Tertullian: de Corona Militis

[1] Proxime factum est. Liberalitas praestaatissimoram imperatorum expungebatur in castris, milites laureati adibant. Adhibetur quidam illic magis Dei miles, ceteris constantior fratribus qui se duobus dominis seruire posse praesumpserant.

[1] Most recently it was done. Liberality of the most outstanding emperors was being checked off in the camp, laurelled soldiers were approaching. A certain man is brought in there, rather a soldier of God, more steadfast than the other brothers, who had presumed that they could serve two masters, serve to be able had presumed.

Solus libero capite, coronamento in manu otioso, uulgato iam et ista disciplina christiano, relucebat.

Alone, with head uncovered, the coronet idle in his hand, now already published, and this discipline, to the Christian, he shone forth.

[2] Denique singuli designareet ludere eminus, infrendere comminus. Continuo murmur; tribuno defertur et persona : iam ex ordine decesserat. Statim tribunus : « Cur, inquit, tam diuersus habitus?

[2] Finally individuals began to designate and to make sport at a distance, to gnash at close quarters. Straightway a murmur;it is reported to the tribune and the personage: he had already departed from the rank. At once the tribune: « Why, he says, so diverse an appearance?

» Negauit ille sibi cum ceteris licere. Causas expostulatus, « christianus sum » respondit. O militem gloriosum in Deo ! Suffragia exinde, et res ampliata et reus ad praefectos.

» He denied that it was permitted to him to be with the others. When pressed for the reasons, « I am a Christian » he replied. O soldier glorious in God ! Thereupon votes, and the matter enlarged, and the defendant to the prefects.

[3] Ibidem grauissimas paenulas posuit, releuari auspicatus, speculatoriam morosissimam de pedibus absoluit, terrae sanctae insistere incipiens, gladium nec dominicae defensioni necessarium reddidit, laurea et de manu claruit. Et nunc, rufatus sanguinis sui spe, calciatus de euangelii paratura, succinctus acutiore uerbo dei, totus de apostolo armatus et de martyrii candida melius coronatus, donatiuum Christi in carcere expectat.

[3] In the same place he put down the very heavy cloaks, presaging to be relieved; he loosed from his feet the most vexatious speculatorian footwear, beginning to set foot on the holy ground; he returned the sword as not necessary even for the Lord’s defense; he shone both by laurel and by hand shone. And now, reddened by the hope of his own blood, shod with the preparation of the gospel, girded with the sharper word of God, wholly from the Apostle armed, and better with the white of martyrdom crowned, he awaits the donative of Christ in prison.

[4] Exinde sententiae super illo, -- nescio an christianorum : non enim aliae ethnicorum --, ut de abrupto et praecipiti et mori cupido, qui de habitu interrogatus nomini negotium fecerit, solus scilicet fortis inter tot fratres commilitones, solus christianus. Plane superest ut etiam martyria recusare meditentur, qui prophetias eiusdem spiritus sancti respuerunt.

[4] Thereupon opinions about him, -- I do not know whether of Christians: for those of the pagans are no different --, as about one abrupt and precipitate and desirous to die, who, when questioned about his habit, made trouble for the Name, the only, forsooth, brave man among so many brother comrades-in-arms, the only Christian. Clearly it remains that they even are contemplating to refuse martyrdoms, they who have rejected the prophecies of the same Spirit Holy.

[5]Mussitant denique tam bonam et longam pacem periclitari sibi. Nec dubito quosdam scripturas emigrare, sarcinas expedire, fugae accingi de ciuitate in ciuitatem. Nullam enim aliam euangelii memoriam curant.

[5]They whisper, finally, that so good and long a peace is in peril for them. Nor do I doubt that certain people are emigrating their scriptures, sarcinas expediting their baggage, girding for flight from city to city. For they care for no other evangel memory.

Noui et pastores eorum: in pace leones et in proelio ceruos. Sed de quaestionibus confessionum alibi docebimus.

I know their shepherds too: in peace lions and in battle deer. But on the questionings of confessions we will teach elsewhere.

[6] At nunc, quatinus et illud opponunt : « Vbi autem prohibemur coronari? », hanc magis localem substantiam causae praesentis aggrediar, ut et qui ex sollicitudine ignorantiae quaerunt instruantur, et qui in defensionem delicti contendunt, reuincantur, ipsi uel maxime christiani laureati, quibus id solum quaestio est, quasi aut nullum aut incertum saltem habere possit delictum quod patiatur quaestionem. Nec nullum autem nec incertum hinc interim ostendam.

[6] But now, insofar as they also set up that objection : « Where, however, are we forbidden to be crowned? », I will address this more local substance of the present cause, so that both those who, out of the solicitude of ignorance, inquire may be instructed, and those who strive in defense of the offense may be refuted, they themselves most especially the laurel-crowned Christians, for whom this alone is the question, as if either none or at least an uncertain one could have the offense which admits a question. Yet I will show from this point, for the moment, that it is neither none nor uncertain.

[1] Neminem dico fidelium coronam capite nosse alias, extra tempus temptationis eiusmodi. Omnes ita obseruant a catechumenis usque ad confessores et martyras uel negatores. Videris unde auctoritas moris, de qua nunc maxime quaeritur.

[1] I say that none of the faithful knows a crown upon the head otherwise, outside a time of temptation of such a kind. All thus observe it from the catechumens up to the confessors and martyrs or deniers. You will see whence the authority of the custom [comes], about which now most especially inquiry is being made.

Porro cum quaeritur cur quid obseruetur, obseruari interim constat. Ergo nec nullum nec incertum uideri potest delictum quod committitur in obseruationem suo iam nomine uindicandam, et satis auctoratam consensus patrocinio.

Furthermore when it is inquired why something is observed, it is meanwhile evident that it is being observed. Therefore the delict cannot seem either nonexistent or uncertain which is committed against an observance, already by its own very name to be vindicated, and sufficiently authorized by the patronage of consensus.

[2] Plane, ut ratio quaerenda sit, sed salua obseruatione, nec in destructionem eius, sed in aedificationem potius, quo magis obserues, cum fueris etiam de ratione securus. Quale est autem ut tunc quis in quaestionem prouocet obseruationem, cum ab ea excidit? et tunc requirat unde habuerit obseruationem, cum ab ea desiit?

[2] Clearly, that reason should indeed be sought, but with the observance kept safe, and not for its destruction, but rather for edification, so that you may observe the more, when you have also become secure about the reason. What sort of thing is it, moreover, that someone then calls the observance into question, when he has fallen away from it? and then asks whence he had the observance, when he ceased from it?

quando, etsi ideo uelit uideri ad quaestionem uocare uti ostendat se non deliquisse in obseruationis destitutione, nihilominus deliquisse eum constet retro in obseruationis praesumptione.

since, even if for that reason he would wish to seem to call the matter into question so as to show that he has not done wrong in the abandonment of the observance, nonetheless it stands evident that he did wrong previously in the presumption of the observance.

[3] Si enim non deliquit hodie suscepta corona, deliquit aliquando recusata. Et ideo non ad eos erit iste tractatus, quibus non competit quaestio, sed ad illos qui studio discendi non quaestionem deferunt, sed consultationem. Namnec semper quaeritur de isto, et laudo fidem quae ante credidit obseruandum esse quam didicit.

