The apology of Tertullian

141쪽

These reductores are much the fame illi Lenones, accordin to that os

142쪽

against Christians, ille that hicli ther malefactor are chargedwithal Does no the prison weat with our eathen criminals continuali Θ Do no the mines continuallyaroan illi the oad of heathens Θ re not our il beasis fatted illi eatheni Andis no the whol her of condemne wretches hicli ome publicbenefactors aee alive so the entertainment of the amphitheatre,are no the ali of our religion NoW amon ali these malefactors, there is no a Christian to e Mund for an crime ut thatos his nam oraly, or Pthereie, e disown him for a Christian.

Mu=aerarii. Such sporis an plays hicli,ere exhibiteda private me attheir own charges in orde to ingratiate illi the eople, ere calle Laι ihonorarii and those of this nature ere so the mos par either encin or Stage-plays. Fenciniis that hicli is here meant, and ecause reel bestowed, calle Mamris, and the bestowers of them μιnerarii. In allusion to this is thato St. Jerome, Munerarius Pause=rum, et gentium Candidatus Diu ad

Ta=ata est Prudentia Hominis ad demonstrandum bonum, quanta accuritas ad eximendum, tam illa falli facilis, quam ista conte i. Where is the philo- Sopher ho an o Clearly demonstrate the true good a torax the notion beyonddisputes and what human powerris ablerio reach the conscience, and bring down

143쪽

the notion into practice For human wisdom is a subjecto error as humanpowerris to contempl. V It is plain, in faci, rom the ad state os darkness,hichoversprea the wori a the comin os our aviour, that humanaeason unassisted was no sussicient for the Stablishment of true mora righteouSness, o to malleone entire an perfeci System of the lamo nature. ut supposing such a bodyo ethic possibi to e collecte sto the writing of the philosopher as e find in the gospei ho sar must such a collectio sal Shor hom a complete, Steady indisputable ut of moralit It is ali at most ut human wisdom, and that a Tertullian says is a subjectato error as human power i to contempt, an both consequently subjecto dispute. ad the sayings of Socrates, Plato, AriStolle, etc., an authorit Z The were ni the sayings and opinion os meremen, an So might be rejected or embrace a me thought fit orcis an partis the doctrine of a philosopher must gorior law, the whole must pas for Such oo, o eis his authorit Ceases. Such a System there re o moralit a wa notoni persecti agreeablerio right reason, ut also of divine indisputable authorityin very oint, a Wantin to the wori besore the coming of ur aviour, allowin mere human philosoph a persectos o pleas in potnt of truth. Such a system, I say, a Wanting hich was notini right in ever rute, butis insallibie isdom an authorit in ever precepi, and eas an intelligibi in allthings necessar to every understanding and the gospei, an only the gospei, Ssuc a system, dictate by divine isdom, an confirmedi divine authority bysuch a isdom ascis no subjecto error, and by suci a power a cannot edisputed.

144쪽

I AV now, a I hinh, Stoo the whole Charge, an replied toevery artiCle, for hicli me have been o deadi Clamorous for thebloo o Christians. have likewis lai besore o our hole State, and the round of ou faith, amely the antiquit of the divine Scripture mos credibi attested together With the testimonyan Confession of the ver deviis themselves he therefore that illtahe pon imo refute me ought to disprove these facts in thesam method an simplicit a I have proposed them, an no tofold himself in quirk of logici the disguis of eloquenCe. In the meantime, I annot ut tali notice of the strange in- Credulit of SOme men, homotWithstanding the are Convince of the excellenC of Our Sect, hi h the are notoriousi sensibi Ofby thei Conversatio an dealings illi iis, et the wil not econvince that Christianit is os divine origina than mere humanphilosophy For, a they, philosopher prescribe and profe3s the

