptis cognoscendis"; B (none visible); C (none visible); D (none visible)
- old-edition numerals: 225 before "ΠΑΡΑΣΚΕΥΗ."
- signature: "PATROL. III." at the foot of col 233, below the footnote
- misprints kept as printed: plurinum (plurimum) in the text; Théologiae (stray accent) and supertitionem (superstitionem) in footnote (1)
THESIS
THESIS
ANTITHESIS
ANTITHESIS
A conditione subjecti ad investigandum eam veritatem minus apti, V; Deest enim
From the condition of the subject, less fit to investigate that truth, V; for there is lacking
(b) Externa hominum conditio nihil officit veritati, XVI.
(b) The outward condition of men is no hindrance to truth, XVI.
1° — Medium causativum doctrina et eruditio:
1. — The causal means, teaching and learning:
1° — Quasdam veritates etiam absque eruditione comparare nobis possumus;
1. — Certain truths we can acquire for ourselves even without learning;
2° — Medium ordinis; opes et facultates;
2. — The means of rank: wealth and resources;
2° — Divitiae magis avocant a sapientia, quam paupertas;
2. — Riches call one away from wisdom more than poverty does;
(c) Ab inutili. Sufficit enim ad vitam beatam cognitio sui ipsius, V.
(c) From uselessness. For knowledge of oneself suffices for a happy life, V.
(c) Concedo cognitionem sui ipsius esse salutarem, sed ea sine universitatis exploratione minus procedit, XVII;
(c) I grant that knowledge of oneself is salutary, but without exploration of the universe it makes less progress, XVII;
(d) A naturali statu hominis, qui humilis et in terram projectus, est, Ibid.
(d) From the natural state of man, which is lowly and cast down towards the earth, ibid.
(d) Naturalis hominis status, qui erectus est, jubet potius coelum aspicere.
(d) The natural state of man, which is upright, bids him rather look up at heaven.
II. — Nec in articulo de creatione, quam perperam Deo attribuunt Christiani, quia omnia fortuito et casu quodam ita conflata sunt, ut nunc cernuntur, V,
II. — Nor in the article concerning creation, which the Christians wrongly attribute to God, because all things have been put together by accident and a kind of chance, just as they are now seen, V,
II. — Deus est creator hujus Universi, quod patet ex ordine rerum ad certum finem instituto, qui sane non potest casus esse fortuiti, XVIII
II. — God is the creator of this Universe, which is evident from the order of things established for a definite end, which surely cannot be the work of accidental chance, XVIII
III. — Neque in articulo de Providentia,
III. — Nor in the article concerning Providence,
III. — Datur Providentia: qucd probatur.
III. — There is a Providence: which is proved
(a) Quia, quae semel coepta sunt, lege necessitatis continuantur; adeoque omnia commodius derivari ex mechanica corporum structura possunt, V.
(a) Because what has once been begun is continued by the law of necessity; and so all things can more suitably be derived from the mechanical structure of bodies, V.
(a) Ex omnimoda perfectione, XVII, XVIII, quae conspicitur.
(a) From the perfection of every kind, XVII, XVIII, which is seen
1° — In Universo: e. g.
1. — In the Universe: for example,
α In quatuor anni temporibus.
α In the four seasons of the year.
β In aquis.
β In the waters.
γ In terra continente.
γ In the dry land.
Editors' notes and page, col. 234
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA. 234
- marginal letters: A ‹vulgata, quam conjecturis›; B (none visible); C (none visible); D (none visible)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: editors' matter set: ‹vulgata, quam conjecturis› (end of a preface, signed Leipzig); Lindner's Logica Dialogi table ‹THESIS / ANTITHESIS› set row by row, thesis cell then antithesis cell; ‹rum, ut Christianorum sacris› (Lindner's analysis). Full-width title "[GOT]TLIEB LINDNERI [ANA]LOGICA DIALOGI" between the preface and the table, cut off at left edge, not set. The table's left-hand part lies in col. 233 (fragments visible). First word of last paragraph "rum" completes "alte-" at foot of col. 233. "nimis" printed with a gap/damaged m; "ce⟨r⟩ta" r damaged; "incerta" final letter blurred; "officit" read from italic t resembling l; "coelum" read as œ (uncertain against æ). No full stop printed after "permanendum". "accomodatum" left as printed (variant spelling). Signature "8" at foot omitted.
- other: the 1 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 233 (reading order, moved on receipt)
- running head: 233 PROLEGOMENA. 234
- marginal letters: A beside "vulgata, quam conjecturis"; B (none visible); C (none visible); D (none visible)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- correction (Q3): the lower paragraph ‹rum, ut Christianorum sacris … continetur› is NOT Lindner's analysis set in layer 1: it is the continuation of the page-foot footnote (1) (call on the title "DIALOGI (1)" in the band), printed below the rule in the right half of the foot; it is set whole with footnote (1) in n233 and correctly stands in no part of this column.