[3] For if he has not transgressed today, the crown having been received, he did transgress at some time when it was refused. And therefore this tractate will not be for those to whom the question does not pertain, but for those who, by zeal of learning, bring not a question, but a consultation. Fornec is there always an inquiry about this, and I praise the faith which beforehand believed that it is to be observed rather than learned.

[4] Et facile est statim exigere ubi scriptum sit ne coronemur. At enim ubi scriptum est ut coronemur? Expostulantes enim scripturae patrocinium in parte diuersa, praeiudicant suae quoque parti scripturae patrocinium adesse debere.

[4] And it is easy at once to demand where it is written that we are not to be crowned. But indeed where is it written that we are to be crowned? Expostulating indeed for the patronage of Scripture on the opposite part, they prejudge that to their own part too the patronage of Scripture ought to be present.

Nam si ideo dicetur coronari licere quia non prohibeat scriptura, aeque retorquebitur ideo coronari non licere quia scriptura non iubeat. Quid faciet disciplina? Vtrumque recipiet, quasi neutrum prohibitum sit, an utrumque reiciet, quasi neutrum praeceptum sit?

For if it will for that reason be said to be lawful to be crowned because Scripture does not prohibit, it will be equally retorted that for that reason it is not lawful to be crowned because Scripture does not command. What will discipline do? Will it receive both, as if neither were prohibited, or will it reject both, as if neither were commanded?

-- « Sed quod non prohibetur ultro permissum est. » -- Immo prohibetur quod non ultro est permissum.

-- « But what is not prohibited is automatically permitted. »
-- Rather, what is not expressly permitted is prohibited.

[1] Et quamdiu per hanc lineam serram reciprocabimus, habentes obseruationem inueteratam, quae praeueniendo statum fecit? Hanc si nulla scriptura determinauit, certe consuetudo corroborauit, quae sine dubio de traditione manauit. Quomodo enim usurpari quid potest, si traditum prius non est?

[1] And how long shall we reciprocate the saw along this line, having an inveterate observance, which by anticipating has established a standing? If no Scripture has determined this, surely custom has corroborated, which without doubt has flowed from tradition. For how, indeed, can anything be usurped—put into use—if it has not first been handed down?

Etiam in traditionis obtentu exigenda est, inquis, auctoritas scripta.

Even under the pretext of tradition, you say, written authority must be exacted.

[2] Ergo quaeramus an et traditio nisi scripta non debeat recipi. Plane negabimus recipiendam, si nulla exempla praeiudicent aliarum obseruationum, quas sine ullius scripturae instrumento, solius traditionis titulo et exinde consuetudinis patrocinio uindicamus. Denique, ut a baptismate ingrediar, aquam adituri ibidem, sed et aliquanto prius in ecclesia, sub antistitis manu, contestamur nos renuntiare diabolo et pompae et angelis eius.

[2] Therefore let us ask whether also tradition, unless written, ought not to be received. Clearly we shall deny that it is to be received, if no examples prejudge other observances, which without any instrument of writing, under the title of tradition alone and thereafter under the patronage of custom we vindicate. Finally, to begin from baptism, when about to approach the water there, but also somewhat earlier in the church, under the hand of the bishop, we testify that we renounce the devil and his pomp and his angels his.

[3] Dehinc ter mergitamur amplius aliquid respondentes quam Dominus in euangelio determinauit. Inde suscepti, lactis et mellis concordiam praegustamus, exque ea die lauacro quotidiano per totam ebdomadem abstinemus. Eucharistiae sacramentum, et in tempore uictus et omnibus mandatum a Domino, etiam antelucanis coetibus nec de aliorum manu quam praesidentium sumimus.

[3] Thereafter we are dipped three times, answering something more than the Lord determined in the Gospel. Thence, having been received, the concord of milk and honey we foretaste, and from that day we abstain from the daily bath per the whole week we abstain. The Sacrament of the Eucharist, and at the time of nourishment and as commanded to all by the Lord, we also take at before-dawn assemblies, nor from the hand of others than of the presiding we receive.

Oblationes pro defunctis, pro nataliciis, annua die facimus.

Oblations for the deceased, for natal days, we make on the annual day.

[4] Die dominico ieiunium nefas ducimus, uel de geniculis adorare. Eadem immunitate a die Paschae in Pentecosten usque gaudemus. Calicis aut panis etiam nostri aliquid decuti in terram anxie patimur.

[4] On the Lord’s day we deem fasting impious, or to adore on the knees. With the same immunity we rejoice from the day of Pasch into
Pentecost
up to. We anxiously endure if anything of our chalice or of our bread be shaken off onto the ground.

Ad omnem progressum atque promotum, ad omnem aditum et exitum, ad uestitum, ad calciatum, ad lauacra, ad mensas, ad lumina, ad cubilia, ad sedilia, quacumque nos conuersatio exercet, frontem signaculo terimus.

At every progress and advance, at every access and exit, at vesture, at footwear, at baths, at tables, at lights, at beds, at seats, wherever our conversation exercises us, we mark the forehead with the sign.

[1] Harum et aliarum eiusmodi disciplinarum si legem expostules, scripturarum nullam leges. Traditio tibi praetendetur auctrix et consuetudo confirmatrix et fides obseruatrix. Rationem traditioni et consuetudini et fidei patrocinaturam aut ipse perspicies aut ab aliquo qui perspexerit disces.

[1] Of these and other disciplines of this kind, if you demand a law you will read none in the Scriptures you will read none. Tradition will be held forth to you as the author, and consuetude as the confirmer, and faith as the keeper. A rationale to champion tradition and consuetude and faith you will either yourself perceive, or you will learn it from someone who has perceived it.

Interim non nullam esse credes cui debeatur obsequium.

Meanwhile you will believe that there is not none to whom obedience is owed.

[2] Adicio unum adhuc exemplum, quatinus et de ueteribus docere conueniet. Apud Iudaeos tam sollemne est feminis eorum uelamen capitis ut inde noscantur. Quaero legem, apostolum differo.

[2] I add one more example, inasmuch as it will also be fitting to teach from the ancients. Among the Jews the head-veil is so customary for their women that from it they are recognized. I seek a law; I defer the apostle.

Si Rebecca conspecto procul sponso uelamen inuasit, priuatus pudor legem facere non potuit, aut, causae suae fecerit, tegantur uirgines solae, et hoc nuptum uenientes, nec antequam cognouerint sponsos.

If Rebecca, on seeing from afar her betrothed, seized a veil, private modesty could not make a law; or, if it made one for her own cause, let virgins alone be covered, and this when coming to nuptials, and not before they have known bridegrooms.

[3] Si et Susanna in iudicio reuelata argumentum uelandi praestat, possum dicere : « Et hic uelamen arbitrii fuit. » Rea uenerat, erubescens de infamia sua, merito abscondens decorem, uel quia timens iam placere. Ceterum in stadio mariti non putem uelatam deambulasse quae placuit.

[3] If even Susanna, unveiled at trial, furnishes an argument for veiling, I can say : « And here too the veil was a matter of choice. » The defendant had come, blushing for her infamy, deservedly hiding her beauty, or because she was afraid now to please. However, in her husband’s stadium I would not think that she who pleased walked about veiled.

Fuerit nunc uelata semper, in ipsa quoque legem habitus requiro uel in quacumque alia.