145쪽

sam doctrine a ChriStians, amely, innocen Ce juStiCe, patienCe, temperan Ce, an Chasti ty. Butio is hi Comparisoni just, and Christianii and philosophy e the Same hings, pray, What is thereaso that e have O the Same philosophi treaiment Whyare emo equalle to thos in poliat o privilege an impunity, toWhom e are Compare in potnts of discipline Θ Wh are no theyWho are of the like profession illi us ut pon the fame ossices Withis, and whicli, for refusing run the isti os u lives Θ ut What philosopher is Compelle to sacrisice or S ea by Our OdS, o to hang out a parcet os insignificant light at noonda upon our festivali And et these philosopher destroy our Od Openly,δand write against our Superstitions and with Our approbation into the argain. Nay many of them no only nari, ut bar aloud againSt the em perorS, and ou ea it ver Contentedly an notoni So, ut give them Statues an pension instea of throwing them to the beast formo doing an ali his, no doubi, illi great reason, beCaUS the go by the nam o philosophers, an notChristians,- nam e ,hich gives no disturbanCe to the demons, and o fhould it since the philosopher do these demons thehonour a to place them ex the OdS. For it Was a Constant for in the molith of Socrates, B in demon' leave I Wili do oor So. et even hi Same philosopher after he had givei suci an instance of his true isdom in denying the divinit of our go is,3 et notwithstandinithis such was the inconstanc of the an he

Gitan imo et Deos vestros alam es ramn -laudantibas vobis These and the ollowing ord are Plaint an imitation, or ather a translatio of thos in

Nomen hoc Philosophorum Daemonia noni at When the more ober and inquisitive eathen too a stricte vie of the lives of the reacher of thegoSpei and of the genuine sollowers, instea of the common an rude nam os impostors, the gave them the more civit ille os philosophers, as e find romthe eginning of this hapter Sed una unicuiq. I manifestatis Persea noStra, quod usas jana et de comm=cio Danotuis, non ιtig Divinetum ne octava existimans, sed magis hi sophiae re=rrιs. They could notaut own Christianit tot a more exalte hin o philosophy, hen the sa the Christians live bove the very notions of the philosophers. ut the differetice etween the lis of a Christianan a philosophe was no the ni characteristic for Says our Tertullian, Nomen hoc Philosophorum Damonia ro=a agat Philosopher is a nam thedeviis Value not the standrini aw of a philosopher' beard nor ill the hemo his pallium cure an diseases. ut Christians id not only utlive them in viriue, ut uidi them in power For Christ was a nam that ad the very deviis tremble; a thing hicli the philosophers illi ali hei might wisdomwere so a from pretendin to that the worShippe thos ver demons ex tothei gods. So that Christianit an philosopli differ justis much a heaven an earth, as a nam that Canio everything, and a mere empi titie.

146쪽

But forasmuch a me of Corrupte mindiliave alwaysin burningliatre to truth, Sole strictest folio Ner must expecto meet illithe severeSt Sage; ut he who adulterates truth ill e sure toliave the thank of her enemies for his service ACCordingly, philosopher affect truth ni in appearance, and this affectation uis them po Corruptin her, o the glorious vanit os a names ut Christians are eartit an violenti Set pon pure truth, and performier Ommand SinCerely, a men ho have nothin to Careso here, ut in orde to thei salvation hereaster and theresore Christians both in respect o conscience an discipline, notWith-Standing OUr Comparison, are ver different personS. An for a further proo of this differenCe, Consider hat Was the ansWer that Thales the prince of naturalist made Croesus, he he wa preSSed

by him plainlyrio declare his positive notioris of the divine nature. Did no the philosopher put o the prince from time to time illi his I ill conside on it Θ ut the meanest meChani among Christians apprehend God, and an anSWer the question, an CanaSSig Substantiat easons, an very sensibi explain himselfisponali these disquisition about the divine nature though Plato assiriniit tot so dissiculi orand ut the Creator of the niVerSe, and when ound to express himself intelligiblympo that subjeci. But is ou mahe a Challerige etween Christians an heathens, in potnt of morais, letis enter the lisis, and egi With hastity and in the tria os Socrates I read ne arti te of the Athenians againsthim for sodomy; ut a Christian heeps inviolabi to ne ex an one oman. I n also that Diogenes Could not te Contentedi in his tu without his mistres Phryne and Phear fine Speusippus of lato's Chool, lain in the ver ac o adultery buta Christian is a man onlyrio his own ise DemoCritus by putting

enti published his incontinenc by his cure; ut a Christia Can

in inscrιlasio tamen allinacerιm rosecari in ne judebat. The ast yingword of Socrates e have in the conclusion o Plato' Phaedo, and the are