- misprints kept as printed: qucd (quod) in "Datur Providentia: qucd probatur."
THESIS
Thesis
ANTITHESIS.
Antithesis.
δ In animantibus.
δ In living creatures.
ε In homine.
ε In man.
ς In nascendi ratione.
ς In the manner of being born.
2° — In singulis Universi partibus, § 3:
2° — In the individual parts of the Universe, § 3:
α Britannia.
α Britain.
β Aegypto.
β Egypt.
ζ Mesopotamia.
ζ Mesopotamia.
δ Oriente.
δ The East.
(a) Ob defectum ordinis, qui est
(a) On account of the lack of order, which is
1° — In rebus naturalibus V.
1° — In natural things, V.
2° — In rebus moralibus, Ibid.
2° — In moral things, ibid.
(b) Ex analogia domus bene aedificatae, XVIII.
(b) From the analogy of a well-built house, XVIII.
DIGRESSIO I.
Digression I.
De unitate Dei quae probatur.
On the unity of God, which is proved.
1° — Inductione Sacratica, exemplis petitis:
1° — By Socratic induction, with examples drawn:
(a) Ab imperiis terrenis, XVIII;
(a) From earthly empires, XVIII;
(b) Ad animalibus sociabilibus, Ib:
(b) From social animals, ibid.:
2° — Ab aeternitate Dei, Ib.;
2° — From the eternity of God, ibid.;
3° — Ab ejus omnipotentia, Ib.;
3° — From His omnipotence, ibid.;
4° — A caeteris perfectionibus, quae uni, non pluribus competunt, Ib.;
4° — From the other perfections, which belong to one, not to several, ibid.;
5° — A defectu nominis, Ib.;
5° — From the lack of a name, ibid.;
6° — A testimonio, tum vulgi. Ibid; tum poetarum, XIX, Ibid.; tum etiam philosophorum, Ib.
6° — From testimony, both of the common people, ibid.; and of the poets, XIX, ibid.; and also of the philosophers, ibid.
II
II
In religione a majoribus tradita est permanendum,
One must remain in the religion handed down by our ancestors,
II
II
Stultum est, in religione falsa illa quidem, sed a majoribus tradita, velle permanere.
It is foolish to wish to remain in a religion that is false, though indeed handed down by our ancestors.
Quod probatur.
Which is proved.
I — Quia certa.
I — Because it is certain.
(a) Ob incertum veritatis, quod ex praemissis patet, VI;
(a) On account of the uncertainty of truth, which is clear from what has been set out before, VI;
(d) Negando omnia esse incerta, Providentia probatur, XX;
(a) By denying that all things are uncertain, Providence is proved, XX;
(b) Ob antiquitatem: habemus enim religiones per, traditionem acceptas, Ib.;
(b) On account of antiquity: for we hold religions received through tradition, ibid.;
(b) Distinguendo inter antiquitatem fabulosam, et veritatis amantem: Haec, non illa. est sectanda, Ib.;
(b) By distinguishing between a fabulous antiquity and one that loves truth: the latter, not the former, is to be followed, ibid.;
(c) Ob fidem majoribus debitam: quo quis enim deorum saeculo propior accedit, eo major illi fides est habenda, Ib.;
(c) On account of the trust owed to our ancestors: for the nearer anyone comes to the age of the gods, the greater the trust that is to be placed in him, ibid.;
(c) A fide majorum dubia, Ib.;
(c) From the doubtful trustworthiness of the ancestors, ibid.;
DIGRESSIO II.
Digression II.
Homines fuisse, quos pro diis coluerint Gentes. Hoc probatur:
That those whom the Gentiles worshipped as gods were men. This is proved:
1° — Ostendendo modum quo factum illud sit, deorum origine altius ex historia repetita, X;
1° — By showing the manner in which that came about, the origin of the gods being traced further back from history, X;
2° — Ex testimoniis philosophorum et historicorum, XXI, XXII;
2° — From the testimonies of philosophers and historians, XXI, XXII;
3° — Ex affectionibus humanis, XXI:
3° — From human affections, XXI:
4° — Ex testimoniis poetarum XXII;
4° — From the testimonies of the poets, XXII;
Editors' notes and page, col. 235
Page
- running head: 235 M. MINUCIUS FE[LIX] (cut off at the image edge)
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: editors' matter: synoptic table of the Octavius (Thesis/Antithesis), from ‹δ In animantibus› to ‹Ex testimoniis poetarum XXII›; table set row by row, left cell before right; the column right of the vertical rule (‹II — Qu...›, ‹(b) Que...›) belongs to the next column and is not set; ‹ζ Mesopotamia› letter unsure (γ expected after β); ‹X› after ‹repetita› possibly XX or XX lost a letter, set as printed; ‹per, traditionem› comma as printed; ‹Hocprobatur› printed run together, set as two words
THESIS.