Let it be now that she was always veiled, in that very one too I require the law of attire, or in whatever other.

[4] Si legem nusquam reperio, sequitur ut traditio consuetudini morem hunc dederit, habiturum quandoque apostoli auctoritatem ex interpretatione rationis. His igitur exemplis renuntiatum erit posse etiam non scriptam traditionem in obseruatione defendi, confirmatam consuetudine, idonea teste probatae tunc traditionis ex perseuerantia obseruationis.

[4] If I find the law nowhere, it follows that tradition has given this practice to custom, destined at some time to have the apostle’s authority from the interpretation of reason. Therefore by these examples it will be declared that even an unwritten tradition can be defended in observance, confirmed by custom, with a suitable witness of the tradition then approved from the perseverance of the observance.

[5] Consuetudo autem etiam in ciuilibus rebus pro lege suscipitur, cum deficit lex, nec differt scriptura an ratione consistat, quando et legem ratio commendet. Porro si ratione lex constat, lex erit omne iam quod ratione constiterit a quocumque productum. An non putas omni fideli licere concipere et constituere, dumtaxat quod Deo congruat, quod disciplinae conducat, quod saluti proficiat, dicente Domino : « Cur autem non et a uobis ipsis quod iustum iudicatis?

[5] Custom moreover also in civil matters is received in place of law, when law fails, nor does it differ whether it consist by writing or by reason, when even law is commended by reason. Furthermore, if by reason law stands, whatever has stood by reason, brought forth by anyone, will already be law. Do you not think it is permitted to every faithful one to conceive and constitute, provided only that which agrees with God, which conduces to discipline, which profits to salvation, the Lord saying: « Why moreover do you not also from your own selves judge what is just?

[6] Et non de iudicio tantum, sed de omni sententia rerum examinandarum dicit et apostolus : « Si quid ignoratis, Deus uobis reuelabit», solitus et ipse consilium subministrare, cum praeceptum Domini non habebat, et edicere a semetipso, spiritum Dei habens deductorem omnis ueritatis. Itaque consilium eius diuini iam praecepti instar obtinuit de rationis diuinae patrocinio.

[6] And not about judgment only, but about every judgment of matters to be examined, the Apostle also says: «If you are ignorant of anything, God will reveal it to you», he himself as well being accustomed to supply counsel when he did not have a precept of the Lord, and to issue by edict from himself, having the Spirit of God as the conductor of all truth. And thus his counsel has already obtained the standing of a divine precept by the patronage of divine reason.

[7] Hanc nuncexpostula saluo traditionis respectu, quocumque traditore censetur, nec auctorem respicias, sed auctoritatem, et in primis consuetudinis ipsius quae propterea colenda est ne non sit rationis interpres, ut, si et hanc Deus dederit, tunc discas non an obseruanda sit tibi consuetudo, sed cur.

[7] Nowdemand this with the regard for tradition kept safe, by whomever it is reckoned the transmitter, and do not look to the author, but to the authority, and first of all to custom itself, which for that reason is to be cultivated so that it may be the interpreter of reason, so that, if and this God shall have granted, then you may learn not whether the custom ought to be observed by you, but why.

[1] Maior efficitur ratio christianarum obseruationum, cum illas etiam natura defendit, quae prima omnium disciplina est. Ideoque haec prima praescribit coronam capiti non conuenire. Puto autem, naturae Deus, Deus noster, qui figurauit hominem et fructibus rerum appetendis, iudicandis, consequendis certos in eo sensus ordinauit propria membrorum quodam modo organa: auditum in auribus fodit, uisum in oculis accendit, gustum in ore conclusit, odoratum in naribus uentilauit, contactum in manibus extimauit.

[1] A greater rationale is effected for Christian observances, when nature also defends them, which is the first discipline of all. And therefore this first prescribes that a crown does not suit the head. I suppose, however, the God of nature, God our own, who fashioned the human and, for the fruits of things to be desired, judged, and obtained, ordained in him certain senses as, in a certain manner, the proper organs of the members: he hollowed out hearing in the ears, kindled sight in the eyes, enclosed taste in the mouth, fanned smell in the nostrils, contact set at the extremities, in the hands.

[2] Per haec exterioris hominis ministeria interiori homini ministrantia fructus munerum diuinorum ad animam deducuntur a sensibus. Quis igitur fructus ex floribus? Substantia enim propria, certe praecipua, coronarum flores agri.

[2] Through these ministries of the outer man ministries ministering to the inner man, the fruits of the divine gifts are conducted to the soul from the senses. What, therefore, is the fruit from flowers? For the proper, assuredly the principal, substance of crowns is the flowers of the field.

Aut odor, inquis, aut color, aut pariter utrumque. Qui erunt sensus coloris et odoris? Visus, opinor, et odoratus.

Either odor, you say, or color, or both together. What will be the senses of color and odor? Vision, I suppose, and smell.

Istos sensus quae membra sortita sunt? Oculi, nisi fallor, et nares. Vtere itaque floribus uisu et odoratu, quorum sensuum fructus est, utere per oculos et nares, quae eorum sensuum membra sunt.

Which members have been allotted those senses? The eyes, unless I am mistaken, and the nostrils. Use therefore the flowers by sight and smell, the fruit of which senses they are; use them through the eyes and nostrils, which of them senses’ members they are.

Substantia tibi a Deo tradita est, habitus a saeculo.

Substance has been handed down to you by God, habit by the age.

[3] Quamquam nec habitus extraordinarius ordinario usui obstrepit : hoc sint tibi flores et inserti et innexi, et in filo et in scirpo, quod liberi, quod soluti : spectaculi scilicet et spiraculi res. Coronam, si forte, fascem existima florum per seriem comprehensorum, ut plures semel portes, ut omnibus pariter utaris. Iam uero et in sinum conde, si tanta munditia est, et in lectulum sparge, si tanta mollitia est, et in poculum crede, si tanta innocentia est : tot modis fruere quot et sentis.

[3] Although nor does extraordinary habit clash with ordinary use : let flowers be this for you both inserted and interwoven, both on thread and on rush-cord, whether free, whether unbound : things, namely, of spectacle and of breath—of fragrance. A crown, if it so happens, reckon a bundle of flowers taken together in a row, so that you may carry more at once, so that you may use all together alike. And now indeed also put them into your bosom, if there is such neatness, and strew them on the little couch, if there is such softness, and entrust them to the cup, if there is such innocence : enjoy in as many ways as you also sense.

[4] Ceterum in capite quis sapor floris, quis coronae sensus, nisi uinculi tantum, quo neque color cernitur neque odor ducitur nec teneritas commendatur? Tam contra naturam est florem capite sectari quam cibum aure, quam sonum nare. Omne autem, quod contra naturam est, monstri meretur notam penes omnes, penes nos uero etiam elogium sacrilegii in Deum, naturae dominum et auctorem.

[4] Moreover, on the head what savor of the flower, what sense of the garland, unless only that of a bond, by which neither color is discerned nor odor is drawn, nor is tenderness commended? So against nature is it to pursue a flower with the head as to pursue food with the ear, as to pursue sound with the nose. Yet everything which is against nature merits the mark of monstrosity among all; with us, indeed, even the charge of sacrilege against God, the lord and author of nature.