147쪽

looh pon a Woman securely, ecause his in is lin t allim pression of that nature. I the question is bout probit orsweetnes of temper, ehol Diogenes illi his diri laetoreadingupon lato' statet Carpeis, an Crying e trample upon lato's pride, though the love dixit illi a greater pride of his own butthe Christia expresses no the eas at o haughtines to thepoorest man On arth. Is e Contendobout moderation illi respectoo oridi greatness, ehol Pythagoras affectin tyrannya Thurium, and Zeno at Prienet ut a Christia has no the ambition to aspire even to the ossice of an pedite. Is, compareequanimity, remember LyCurgus made Way ith himself ecausehe was unable to bear the thought of the Lacedaemonians Correctingilie severit of his laws; ut a Christia aster Condemnation is ableto retur thanks to those ho have Condemne him. Is ou vie

with us in fidelity there is ou Anaxagoras ho ad not fidelityenough to restore the stranger the good the had deposite in his trusi; ut a Christia has the nam os fatilis ut even amon theenenties of his laith. f, dispute humility I must teli ou that Aristolle Could no sit eas untii e proudi made his friendHermias sit belo hims ut a Christian neve bear hard so much

Alexander, o heemthatiuge pupil unde his management, as lato was os Dionysius for the benefit of his belly. Aristippus in his

debau hee and Hippias was illed hile he was actuali in

ambusti against the City, a thin Whichis Christianisve attempted for the deliverance of his brethren, though unde the mos barbarous usage. ut perhaps it ma be replied that ome Christians aresar ro living up to thei profession to hicli I repl again thatthen the are a far rom havin the reputationis Christians among those ho trui are so but et philosopher Shal enjo the amean honour os philosophy among o in Spite of the wickednes of

Hi ias dum Cisseati insidias dissonit, occiditur hoc ro stiis omni a roci aradissipatis nemo tinguam Christia=arι tentavit. Concerning the severa crimes charged pon the philosopher in his catalogue, the reade ma find them sussicienti dilate o by the commentators; ut that hicho thin mostlyremari able in his comparison etween a philosopher an a Christia is thathe concludes the whole illi the instance of rebellion in Hippias thing,' sayshe, whichio Christian was ever ear to have attempte for the rescue of his brethren, though unde the mos provokin and barbarous usage.' his ponat occasion he hows to e the distinguishin character o Christians, his hetriumplis pon, and there re concludes the period with non-resistanc like an Orator lio graduali rises higher an higher, and clinches ali illi that he thinlismos lihel to leave the deepes impresSion.

148쪽

their lives And where is noW the similitude belween a philosopheran a Christian Θ etween a disciple o GreeCe and of heavei a