Thesis.
ANTITHESIS
Antithesis
5° — Ex ipsorum nativitate et morte XXIII.
5° — From their own birth and death, XXIII.
DIGRESSIO III.
Digression III.
De Idolorum Origine et Vanitate.
On the Origin and Vanity of Idols.
1° — Origo, XXIII.
1° — Origin, XXIII.
2° — Vanitas, XXIV.
2° — Vanity, XXIV.
II — Quia utilis. Romani enim magnitudinem imperii sui diis debuerant; Quod Romani fuerint religiosi, hoc patet ex venerandis;
II — Because it is useful. For the Romans had owed the greatness of their empire to the gods; that the Romans were religious is clear from the worshipping;
1° — Diis vernaculis, VI:
1° — Of native gods, VI:
2° — Diis peregrinis, Ib;
2° — Of foreign gods, Ib;
3° — Instituendis castis virginibus et nominibus sacerdotum. Ib.
3° — From the instituting of chaste virgins and of the titles of priests. Ib.
II — Falsissimum est Romanos imperium suum diis debuisse, XXV;
II — It is utterly false that the Romans owed their empire to the gods, XXV;
(a) Quia Romani non tam religiosi, quam impune sacrilegi.
(a) Because the Romans were not so much religious as sacrilegious with impunity.
Hoc probatur demonstratione indirecta, per rationem disjunctivam. Si a diis Romani regna accepta possederunt, ea habuerunt
This is proved by indirect demonstration, through disjunctive reasoning. If the Romans possessed kingdoms received from the gods, they had them
1° — Vel a diis peregrinis,
1° — Either from foreign gods,
2° Vel a diis vernaculis,
2° Or from native gods,
3° — Vel ob cultum religiosiorem. Atqui, non a diis peregrinis, qui antiquos sui cultores potius tuiti essent, si quidquam valerent, c. XXV;
3° — Or on account of a more religious worship. But not from foreign gods, who would rather have protected their own ancient worshippers, if they had any power at all, ch. XXV;
Nec a diis vernaculis, qui morbi potius sunt et propudia, quam dii, Ib.
Nor from native gods, who are diseases and shameful things rather than gods, Ib.
Neque ob cultum castiorem, siquidem virginibus non castitas tutior, sed impudicitia felicior fuit, Ib.
Nor on account of a more chaste worship, since for the virgins it was not chastity that was safer, but unchastity that was more fortunate, Ib.
Ergo nullo modo diis imperium suum Romani debent, sed est audaciae praeda Ib.;
Therefore in no way do the Romans owe their empire to the gods, but it is the plunder of audacity, Ib.;
(b) Quod haec religio imperium conciliaverit illis, patet:
(b) That this religion won the empire for them is clear:
1° Ex institutione, quia sacra Romana optimo consitio sunt instituta, VII,
1° From their institution, because the Roman rites were instituted with the best counsel, VII,
a) Ad remunerandum divinam indulgentiam, Ib.;
a) For repaying the divine indulgence, Ib.;
(b) Ad avertendam iram Ib.;
(b) For averting wrath, Ib.;
(b) Imperia possederunt gentes exterae, etiam absque superstitione Romana, Ib.;
(b) Foreign nations have possessed empires, even without the Roman superstition, Ib.;
2° — Ex eventu, quia augura poenitenter omissa et observata feliciter, Ib.;
2° — From the outcome, because auguries were omitted to men's regret and observed with good fortune, Ib.;
2° — Auguria multoties fefellerunt, adeoque committitur fallacia non causae ut causae, XXVI.
2° — Auguries have very often deceived, and so the fallacy of taking a non-cause as a cause is committed, XXVI.
3° — Ex oraculis et vaticiniis, non antiquissimorum modo temporum, sed recentiorum etiam, Ib.
3° — From oracles and prophecies, not only of the most ancient times, but of more recent ones too, Ib.
3° — Oracula saepius mentita sunt, adeoque eventus non industriae, sed casui attribuendus, Ib.
3° — Oracles have quite often lied, and so the outcome is to be attributed not to skill but to chance, Ib.
DIGRESSIO IV.
Digression IV.