[1]Quaeres igitur Dei legem? Habes communem istam in publico mundi, in naturalibus tabulis ad quas et apostolus solet prouocare, ut cum in uelamine feminae : « Nec natura, inquit, uos docet? », ut cum ad Romanos, natura facere dicens nationes ea quae sunt legis, et legem naturalem suggerit et naturam legalem.

[1]Will you therefore inquire the law of God? You have this common one in the public of the world, on natural tablets to which even the apostle is wont to appeal, as when in the veiling of the woman: « Does not nature, he says, teach you? », as when to the Romans, saying that the nations by nature do the things which are of the law, and he suggests both a natural law and a legal nature.

Sed et in priore epistula naturalem usum conditionis in non naturalem masculos et feminas inter se demutasse affirmans ex retributione erroris in uicem poenae, utique naturalibus patrocinatur.

But also in the former epistle, affirming that males and females have exchanged among themselves the natural use of their condition for the non-natural as a retribution of error in turn as a penalty, certainly the natural he champions.

[2] Ipsum Deum secundum naturam prius nouimus, scilicet deum appellantes deorum, et bonum praesumentes et iudicem inuocantes. Quaeris an conditioni eius fruendae natura nobis debeat praeire? Ne illa ui rapiamur qua Dei aemulus uniuersam conditionem, certis usibus homini mancipatam, cum ipso homine corrupit : unde eam et apostolus inuitam ait uanitati succidisse, uanis primum usibus, tum turpibus et iniustis et impiis subuersam.

[2] We first know God himself according to nature, namely calling him the god of gods, and presuming him good and invoking [him as] judge. Do you ask whether nature ought to go before us for the enjoying of that creation? Lest that force seize us by which the rival of God corrupted the whole creation, made over to man for certain uses, together with the man himself: whence the apostle also says that it, unwilling, has sunk under vanity, having been subverted first by vain uses, then by base and unjust and impious ones.

[3] Sic itaque et circa uoluptates spectaculorum infamata conditio est ab eis qui natura quidem omnia Dei sentiunt, ex quibus spectacula instruuntur, scientia autem deficiunt illud quoqueintellegere, omnia esse a diabolo mutata. Sed et huic materiae propter suauiludios nostros Graeco quoque stilo satis fecimus.

[3] Thus accordingly, even concerning the pleasures
of spectacles
an ill-famed condition is from those who by nature indeed sense that all things are God’s, from which the spectacles are constructed, but in knowledge
they fail to understand this as well to understand, that all things to be changed by the devil.
But even for this matter, on account of our “sweet-shows,” we have given satisfaction in the Greek style as well.

[1] Proinde coronarii isti agnoscant interim naturae auctoritatem communis sapientiae nomine, qua homines, sed propriae religionis pignore, qua Deum naturae de proximo colentes, atque ita uelut ex abundanti ceteras quoque rationes dispiciant, quae nostro priuatim capiti coronamentis, et quidem omnibus interdicunt.

[1] Accordingly, let these wreath‑wearers meanwhile acknowledge the authority of nature under the name of common wisdom, whereby humans, but by the pledge of their own religion, worshiping the God of nature at close hand, and thus, as it were out of abundance, let them also consider the other reasons which interdict to our private head the crowns—and indeed all of them.

[2] Nam et urguemur a communione naturalis disciplinae conuerti ad proprietatem christianam totam iam defendendam per ceteras quoque species coronarum, quae aliis usibus prospectae uidentur ut aliis substantiis structae, ne, quia non ex floribus constant, quorum usum natura signauit, ut ipsa haec laurea militaris, non credantur admittere sectae interdictionem quia euaserint naturae praescriptionem. Video igitur et curiosius et plenius agendum ab originibus usque ad profectus et excessus rei.

[2] For we are also pressed by the communion of natural discipline to be converted to the Christian whole particularity now to be defended through the other also species of crowns, which seem to have been provided for other uses as constructed of other substances, lest, because they do not consist of flowers, whose use nature has marked out, as this military laurel itself, they be thought not to admit the interdiction of the sect, because they have escaped nature’s prescription. I see, therefore, that it must be handled both more curiously and more fully from the origins up to the advances and excesses of the matter.

[3] Litterae ad hoc saeculares necessariae. De suis enim instrumentis saecularia probari necesse est. Quantulas attigi, credo, sufficient.

[3] Secular writings are necessary for this; for it is necessary that secular things be proved by their own instruments. The few which I have touched on, I believe, will suffice.

Si fuit aliqua Pandora, quam primam feminarum memorat Hesiodus, hoc primum caput coronatum est a Charitibus, cum ab omnibus muneraretur, unde Pandora. Nobis uero Moyses, propheticus, non poeticus pastor, principem feminam Euam facilius pudenda foliis quam tempora floribus incinctam describit. Nulla ergo Pandora.

If there was any Pandora, whom Hesiod remembers as the first
of women, this first head was crowned
by the Charites (Graces), when she was being gifted by all, whence “Pandora.” But for us Moses, a prophetic, not poetic, shepherd, describes the first woman, Eve, as more readily girded at the pudenda with leaves than her temples with flowers.
Therefore, no Pandora.

Sed ut de mendacio erubescenda est coronae origo, iam nunc et de ueritatibus suis.

But since the crown’s origin is blushworthy for the falsehood, now at once also about its truths its.

[4] Certe enim ceteros fuisse constat auctores rei uel illuminatores. Saturnum Pherecydes ante omnes refert coronatum, Iouem Diodorus post deuictos Titanas hoc munere a ceteris honoratum. Dat et Priapo taenias idem, et Ariadnae sertum ex auro et Indicis gemmis, Vulcani opus, ac post Liberi munus, postea sidus.

[4] For surely others are established to have been authors of the matter or illuminators. Pherecydes before all reports Saturn crowned, Jupiter, Diodorus [relates], after the Titans had been defeated, honored by the rest with this gift. The same also gives Priapus fillets, and to Ariadne a wreath of gold and Indian gems, a work of Vulcan, and afterward the gift of Liber, afterward a star.

Iunoni uitem Callimachus induxit. Ita et Argi signum eius palmite redimitum, subiecto pedibus corio leonino, insultantem ostentat nouercam de exuuiis utriusque priuigni. Hercules nunc populum capite praefert, nunc oleastrum, nunc apium.

Callimachus draped a vine upon Juno. Thus also
at Argos the statue of her, wreathed with a vine-shoot, with a lion skin placed beneath her feet, displays the stepmother exulting over the spoils of each stepson. Hercules now bears the poplar on his head, now the wild olive, now parsley.

[5] Habes tragoediam Cerberi, habes Pindarum atque Calli- machum, qui et Apollinem memorat interfecto Delphico dracone lauream induisse, qua supplicem. Erant enim supplices coronati apud ueteres. Liberum, eundem apud Aegyptios Osirim, Harpocration industria ederatum argumentatur, quod ederae naturae sit cerebrum ab heluco defensare.

[5] You have the tragedy of Cerberus, you have Pindar and Calli- machus, who also recounts that Apollo, with the Delphic dragon slain, put on the laurel, with which, as a suppliant. For the suppliants were crowned among the ancients. Liber, the same among the Egyptians as Osiris, Harpocration by his industry argues was ivy-wreathed, because it is of ivy’s nature to defend the brain from the helix.

Sed et alias Liberum principem coronae, plane laureae in qua ex Indis triumphauit, etiam uulgus agnoscit, cum dies in illum sollemnes Magnam appellat Coronam.