thie any guardian of this sacre depositum p

Famne elotiator, et Vita trade in fame, and a faver os fouis. V Philosophtis Goris Animal et opularis atriae vile mancipiasm, say Jerome ad Iulianum. A philosopher is an animal o fame, ne ho hasel drudges sortheireathis theseople. V Lactantius is no a litile severe,it Cicero pon this ver score, for thusae deliversiimself in his secon book de Origine Erroris, sec. 3, p. 67 Cantab. Edit. intelliobat Cicero falsa esse, etc. Cicero,' sayche, was ver sensibi of the vanities in orghip and when he had sal enough in ali reason ulterint overthrow the establishe religions, et e concludes that these ere the trullis notato be tot theseoplessor ear of unhining the religions of the State. o what is to e done illi a man who nows himself in an error, and et knowingi daShes pono och, that the eopte mando so oo Θwho pulis ut his own yes o secure ther in arkness who Deither deserves wel of thos he permit to ander nor of himself, hom he associales illi practices he condemns; ho mahes no se of his isdom so the regulation os his iis, ut iis ult entangles himself to ensnare thers, whOm a the wiSerperson he was oblige to rescue sto error. But, O Cicero Q yo havem regaressor virtve, attem p rathe to delive the eopte ut o ignorance itis a nobi enterprise, and worth ait our power os eloquence neve Darbutoour orator wil hol out in so good a cause, hicli neve fallen o in thedelance of so many baxones. But Socrates prison is the thing ou dread, and there re truth must want a patron But certainly, a a WiS man, O ought Odespis death in competition illi truth and ou ad falle more honour lyb much sor speakin welli truth, than or speakin illi Antony. or illyou ver is to that height of glor by our hilippios as ou ould avedone hy labouring to undeceive the worid, an dispute the eopte into their senses. V his I ake tot a just character, Socrates excepted of at the heathen philosophers the were trader sor fame, an enriche thei head onlyrio filithei pocket the neve love truth wel enough to suffer sor her nor ould plead her cause hei ore the Areopagus o Senate, at the harar of their lives their notions ere inactive, and layioatin oni o thei sancies, nor ere the eopleno them Selves the bet ter me so thei philosophya Socrates prison spoiled all. How unlike to this a the carriage of the apostles and thei genuine followersi How did the engage in the delanceis truth l With What eat id the preachthei crucified aster e re anhedrim an Senate, in the face of at the dis- Couragin tortures iit malice could inventi They accounte no agardsComparabie to the ad vantage the ortu ould erio by the propagation os Christia philosophy the rejoicen that the were accounte worthyrio suffersor the nam o Christ. his howe a trul nobi an generous spirit, that would not e discouraged rom oin the wori good, though the benefactorsmet illi such hard sage so their ains. his likewise howed the divine power of the Christia religion that it was able to ais it professor above ali ConSiderations present for the o that was Se before them. Such was the disser- ence etween a philosophe and a Christian, etween a disciple o Greece anda disciple of heaVen.

149쪽

Antiquior omnibus, etc. Was it no sor ear of gwelling this tractaeyonditie bound of an Apology, Tertullian says, he would enter into a particular proos of the antiquit of themoly Scriptures. The reader illin this larget trealed by Eusebius in his Proesar Evani, here in the fifth hapter, lib. ., ou Willse that the Grecians ad not so muchos the se of letters tili Cadmus the Phoenicia introduce them, hicli the liceniciansi ad froni the Syrians that is, the Iebrews, hichiorderedipo them. In thi chapterso wil See also notoni the assinit between the Hebremand Gree alphabet, hiches have atready mentioned, ut o ali the wo-and - twent letters in the Hebre have their prope signification, hicli in the Greel have o meaning at ali; hichilainlyproves the ne to e ut an imperfect op of the ther, specialty hen theletters are jus almost the fame in both, as Alph, Alpha, etc. Quis Poetaraιm, qui non om=ma de Pros narrem fonte rotaverit TheGrecian hard of old were the instructor of the eople, an priest generali aswel a poets the travelle much into Egypt and ther pari mos note sorantiquit an learning and rom hence reighte themselves illi ancient traditions, hicli the set thei sancies o or upon, and so ache an hewed

an disguised the originals that it achar to a DOm hat country the came. Graecia Mendax as a triae motio. I illiso go about oratio particulari howthe poets have tundere the propheis, Since Bochartus, ossius e GL, and Bisho Stillingfleet, Origi ac , have so nicet trace the plagiaries and discovere lthe Mundation Dalmos the whole sabulous superstructure, in spite o ali heir artifice to concea it. However, it ma notae amiss ustrio mention ome of the way the took o concea an colour the impostures. An one a WaS, to alter the Hebre nam an put a Gree one in the place of like importance. Thus Cham ormam, holither fortis minorit or undutii uines h ad his sitare ofgovernment allotted him in the barren and of Africa, and was there sor many ages Orshippe unde the nam o Iupiter Hamon, hicli the gyptians by

whicli signifies fervi soro the radix fervere, the Put ευει, stomζεω, hicli Signifies the fame in Gree with Ham in Hebrew. his Ammon ha a temple in the cit of o, as e findorom that of Jeremiali xlvi a D: Behold, I ill punish the multitude of o, and haraoli an Egypt illi theirgods. That whicli, rende the multitude oscio, is in the original Amon de No,