De exsistentia et molitionibus daemonum:
On the existence and the machinations of demons:
Ubi describitur:
Where is described:
1° — Exsistentia, XXVI,
1° — Existence, XXVI,
(a) Descriptione, Ib.,
(a) By description, Ib.,
(b) Testimonis, Ib.,
(b) By testimonies, Ib.,
2° Molitiones, XXVII, tot.
2° Machinations, XXVII, throughout.
Editors' notes and page, col. 236
Page
- running head: MINUCIUS FELIX. 236
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: editors' matter: synoptic table of the Octavius in two columns (THESIS. / ANTITHESIS), set row by row in vertical order, matching thesis and antithesis entries interleaved; cut-off fragments at the left edge of the images belong to the neighbouring column and are not set; "debuerant" set as printed (perhaps for debuerint); first "2°" under Digressio III and antithesis "2₀" printed with odd degree signs, set as 2°
THESIS.
Thesis.
ANTITHESIS.
Antithesis.
Digressio V.
Digression V.
De perversa in Christianos quaestione, Quae daemoniis instigantibus, perversa est; quia fit:
On the perverse inquiry against the Christians, Which is perverse at the instigation of demons; because it is made:
1°—De incognitis et inexploratis, XXVIII;
1°—Concerning things unknown and unexamined, XXVIII;
2°—Quia non admittit defensionem, Ib.
2°—Because it does not admit a defence, ibid.
3°—Quia cogit non ad confitendum, sed ad negandum, Ib.
3°—Because it compels not to confess but to deny, ibid.
III.
III.
Christiana religio non est utilis.
The Christian religion is not useful.
1°—Ob mores Christianorum deterrimos: Si enim esset utilis, primam utique utilitatem exsereret in emendandis moribus, VII. Jam vero sunt.
1°—On account of the most wicked morals of the Christians: For if it were useful, it would surely display its first usefulness in amending morals, VII. Now in fact they are:
III.
III.
1°—Qui de Christianorum sceleribus circumferuntur sermones, partim aperte sunt falsi et a malevolis quibusdam, instigatione daemonum disseminati; partim quidem veri, sed sinistra interpretatione, inspersisque mendaciis dopravati.
1°—The tales that are spread about concerning the crimes of the Christians are partly plainly false, and disseminated by certain malevolent persons at the instigation of demons; partly indeed true, but corrupted by perverse interpretation and by lies sprinkled in.
(a) De ultima pleb⟨e⟩, VII;
(a) From the lowest common people, VII;
(a) Negat hoc ex eo sequi quod honores et purpuras Gentium recusarent, XXXI;
(a) He denies that this follows from the fact that they refused the honours and purple robes of the Gentiles, XXXI;
(b) Factiosi, Ib.;
(b) Factious, ibid.;
(b) Negat docendo Christianos congregatos eadem quiete agere, qua et singuli, Ib.;
(b) He denies it, teaching that Christians gathered together behave with the same quietness as they do singly, ibid.;
(c) In publicum muti, Ib.;
(c) Mute in public, ibid.;
(c) Concedit, sed hoc ideo fieri monet, quod Gentes eos publice audire erubescerent, Ib.;
(c) He grants it, but points out that this happens because the Gentiles would be ashamed to hear them in public, ibid.;
(d) Eorum multitudo in dies crescit, IX, instar lolii;
(d) Their multitude grows from day to day, IX, like darnel;
(d) Concedit, sed hoc laudis, non criminis esse docet, Ib.;
(d) He grants it, but teaches that this is a matter of praise, not of reproach, ibid.;
(e) Occultis se signis noscunt, Ib.;
(e) They recognize one another by secret signs, ibid.;
(e) Concedit, sed crimen removet, eo quod non notaculo corporis, sed innocentiae signo se dignoscerent, Ib.;
(e) He grants it, but removes the charge, since they would recognize one another not by a mark on the body but by the sign of innocence, ibid.;
(f) Incestum ob fratris appellationem committunt, Ib.;
(f) They commit incest on account of the name of brother, ibid.;
(f) Negat, appellatonis fraternae innocentiam defendit, Ib.;
(f) He denies it; he defends the innocence of the brotherly name, ibid.;
2°—Ob sacra multo deteriora; nam.
2°—On account of rites far worse; for:
2°—Plurima quae de sacris nostris spargitis, sunt falsa; non pauca depravata:
2°—Very many things that you spread about our rites are false; not a few are distorted:
(a) Colunt caput asini, IX;
(a) They worship the head of an ass, IX;
(a) Inficiatur et retorquet, XXVIII;
(a) He disowns it and turns it back [on them], XXVIII;
(b) Genitalia sacerdotis sui adorant, Ib.;
(b) They adore the genitals of their priest, ibid.;
(b) Negat, et convicium remittit, XXVIII, XXIX:
(b) He denies it, and throws the insult back, XXVIII, XXIX:
(c) Ad hominem e cruce pendentem supplicant, Ib.