But also otherwise the common folk acknowledge Liber as the chief of the crown, plainly of the laurel in which he triumphed from the Indies, when on the solemn days in his honor they call it the Great Crown.

[6] Si et Leonis Aegyptii scripta euoluas, prima Isis repertas spicas capite circumtulit, rem magis uentris. Plura quaerentibus omnia exhibebit praestantissimus in hac quoque materia commentator Claudius Saturninus.

[6] If also of Leon the Egyptian you peruse the writings, Isis was first to carry about on her head the discovered ears of grain, a matter more of the belly. To those seeking more, the most excellent commentator, Claudius Saturninus, most outstanding also in this material, will set forth everything.

[7] Nam est illic de coronis liber, et origines et causas et species et sollemnitates earum ita edisserens ut nullam gratiam floris, nullam laetitiam frondis, nullum caespitem aut palmitem non alicuius capiti inuenias consecratum: quo satis instruamur quam alienum iudicare debeamus coronati capitis institutionem ab eis prolatam et in eorum deinceps honorem dispensatam, quos saeculum deos credidit.

[7] For there is there a book on crowns, expounding the origins and causes and species and solemnities of them in such a way that you would find no grace of a flower, no joy of a frond, no turf or vine-shoot not consecrated to someone’s head: whereby we are sufficiently instructed how alien we ought to judge the institution of the crowned head brought forth by them and thereafter and in their honor dispensed, whom the age has believed to be gods.

[8] Si enim mendacium diuinitatis diabolusoperatur, in hac etiam specie a primordio mendax, sine dubio et eos ipse prospexerat, in quibus id mendacium diuinitatis ageretur. Quale igitur habendum est apud homines Dei ueri quod agentibus candidatis diaboli introductum et ipsis a primordio dicatum est, quoque iam tunc idolis latriae initiabantur ab idolis et in idolis adhuc uiuis? non quasi aliquid sit idolum, sed quoniam, quae idolis ab aliis fiunt ad daemonas pertinent.

[8] For if the devil works the lie of divinityhe operates, being from the beginning a liar even in this guise, without doubt he himself had also foreseen those in whom that lie of divinity would be enacted. What esteem, therefore, should there be among the men of the true God for that which, by the acting “candidates” of the devil, was introduced and dedicated to them from the beginning, and by which even then to the latria of idols they were being initiated by idols and in idols still living? not as though an idol is anything, but because the things that are done for idols by others pertain to demons pertain.

[9] Porro si quae alii idolis faciunt ad daemonas pertinent, quanto magis quod ipsa sibi idola fecerunt, cum aduiuerent? Ipsi scilicet sibi procurauerunt daemones, per eos in quibus esurierant ante quod procurauerunt.

[9] Furthermore, if the things which others do to idols pertain to demons pertain, how much more that they themselves made idols for themselves, while they were still alive? They themselves, plainly, procured demons for themselves, through those in whom they had hungered before what they procured.

[1] Tene interim hunc finem, dum incursum quaestionis excutio. Iam enim audio dici et alia multa, ab eis prolata quos saeculum deos credidit, tamen et in nostris hodie usibus et in pristinorum sanctorum et in Dei rebus et in ipso Christo deprehendi, non alias scilicet homine functo quam per communia ista instrumenta exhibitionis humanae. Plane ita sit, nec antiquius adhuc in origines disceptabo.

[1] Hold meanwhile this end, while I sift the incursion of the question. For already I hear many other things being said, brought forth by those whom the age believed to be gods, yet to be apprehended both in our uses today and in those of the former saints and in the matters of God and in Christ himself, not otherwise, of course, with a man functioning than through these common instruments of human exhibition. Plainly, let it be so, nor will I as yet dispute further back into the origins.

[2] Primus litteras Mercurius enarrauerit : necessarias confitebor et commerciis rerum et nostris erga Deum studiis. Sed et si neruos idem in sonum strinxit, non negabo et hoc ingenium eius sanctis fecisse et Deo ministrasse, audiens Dauid. Primus medellas Aesculapius explorauerit : meminit et Esaias Ezechiae languenti aliquid medicinale mandasse, scit et Paulus stomacho uinum modicum prodesse.

[2] Mercury was the first to expound letters: I will confess them necessary both for the commerce of things and for our studies toward God. But even if that same one tightened the strings into sound, I will not deny that this talent of his has done service for saints and has ministered to God, hearing David. Aesculapius was the first to explore remedies : and Isaiah also makes mention of having enjoined something medicinal for ailing Hezekiah, and Paul knows that a little wine profits the stomach.

Sed et Minerua prima molita sit nauem : uidebo nauigantem Ionan et apostolos.

But also Minerva may have been the first to fashion a ship: I will see Jonah sailing and the apostles.

[3] Plus est quod et Christusuestitur; habebit etiam, paenulam Paulus. Si et uniuscuiusque suppellectilis et singulorum uasorum aliquem ex diis saeculi auctorem nominaris, agnoscam necesse est et recumbentem in lectulo Christum, et cum peluem discipulorum pedibus offert, et cum aquam ex urceo ingerit, et cum linteo circumstringitur, propria Osiridis ueste.

[3] What is more, Christ toois clothed; Paul too will have a paenula. If you name as author some one of the gods of the age for each piece of furniture and of individual vessels, I must acknowledge Christ too as reclining on a couch, and when he offers the basin to the feet of the disciples, and when he pours water from a pitcher, and when he is girded with a linen cloth, with the proper garment of Osiris.

[4] Huiusmodi quaestioni sic ubique respondeo, admittens quidem utensilium communionem, sed prouocans eam ad rationalium et inrationalium distinctionem, quia passiuitas fallit obumbrans corruptelam conditionis qua subiecta est uanitati.

[4] To a question of this kind I answer thus everywhere, indeed admitting a communion of utensils, but appealing it to the distinction of rational and irrational, since passivity deceives, overshadowing the corruption of the condition whereby it has been subjected to vanity.

[5] Dicimus enim ea demum et nostris et superioribus usibus et Dei rebus et ipsi Christo competisse, quae meras utilitates et certa subsidia et honesta solacia necessariis uitae humanae procurant, ut et ipso Deo inspirante dantur, priore prospectore et instructore et oblectatore, si forte, hominis sui ; quae uero hunc ordinem excesserunt, ea non conuenire usibus nostris, praesertim quae propterea scilicet nec apud sanctum ullum nec in Dei rebus nec in conuersationibus Christi recognosci est.

[5] For we say that only those things have been fitting both for our uses and for higher uses and for the things of God and for Christ himself, which procure mere utilities and sure subsidies and honorable solaces for the necessities of human life procure, so that, God himself inspiring, they are given, as the prior foreseer and instructor and, if perhaps, delighter of his own man; but the things which have exceeded this order, these do not befit our uses, especially those which for that reason, namely, are recognized neither with any sanctum ullum nor in the things of God nor in the conversations of Christ.

[1] Quis denique patriarches, quis prophetes, quis leuites aut sacerdos aut archon, quis uel postea apostolus aut euangelizator aut episcopus inuenitur coronatus? Puto, nec ipsum Dei templum nec arca testamenti, nec tabernaculum martyrii, nec altare, nec candelabrum, quibus utique et in prima dedicationis sollemnitate et in secunda restitutionis gratulatione competisset coronari, si dignum Deo esset.