150쪽

the Muntain of the propheis It is stom these aere four eslikewis that our philosophers have refreshed thei thirsty inquisitive spiriis. From ence also it is that philosopli has been

proscribe some OuntrieS, a Thebes, Sparta, an Argos for themonstrous issue he produce sto the adulterous mixture os divine trullis illi human inventionso an no onder, since a Iliave aid these philosophers ere me o glor only, and riven

th God Amon, hos temple was in the cit No. M. Bochar Phalegi lib. i. pp. 3, 6. nother Way of disguising thei thest was by taking the Hebre in iis

literat and prope sense thus findin Noah whom Bochartus has demonstratedt be the fame illi Saturn to e called, Gen. i. O, NI et X vir Terra a usbandman, a Vir Sanguinis, Vir Pecoris, a loody man, a hepherd, a Sam xvi. 7, Gen. HVi. 32. A moS samilia phrage among the Hebrews, theytake vir Terrae or huSbandman in a itera sense sor αν - σει γει, he hvsbando the arth andis Saturn, hich a Noah, is reporte to have married Rhea that is, the arth. Vid. Bochari Phalem lib. i. cap. I, p. 3. An Solikewise here the Oriental languages ere ambiguous o equivocat, Domitiing the obvious ense and folloWing the obscure, the spun ut Strange stories. ThuSagain the rea Bochartus, lib. v. cap. 3I, has trace the able of the olden Fleece, hich was nothinibu the robbing the reasur of the kin o Colchis, framed rom the equivocat Syriae ord rq I, hicli signifies both a fleece an atreasury and so the bulis and dragons hicli epicit ere nothing ut thewalis an brage gales for vita signifies both a buli an a wall, an irria, bras and a dragon. I shal mentio but ne Grecian artifice more, hich was by ascribin to Some of their own nation ha is recordeo in the sacre history. Thus the Thessalians malae Deucalion to e the person ho scape the ood, and rom ho the world was eopte after it; and whoeve compares therelation o Deucalion's ood in Apollodorus, Biblioth. lib. i. p. 19, illi thatos oses may easti turn Apollodorus's Gree into the language of Scripture byoni turning Greece into the whole arth, an Deucalion into Noah Parnassus into Ararat, and Iupiter into Iehovah. M. Bisho Stillingfleet' orii Sac. lib. iii CaP. 3. x Sistita in Sanctis Scripturis ossenderunt, pro instituto Curiositatis,ae propria Nera verterunt. In the foregoin Apology, Justin artyr gives Severat instances wherein lato ad stolen romioses an Clemens Alexandrinus, Strona. , calis lato σον 'Eβραίων φιλοσοφον. See St. Austin, de orem Christ. lib. i. cap. 28, de civit. Dei, lib. xviii. cap. 4Ι, an lib. viii cap. I. ut above ali se this philosopher hunte through allii coveris, and trace home to the propheis hyEusebius in his Proesar Evang. lib. i. xii xiii. and there o wil find withwhat good eason the Father charge the philosopher in generat, an Plato in particular, o fhirking rom themoly Scriptures, accordin to that o Eusebius,

aliud Plato, quam Moses Attis loquens Orige is of opinio that Plato byconVersing illi the Jews in Egypt came acquaint ed illi the histor of the allos man whicli aster his enigmatical Wayae describes in his Θmposiacs, here heintroduces orus the o os plent seastin with the res of the go is aster suppe Penia comes to the door a-hegging Ρorus bein drun with nectar, goes into Iupiter' garden, and there salis ast flees; enia observin i steat to