(c) They make supplication to a man hanging from a cross, ibid.
(c) Negat et retorquet, Ib.
(c) He denies it and turns it back, ibid.
(d) Initiantur caede infantis, Ib.;
(d) They are initiated by the slaughter of an infant, ibid.;
(d) Negat et retorquet. XXX tot.;
(d) He denies it and turns it back. XXX throughout;
(e) Convivia incesta celebrant, Ib.;
(e) They celebrate incestuous banquets, ibid.;
(e) Negat et retorquet XXXI;
(e) He denies it and turns it back, XXXI;
(f) Sacra sua occultant, X;
(f) They conceal their rites, X;
(f) Concedit, sed jure fieri monet, XXX;
(f) He grants it, but points out that it is done rightly, XXX;
3°—Ob alia plura opinionum portenta;
3°—On account of many other monstrosities of opinion;
3°—Christianorum doctrina est sanissima: hinc.
3°—The doctrine of the Christians is most sound: hence:
A.—In articulo de Deo; colunt enim.
A.—In the article on God; for they worship:
A—In articulo de Deo,
A—In the article on God,
(a) Deum solitarium, eumdemque imbecillum; quod exemplo Judeorum patet, X;
(a) A solitary God, and the same one weak; which is evident from the example of the Jews, X;
(a) Distinguendum esse monet inter judaeos veteres legique divinae obedientes, et recentiores immorigeros, XXXIII,
(a) He points out that a distinction must be drawn between the Jews of old, obedient to the divine law, and the more recent ones, who are disobedient, XXXIII,
Editors' notes and page, col. 237
Page
- running head: 237 PROLEGOMEN (cut off at the right edge of the image)
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: editors' matter: whole column is a synoptic table of the Octavius in two sub-columns (Thesis / Antithesis), beginning "THESIS. ANTITHESIS. Digressio V. De perversa in Christianos quaestione"; set paired in reading order, thesis entry before its antithesis entry. The third sub-column right of the vertical rule belongs to column 238 and is cut off; not set. "pleb⟨e⟩": last letter damaged, read as plebe; UNSURE. "dopravati" in the middle image, the top image's cut line looks like depravati; UNSURE. Thesis 2°(c) "Ib." printed with damaged b (looks like ID.).
THESIS.
Thesis.
ANTITHESIS.
Antithesis.
(b) Deum invisibilem : quod absurdum, Ib. ;
(b) A God invisible: which is absurd, ibid.;
(c) Deum omniscium : quod impium, Ib.
(c) A God all-knowing: which is impious, ibid.
(b) Invisibilitatem Dei jure astrui docet, XXXII: Omniscientiam Dei firmissimis niti argumentis asserit, XXXII.XXXIII:
(b) He teaches that the invisibility of God is rightly established, 32; he asserts that the omniscience of God rests on the firmest arguments, 32, 33;
B. — De fine mundi. Statuunt mundum interiturum aliquando : quae opinio repugnat legi naturae semel constitutae atque aeternae, X
B. On the end of the world. They maintain that the world will one day perish: an opinion which conflicts with the law of nature, once established and eternal, 10.
B. — Doctrina de fine mundi, nec legi naturae nec philosophorum sententiis repugnat, XXXIV
B. The doctrine of the end of the world conflicts neither with the law of nature nor with the opinions of the philosophers, 34.
C. — De resurrectione mortuorum, quam impugnat, argamentis.
C. On the resurrection of the dead, which he attacks with arguments.
C. — Ad objecta de mortuorum resurrectione respondetur.
C. The objections concerning the resurrection of the dead are answered.
1° — Κατ' ἄνθρωπον, quia ad resurrectionem stabiliendam, multa alia absurda simul sunt assumenda: e. g.