[1] Who, finally, of the patriarchs, who of the prophets, who of the Levites or priests or an archon, who even later of an apostle or an evangelizer or a bishop is found crowned? I think, not even the very temple of God nor the ark of the covenant, nor the tabernacle of the testimony, nor the altar, nor the candelabrum, for which assuredly both at the first solemnity of dedication and at the second thanksgiving of restoration it would have been fitting to be crowned, if it were worthy of God.

[2] Atquin si figurae nostrae fuerunt, -- nos enim sumus et templa Dei et altaria et luminaria et uasa, -- hoc quoque figurate portendebant, homines Dei coronari non oportere. Imagini ueritas respondere debebit. Si forsitan opponis ipsum Christum coronatum, ad hoc breuiter interim audies : « Sic et tu coronare; licitum est.

[2] But indeed, if they were our figures, -- for we are both the temples of God and the luminaries and the vessels, -- they also in figurative fashion portended this, that the men of God ought not to be crowned. To the image the verity ought to respond. If perchance you oppose Christ himself crowned, to this briefly for the interim you will hear: "So you too be crowned; it is licit.

[3] Tamen nec illam impietatis contumeliosae coronam populus consciuit. Romanorum militum fuit commentum, ex usu reisaecularis, quem populus Dei nec publicae umquam laetitiae nec ingenitae luxuriae nomine admisit, facilius cum tympanis et tibiis et psalteriis reuertens de captiuitate Babyloniae quam cum coronis, et post cibum et potum exsurgens ad ludendum sine coronis.

[3] Yet neither did the people contrive that crown of contumelious impiety. It was a contrivance of the soldiers of the Romans, from the usage of asecular affair, which the people of God admitted under the name neither of public gladness nor of inborn luxury, more readily with drums and pipes and psalteries returning from the Babylonian captivity than with crowns, and after food and drink rising up to play without crowns.

[4] Nam neque laetitiae descriptio neque luxuriae denotatio de coronae decore aut dedecore tacuisset. Adeo et Esaias : « Quoniam, inquit, cum tympanis et psalteriis et tibiis uinum bibunt», dicturus etiam « cum coronis », si umquam hic usus fuisset et in Dei rebus.

[4] For neither the description of joy nor the denotation of luxury about the crown’s decor or disgrace would have kept silent. So much so also Isaiah : « For, inquit, with timbrels and psalteries and pipes they drink wine», would have said also « with crowns », if ever this usage had existed even in the things of God.

10.

[1] Ita cum idcirco proponis deorum saecularium commenta etiam apud Deum deprehendi, ut inter haec coronam quoque capitis communi usui uindices, ipse tibi iam praescribis non habendum in communione usus apud nos quod non inueniatur in Dei rebus. Quid enim tam indignum Deo quam quod dignum idolo?

[1] Thus, since for that reason you propose of secular gods contrivances to be detected even with God, so that among these you also vindicate a crown of the head for common use, you already prescribe for yourself that there is not to be had in communion of use among us what is not found in the things of God. What indeed is so unworthy of God as what is worthy of an idol?

Quid autem tam dignum idolo quam quod et mortuo?

But what is as fitting to an idol as that which is also to the dead?

[2] Nam et mortuorum est ita coronari, quoniam et ipsi idola statim fiunt et habitu et cultu consecrationis, quae apud nos secunda idololatria est. Igitur qui careant sensu, illorum erit perinde uti ea re, cuius careant sensu, atque si abuti eo uellent, si sensu non carerent. Nulla uero distantia est abutendi, cum ueritas cessat utendi: cessante natura sentiendi qua uult, quis abutatur, cum non habeat qua utatur?

[2] For to be crowned thus is also of the dead, since they too straightway become idols both by the habit and the cult of consecration, which among us is a second idolatry. Therefore, for those who lack sense-perception, it will be the same to use that thing, of which they lack sense-perception, just as if they would abuse it, if they did not lack sense-perception. There is truly no distinction regarding abusing, when the truth of using ceases: with the nature of perceiving, as far as it would, ceasing, who can abuse, when he does not have that by which he may use?

[3] Nobis autem abuti apud apostolum non licet, facilius non uti docentem. Nisi quod nec abutuntur qui nihil sentiunt, sed uacant totum, et est ipsum quoque opus mortuum, quantum in idolis, uiuum plane, quantum in daemoniis ad quae pertinet superstitio. « Idola nationum, inquit Dauid, argentum et aurum : oculos habent, nec uident, nares, nec odorantur, manus, nec contrectabunt.

[3] But for us to abuse, according to the apostle, is not permitted, teaching rather more easily not to use. Except that neither do those abuse who perceive nothing, but they are wholly vacant, and the work itself also is dead, so far as it is in idols; plainly living, so far as it is in the demons to whom superstition pertains. «The idols of the nations, says David, are silver and gold: they have eyes, and do not see, noses, and do not smell, hands, and they will not handle.»

[4] Per haec enim floribus frui est. Quod si tales edicit futuros qui idola fabricantur, tales iam sunt qui secundum idolorum ornatum quid utuntur. Omnia munda mundis; ita et immunda omnia immundis.

[4] For by these things, indeed, is to enjoy the flowers. But if he declares such to be the future lot of those by whom idols are fabricated, such already are those who, according to the ornament of idols, make any use. All things are clean to the clean; so also all things are unclean to the unclean.

Nihil autem immundius idolis. -- Ceterum substantiae mundae, ut Dei res, et hac sua condicione communes usui. -- Sed et ipsius usus administratio interest.

Nothing, however, more unclean than idols. -- Moreover, substances are clean, as the things of God, and by this their condition are common for use. -- But even the administration of the use itself makes a difference.

[5] Nam et ego mihi gallinaceum macto, non minus quam Aesculapio Socrates, et si me odor alicuius loci offenderit, Arabiae aliquid incendo, sed non eodem ritu, nec eodem habitu, nec eodem apparatu, quo agitur apud idola. Si enim uerbo nudo conditio polluitur, -- ut apostolus docet : « Si quis autem dixerit : hoc idolothytum est, ne contigeris », -- multo magis, cum saltitaueris habitu et ritu et apparatu idolothytorum, contaminatur. Ita et corona idolothytum efficitur.

[5] For I too sacrifice a rooster for myself, no less than Socrates to Aesculapius; and if the odor of some place offends me, I burn something of Arabia; but not with the same rite, nor with the same attire, nor with the same apparatus, with which it is done among idols. For if by the bare word the condition is polluted, -- as the apostle teaches: «But if anyone should say: this idolothyte is, do not touch it», -- much more, when you have capered in the garb and rite and apparatus of the idolothytes, it is contaminated. Thus also a crown is made an idolothyte.

[6] Hoc enim ritu et habitu et apparatu idolis immolatur auctoribus suis, quorum eo uel maxime proprius est usus, ne in communionem possit admitti, quod in Dei rebus non inuenitur. Propterea apostolus clamat : « Fugite idololatriam ! » Omnem utique et totam.

[6] For by this rite and habit and apparatus, sacrifice is made to idols, to their authors, whose use is thereby most proper to them, so that what is not found among the things of God cannot be admitted into communion. Therefore the apostle cries out: «Flee idolatry !» All of it, assuredly, and wholly.

[7] Recogita siluam et quantae latitant spinae. Nihil dandum idolo; sic nec sumendum ab idolo. Si in idolio recumbere alienum est a fide, quid in idoli habitu uideri?

[7] Reconsider the forest, and how many
thorns lurk. Nothing must be given to an idol; thus neither must anything be taken from an idol. If to recline in an idol-temple is alien to the faith, what of being seen in the idol’s habit?

Quae communio Christo et Beliae? Et ideo fugite. Longum enim diuortium mandat ab idololatria.

What communion has Christ with Belial? And therefore flee. A long indeed divorce he commands from idolatry.

In nullo proxime agendum : draco etiam terrenus de longinquo homines spiritu absorbet.

In no case should one go near : the dragon even earthly from afar men by its breath swallows up.

[8] Altius Iohannes : « Filioli, inquit, custodite uos ab idolis! »; non iam ab idololatria quasi officio, sed ab idolis, id est ab ipsa effigie eorum. Indignum enim ut imago Dei uiui imago idoli et mortuifias.

[8] More deeply John : « Little children, says he, guard yourselves from idols! »; not now from idolatry as from a quasi-office, but from idols, that is, from their very effigy. For it is unworthy that you, the image of the living God, should become the image of an idol and of what is deadbecome.

Vsque adhuc proprietatem istius habitus et ex originis censu et ex superstitionis usu idolis uindicamus, ex eo praeterea quod, dum in rebus Dei non refertur, magis magisque illorum deputatur in quorum et anti quitatibus et sollemnitatibus et officiis conuenitur.

Up to now we claim for idols the property of this habit both from the reckoning of its origin and from the use of superstition, furthermore from this, that, while it is not referred to the things of God, it is more more assigned to those in whose both anti quities and solemnities and offices it is agreed.

[9] Ipsae denique fores et ipsae hostiae et arae, ipsi ministri ac sacerdotes eorum coronantur. Habes omnium collegiorum sacerdotalium coronas apud Claudium. Sed et illam interstruximus distinctionem differentium rationalium et inrationalium eis occurrentem, qui communionem in omnibus de quorundam exemplorum occasione defendunt.

[9] Even the doors themselves, and the victims themselves and the altars, the ministers themselves and their priests, are crowned. You have the crowns of all the priestly colleges with Claudius. But we have also inserted that distinction of differing rational and irrational things meeting them, who defend communion in all things on the occasion of certain examples.

[10] Ad hanc itaque partem causas iam ipsas coronarias inspici superest, ut, dum ostendimus extraneas, immo et contrarias disciplinae, nullam earum rationis patrocinio fultam probemus, quo posset habitus huiusmodi quoque communioni uindicari, sicut et quidam quorum exempla nobis obiectantur.

[10] To this part, therefore, it remains to inspect the very coronal causes, so that, while we show them to be extraneous, immo and even contrary to the discipline, we may prove that none of them is upheld by the patronage of reason, whereby it might be possible for a habit of this kind also to be claimed for communion, just as also certain persons whose examples are thrown in our teeth.

11.

[1] Etenim, ut ipsam causam coronae militaris aggrediar, puto prius conquirendum an in totum christianis militia conueniat. Quale est alioquin de accidentibus retractare, cum a praecedentibus culpa sit? Credimusne humanum sacramentum diuino superduci licere, et in alium dominum respondere post Christum, et eierare patrem ac matrem et omnem proximum, quos et lex honorari et post Deum diligi praecepit, quos et euangelium, solum Christum pluris faciens, sic quoque hono- rauit?

[1] Indeed, that I may approach the very cause of the military corona, I think it must first be inquired whether in the whole military service befits Christians. What sense is there otherwise to reconsider the accessories, when the fault is with the antecedents cause? Do we believe it is permitted that the human sacrament be superinduced upon the divine, and to answer to another lord after Christ, and to abjure father and mother and every neighbor, whom both the law commanded to be honored and, after God, to be loved, whom also the gospel, alone Christ valuing more thus also hono- red?

[2] Licebit in gladio conuersari, Domino pronuntiante gladio periturum qui gladio fuerit usus? Et proelio operabitur filius pacis, cui nec litigareconueniet? Et uincula et carcerem et tormenta et supplicia administrabit, nec suarum ultor iniuriarum?

[2] Will it be permitted to conduct oneself with the sword, the Lord pronouncing that he who has used the sword will perish by the sword? And will the son of peace operate in battle, for whom it will not be fitting even to litigatewill be fitting? And will he administer bonds and prison and torments and punishments, he who is not an avenger of his own injuries?

[3]Iam et stationes aut aliis magis faciet quam Christo, aut et dominico die, quando nec Christo? Et excubabit pro templis quibus renuntiauit? Et cenabit illic, ubi apostolo non placet?

[3]Now will he even keep the stations either more for others than for Christ, or even on the Lord’s day, when not even for Christ? And will he keep watch for the temples which he has renounced? And will he dine there, where it does not please the apostle?

Et quos interdiu exorcismis fugauit, noctibus defensabit, incum- bens et requiescens super pilum quo perfossum est latus Christi? Vexillum quoque portabit aemulum Christi? Et signum postulabit a principe, qui iam a Deo accepit?

And those whom by exorcisms he drove away by day, will he defend by night, lean-
ing and resting upon the spear by which the side of Christ was pierced? Will he also carry a standard emulous of Christ? And will he demand a sign from the ruler, who has already received it from God?

Mortuus etiam tuba inquietabitur aeneatoris, qui excitari a tuba angeli expectat? Et cremabitur ex disciplina castrensi christianus, cui cre mari non licuit, cui Christus merita ignis indulsit?

Will the dead man also be disquieted by the trumpet
of the trumpeter, who expects to be awakened by the trumpet of an angel? And will a Christian be cremated by military discipline, to whom cre mated was not permitted, to whom Christ has bestowed the merits of the fire?

[4] Quantaalibi inlicita circumspici possunt castrensium munium, transgressioni interpretanda! Ipsum de castris lucis in castra tenebrarum nomen deferre transgressionis est. Plane, si quos militia praeuentos fides posterior inuenit, alia condicio est, ut illorum quos Iohannes admittebat ad lauacrum, ut centurionum fidelissimorum quem Christus probat et quem Petrus catechizat, dum tamen, suscepta fide atque signata, aut deserendum statim sit, ut a multis actum, aut omnibus modis cauillandum, ne quid aduersus Deum committatur quae nec extra militiam permittuntur, aut nouissime perpetiendum pro Deo, quod aeque fides pagana condixit.

[4] How many illicit things elsewhere can be observed in the camp duties of soldiers, to be construed as transgression!In other places illicit can be observed around the camp duties, for transgression to be interpreted! The very act of carrying the name from the camp of light into the camp of darkness is transgression. Clearly, if faith later finds some who have been overtaken by military service, the condition is different, as with those whom John used to admit to the laver, as with the most faithful centurion whom Christ approves and whom Peter catechizes, provided, however, that, the faith having been undertaken and sealed, either it is to be deserted at once, as has been done by many, or in every way to cavil, lest anything be committed against God—things which are not permitted even outside military service— or finally to be endured for God, which the pagan faith has equally stipulated.