1. Κατ' ἄνθρωπον [ad hominem], because, in order to establish the resurrection, many other absurdities must be assumed along with it, e.g.:
(a) Ignium sepulturam esse rejiciendam, ne scilicet corpus resuscitandum, periret, XI ;
(a) That burial by fire must be rejected, lest, that is, the body that is to be raised should perish, 11;
(a) Ignium sepultura, non facilitandae resurrectionis causa rejicitur, sed ut mos veterum humandi corpora frequentetur, XXXIV ;
(a) Burial by fire is rejected, not for the sake of making the resurrection easier, but so that the custom of the ancients of burying bodies in the earth may be kept up, 34;
(b) Poenas et remunerationes post mortem statuere, quia error errorem facile pariat, Ib. ;
(b) That they posit punishments and rewards after death, because error easily begets error, ibid.;
(b) Poenas post mortem etiam Gentes statuunt, sed easdem perhorrescunt. Ib. ; XXXIV ;
(b) The Gentiles too posit punishments after death, but they shudder at them. Ibid.; 34;
(c) Ipsos Christianos poenis esse dignos, cum sint mali, Ib. ;
(c) That the Christians themselves deserve punishments, since they are wicked, ibid.;
(e) Christiani ethnicis tamen multo sunt meliores, Ib. ;
(c) Christians are nevertheless much better than the heathen, ibid.;
(d) Deum esse injustum, qui sortem in hominibus puniat, cum omnia subjecta sint fato, Ib.;
(d) That God is unjust, Who punishes lot in men, since all things are subject to fate, ibid.;
(d) Concedit fatum esse, sed liberum, ob omniscientiam Dei, qua futura praesciat, XXXVI ;
(d) He grants that there is fate, but a free one, on account of the omniscience of God, by which He foreknows things to come, 36;
2° — Κατ' ἀλήθειαν, ostendendo impossibilitatem.
2. Κατ' ἀλήθειαν [according to truth], by showing its impossibility:
2° — Possibilitas resurrectionis astruitur,
2. The possibility of the resurrection is established,
(a) Dilemmate, Ib. ;
(a) By a dilemma, ibid.;
(a) Tum sententiis philosophorum, tum argumentis ex ratione petitis, XXXIV ;
(a) Both by the opinions of the philosophers and by arguments drawn from reason, 34;
(b) Defectu exempli, Ib.;
(b) By the lack of an example, ibid.;
(b) Aeque absurdum est exemplum hominis qui ex mortuis resurrexerit videre velle, quam esset postulare ut sol sub noctem oriatur, et arbores in hieme vernent. Exempla resurgentium apparebunt utique, sed suo tempore, Ib.
(b) It is as absurd to wish to see the example of a man who has risen from the dead as it would be to demand that the sun should rise at nightfall and the trees put forth leaves in winter. Examples of those rising again will certainly appear, but in their own time, ibid.
3° — Ob mala plurima quibus cultores suos exponit : Cultus enim Dei unius non ducit ad felicitatem,
3. Because of the very many evils to which it exposes its worshippers: for the worship of one God does not lead to happiness,
3° — Inter Christianos et ethnicos de eo quod bonum malumve est, non convenit.
3. Christians and heathen do not agree about what is good or evil.
(a) Quia ejus cultores sunt pauperes, XII ;
(a) Because His worshippers are poor, 12;
(a) Paupertas haec non infamiae, sed gloriae est; non coacta, sed voluntaria, XXXVI ;
(a) This poverty is a matter not of disgrace but of glory; not forced, but voluntary, 36;
(b) Quia infirmi ac calamitosi, Ib. ;
(b) Because they are sickly and afflicted, ibid.;
(b) Fortitudo infirmitatibus roboratur, virtus calamitatibus, 8 ;
(b) Fortitude is strengthened by infirmities, virtue by calamities, 8;
(c) Tormentis aliorum expositi, Ib. ;
(c) Exposed to the torments of others, ibid.;
(c) Gloriamur suppliciis affecti, freti auxilio Dei, XXXVII ;
(c) We glory when subjected to tortures, relying on the help of God, 37;
(d) A Deo relicti, Ib. ;
(d) Abandoned by God, ibid.;
(d) Non derelinquimur a Deo, sed tentamur, Ib.;
(d) We are not forsaken by God, but tested, ibid.;
(e) Alii sine Deo felices sunt, Ib. ;
(e) Others are happy without God, ibid.;
(e) Felicitas sine Deo non potest esse solida, Ib. ;
(e) Happiness without God cannot be solid, ibid.;
(f) Honestis voluptatibus avocat, ut sunt :
(f) It calls them away from honourable pleasures, such as:
(f) Voluptates, quibus abstinemus non sunt honestae, sed pravae. Ib.; quod probatur, ib. ;
(f) The pleasures from which we abstain are not honourable but depraved, ibid.; which is proved, ibid.;
Editors' notes and page, col. 238
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA.
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: editors' matter: synopsis table of the Octavius in two sub-columns, THESIS / ANTITHESIS (‹(b) Deum invisibilem›), set row by row, thesis item then answering antithesis item; the cut-off right edge of the neighbouring column at left (col. 237) not set; "XXXII.XXXIII" in antithesis (b) printed with a stop; "8" in antithesis 3°(b) printed as an Arabic figure, perhaps for a Roman numeral, left as printed; first "Ib." may read "lb."
THESIS.
Thesis.
ANTITHESIS.
Antithesis.
1° — Pompae et spectacula, Ib.;
1° — Processions and spectacles, ibid.;
1° — De pompis et spectaculis, 12, 13;
1° — On processions and spectacles, 12, 13;
2° — Praecerpti cibi et potus delibati, Ib.;
2° — Foods tasted beforehand and drinks poured in libation, ibid.;
2° — Sacrificiorum reliquiis, quae daemoniis libantur, XXXVIII;
2° — On the remains of sacrifices, which are offered in libation to demons, 38;
(g) Rerum licitarum usum, qualis florum est, damnat, Ib.:
(g) It condemns the use of lawful things, such as is that of flowers, ibid.:
(g) Florum non usus, sed abusus damnatur, Ib.;
(g) Not the use of flowers but their abuse is condemned, ibid.;
(h) Defunctos adeo debito honore defraudat, dum coronari eos prohibet. Ib.;
(h) It so far defrauds the dead of their due honour, in that it forbids them to be crowned. Ibid.;
(h) Abhorret a ratione mos coronandi mortuos, Ib;
(h) The custom of crowning the dead is at odds with reason, ibid.;
(i) Nec damnum vitae praesentis futurae felicitate pensat, Ib.;
(i) Nor does it make up for the loss of the present life by the happiness of the future one, ibid.;
(i) Christiani non tranquille solum vivunt, sed beati etiam sunt spe futurae felicitatis, Ib.;
(i) Christians not only live tranquilly, but are also happy in the hope of future happiness, ibid.;
IV.
IV.
IV.
IV.
Summa totius disputationis.
Summary of the whole disputation.
1° — A rérum divinarum exploratione abstinendum.
1° — One must abstain from the exploration of divine things.
1° — A rerum divinarum investigatione nemo absterreri debet, quia
1° — No one ought to be deterred from the investigation of divine things, because
(a) Quia veritas est supra, nos, XII. Ib,;
(a) Because the truth is above us, 12. Ibid.;
(a) Veritas non est supra, sed penes nos, Ib.;
(a) The truth is not above us, but within our reach, ibid.;
(b) Ob inertiam et ruditatem eorum qui huic studio incumbunt, XII;
(b) On account of the sloth and ignorance of those who apply themselves to this study, 12;
(b) Nos non habitu, sed mente, sapientiam praeferimus, XXXVIII.
(b) We display wisdom not in our dress but in our mind, 38.
(c) Ab exemplo Socratis. Arcesilae, Carneadis,
(c) From the example of Socrates. Arcesilaus, Carneades,
(c) Philosophorum exempla nihil nos movent, Ib.;
(c) The examples of the philosophers do not move us at all, ibid.;
THESIS.
Thesis.
Academicorum et Simonidis Melici, XIII ;
of the Academics and of Simonides the lyric poet, XIII;
2° — Dubia ergo quae sunt, merito relinquenda, Ib.
2. Therefore the things that are doubtful are rightly to be left alone, ibid.
ANTITHESIS.
Antithesis.
2° Non dubia amplius sunt quae dubia quondam fuerunt, cum veritas divinitatis jam maturuit.
2. No longer doubtful are the things that were once doubtful, since the truth of the divinity has now ripened.
V.
V.
EPILOGUS
Epilogue
continet :
contains:
1° — Provocationem Caecilii ad Octavium, qua invitatur ad respondendum, XIV ;
1. The challenge of Caecilius to Octavius, by which he is invited to reply, XIV;
2° — Orationem Minucii ad Caecilium, qua ipsum, non prius exsultandum esse monet, quam utrinque fuerit peroratum, Ib. :
2. The speech of Minucius to Caecilius, in which he warns him that he must not exult before both sides have finished their pleading, ibid.;
3° Responsionem Caecilii, qua Minucium taxat, quod se oratione gravissima interpellaverit et attentum Januarii auditorem fore promittit, XV, tot.
3. The reply of Caecilius, in which he censures Minucius because he had interrupted him with a very weighty speech, and promises that he will be an attentive hearer of Januarius, XV, entire.
V.
V.
EPILOGUS
Epilogue
ostendit
shows
1° — Quos stimulos oratio Octavii in animis audientium reliquerit, XXX, tot ;
1. What goads the speech of Octavius left in the minds of the hearers, XXX, entire;
2° — Confessionem Caecilii, qua victum se esse fatetur, XL ;
2. The confession of Caecilius, in which he admits that he has been defeated, XL;
3° Dilationem quaestionis de rebus ad quas institutio perfectior requirebatur. Ib. ;
3. The postponement of the inquiry into the matters for which a more complete instruction was required, ibid.;
4° Gratulationem Minucii conjunctam cum gratiarum actione ad Octavium. XLI, 1, 2 ;
4. The congratulation of Minucius, joined with an expression of thanks to Octavius, XLI, 1, 2;
5° Laetum omnium discessum, Ib.
5. The joyful departure of all, ibid.
Editors' notes and page, col. 239
Footnotes
<!-- Page holds the end of Lindner's analysis and the opening of the Octavius; the notes below are headed "Variorum notae". The (a)–(c) letters in the analysis at the top are its own divisions, not footnote calls. The call for the asterisked editors' note is not visible in these images. --> (printed under page 172)
Page
- running head: 239 M. MINUCIUS[...] (cut off at right edge)
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: a full-width band stands across cols 239/240 in mid-page: the 19 paragraph(s) above it in col 240 are set here, after the 23 above it in col 239 (reading order, moved on receipt); the band itself (its title lines) is the title of the Octavius and belongs to the next unit, not set here: set it here, at the move, with full_width
- other: the column continues with CAPUT PRIMUM. (another unit); not set here
Editors' notes and page, col. 240
Footnotes
(1) ‹anchor: MARCI MINUCII FELICIS› · call in col 240 (title, across both columns)
M. Minucii Felicis. Plura Minuciae gentis cognomina, Rufi Termi, Fausti, Macri, Fundani, et in his etiam Felicis. Vetus inscriptio Romana apud Gruter. pag. 918: DIIS MANIBVS SACRVM Q. MINVCIVS FELIX. Scribitur per C, quia non a minutus: quod correpta etiam syllaba jubet. Silius Italicus VII, 523: Nec more, disjecto minuci vecordia vallo Perdendi simul et pereundi ardebat amore. CELLAR.
"Of Marcus Minucius Felix." The Minucian family had several cognomina: Rufus, Thermus, Faustus, Macer, Fundanus, and among them Felix too. An old Roman inscription in Gruter, p. 918: "Sacred to the departed spirits. Q. Minucius Felix." It is written with C, because it does not come from minutus, as the short syllable also requires. Silius Italicus VII, 523: "Without delay [printed "more"; Silius has "mora"], Minucius's madness, his rampart thrown down, burned with the love of destroying and of perishing alike." Cellarius.
(printed under page 172)
(2) ‹anchor: OCTAVIUS› · call in col 240 (title, across both columns)
Octavius. Hoc nomen dialogi, sumptum a principe colloquentium persona, ut Cicero suos dialogos Catonis, Luculli, Bruti, Laelii nomine praescripsit, Platonem imitatus cujus Phaedonem, Atribradem, Socratem et alios libros, a principe colloquente nominatos habemus. Quis fuerit Octavius, ex cap. I et II, quantum de eo nobis traditum est, cognoscitur. Infra cap. XV et Januarius plenis nominibus Januarius Octavius appellatur. Caeteri colloeutores sunt Caecilius Natalis, paganus adhuc, post colloquium Christianus, et noster M. Minucius Felix, qui in hoc Dialogo aliquando solo praenomine Marcus vocitatur. Vide capp. III et V CELLAR.
"Octavius." This is the dialogue's name, taken from the chief person of the speakers, just as Cicero headed his dialogues with the names of Cato, Lucullus, Brutus and Laelius, imitating Plato, whose Phaedo, Alcibiades [printed "Atribradem"], Socrates and other books we have named after the chief speaker. Who Octavius was is learned, so far as anything about him has come down to us, from chs. I and II. Below, in ch. XV, he is also called Januarius, and by his full names Januarius Octavius. The other speakers are Caecilius Natalis, still a pagan, a Christian after the conversation, and our M. Minucius Felix, who in this Dialogue is sometimes called by his first name Marcus alone. See chs. III and V. Cellarius.
(printed under page 172)
(3) ‹anchor: fidelissimi contubernalis› · call in col 240
Fidelissimi contubernalis. Buzelius de militia (continues)
"Of a most faithful comrade." Buzelius, on military service … (continues)
(*) ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Ut accuratior exhibeatur unius codicis exstantis dialogi Octavius collatio ac verior effigies, in textu sunt interpositi numeri, quorum alii, nempe romani, capita seu divisiones codicis, alii vero, vulgares scilicet, exhibent folia. EDD.
So that a more accurate collation and a truer likeness of the one surviving manuscript of the dialogue Octavius may be given, numbers have been inserted in the text: some, namely the Roman ones, show the chapters or divisions of the manuscript; the others, the ordinary ones, show its leaves. The Editors.
(printed under page 172)
Page
- running head: M. MINUCIUS FELIX. 240
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: the 19 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 239 (reading order, moved on receipt)
- other: the text of this column below the full-width band belongs to the next unit; not set here (rail-only part)