[5] Nec enim delictorum impunitatem aut martyriorum immunitatem militia promittit. Nusquamchristianus aliud est, unum euangelium et idem : Iesus negaturus omnem negatorem et confessurus omnem confessorem, et saluam facturus animam pro nomine eius amissam, perditurus autem de contrario aduersus nomen eius lucri habitam. Apud hunc tam miles est paganus fidelis quam paganus est miles fidelis.

[5] Nor indeed does military service promise impunity of delicts or immunity of martyrdoms. Nowhereis the Christian something other, one gospel and the same: Jesus being about to deny every denier and to confess every confessor, and to make safe the soul lost for his name, but on the contrary to destroy that held as gain against his name. With him as much a soldier is the faithful pagan as the pagan is a faithful soldier.

[6] Non admittit status fideinecessitates. Nulla est necessitas delinquendi, quibus una est necessitas non delinquendi. Nam et ad sacrifican- dum et directo negandum necessitate quis premitur tormentorum siue poenarum.

[6] The status of faith does not admitnecessities. There is no necessity of delinquency, for whom there is the one necessity of not delinquenting. For both to sacrifice and to deny outright one is pressed by the necessity of torments or of penalties.

Tamen nec illi necessitati disciplina coniuet, quia potior est necessitas timendae negationis et obeundi martyrii quam euadendae passionis et implendi officii.

Yet neither does discipline connive at that necessity, because the weightier necessity is of fearing denial and of undergoing martyrdom than of evading passion and of fulfilling office.

[7] Ceterum subuertit totam substantiam sacramenti causatio eiusmodi, ut etiam uoluntariis delictis fibulam laxet. Nam et uoluntas poterit necessitas contendi, habens scilicet unde cogatur uelipsa. Haec praestruxerim et ad ceteras officialium coronarum causas, quibus familiarissima est aduocatio necessitatis, cum idcirco aut officia fugienda sunt ne delictis incidamus, aut martyria toleranda sunt ut officia rumpamus.

[7] Moreover, a plea of this sort subverts the whole substance of the sacrament, so that it even loosens the clasp for voluntary delicts. For even will can be contended to be a necessity, having, to wit, that whence it is compelled,
or itself. I have prearranged these points also for the other causes of the crowns of officials, for which most familiar is the advocacy of necessity, since for that reason either the offices must be fled lest we fall into delicts, or the martyrdoms must be endured so that we may break off the offices.

De prima specie quaestionis, etiam militiae ipsius inlicitae, plura non faciam, ut secunda reddatur, ne, si omni ope expulero militiam, frustra iam de corona militari prouocarim. Puta denique licere militiam usque ad causam coronae.

Concerning the first species of the question, even of the illegality of military service itself, I will not go on at greater length, so that the second may be rendered, lest, if by every effort I have driven out military service, I should now have appealed concerning the military crown in vain. Suppose, finally, that military service is permitted up to the case of the crown.

12.

[1] Sed et de corona priusdicamus. Laurea ista Apollini uel Libero sacra est, illi ut deo telorum, huic ut deo triumphorum. Sic docet Claudius,

[1] But also about the crown firstlet us speak. This laurel is sacred to Apollo or to Liber is sacred, to him as the god of missiles, to this one as the god of triumphs. Thus teaches Claudius,

[2] cum et myrto ait milites redimiri solere: Veneris enim myrtus, matris Aeneadarum, etiam amiculae Martis, per Iliam et Romulos Romanae. Sed ego Venerem non credo ex hac parte cum Marte Romanam, qua pelicis dolor est. Cum et olea militia coronatur, ad Mineruam est idololatria, armorum aeque deam, sed et pace cum Neptuno inita ex hac arbore coronatam.

[2] since he also says that soldiers are wont to be wreathed with myrtle: for the myrtle is of Venus, mother of the Aeneadans, even the little friend of Mars, through Ilia and Romuli Roman. But I do not believe Venus to be Roman with Mars in this respect, where there is the grief of a concubine. Since the soldiery too is crowned with the olive, the idolatry pertains to Minerva, equally a goddess of arms, but also, with peace with Neptune entered, she was crowned from this tree.

In his erit serti militaris superstitio, ubique polluta et polluens omnia. Quae iam polluantur et causis.

In these things will be the superstition of the military wreath, everywhere defiled and defiling all things. Let us now indicate what things are polluted, and the causes.

[3] Ecce annua uotorum nuncupatio : quid uidetur? Prima in principiis, secunda in capitoliis. Accipe, post loca, et uerba : « Tunc tibi, Iuppiter, bouem cornibus auro decoratis uouemus esse futurum.

[3] Behold the annual nuncupation of vows: what does it seem? First in the principia, second on the Capitols. Receive, after the places, also the words: « Then to you, Jupiter, we vow that there will be a bull with horns adorned with gold

» Cuius sententiae uox est? Vtique negationis. Etiam si tacet illic christianus ore, coronatus capite respondit.

» Of what sentence is the voice? Surely of negation. Even if the Christian is silent there with his mouth, crowned on his head he has answered.

Eadem laurea in donatiui dispensationem denuntiatur. Plane non gratuita

The same laurel is proclaimed for the dispensation of the donative. Plainly not gratuitous

[4] idololatria, aliquibus aureis uenditans Christum, ut argenteis Iudas. Hoc erit « Non potestis Deo seruire et mammonae », mammonae manum tradere et Deo absistere? Hoc erit « Reddite quae sunt Caesaris Caesari et quae Dei Deo », nec hominem Deo reddere et denarium Caesari auferre?

[4] idolatry, peddling Christ for some gold pieces, as Judas for silver. Will this be «You cannot serve God and Mammon», to hand your hand over to Mammon and stand apart from God? stand apart? Will this be «Render the things that are Caesar’s to Caesar and the things of God to God», and not render the man to God and take away the denarius from Caesar?

Triumphi laurea foliis struitur an cadaueribus? lemniscis ornatur an bustis? unguentis delibuitur an lacrimis coniugum et matrum?

Is the laurel of triumph arrayed with leaves
or with corpses? Is it adorned with fillets or with funeral pyres? Is it anointed with unguents or with the tears of wives and mothers?

Fortasse quorundam et christianorum : et apud barbaros enim Christus.

Perhaps of certain people, even of Christians: for among the barbarians there is Christ as well.

[5] Qui hanc portauerit in capite causam, nonne et ipse pugnauit? Est et alia militia, regiarum familiarum. Nam et castrenses appellantur, munificae et ipsae sollemnium Caesarianorum.

[5] Whoever will have carried this cause upon his head, has not he himself also fought? There is also another soldiery, of royal households. For they too are called “castrenses,” munificent they too at the solemnities of the Caesars.

Sed et tu proinde miles ac seruus alterius, et si duorum, Dei et Caesaris, certe tunc non Caesaris, cum te Deo debes, etiam in communibus, credo, potiori.

But you too likewise are a soldier and servant of another; and if of two, of God and of Caesar, certainly then not of Caesar, when you owe yourself to God, even in common matters, I believe, to the superior.

13.

[1] Coronant et publicos ordines laureis publicae causae, magistratus uero insuper aureis, ut Athenis, ut Romae. Superferunturetiam illis Etruscae. Hoc uocabulum est coronarum quas gemmis et foliis ex auro quercinis ab Ioue insignes ad deducendas tensas cum palmatis togis sumunt.

[1] They crown the public orders also with laurels for a public cause, magistrates moreover in addition with golden ones, as at Athens, as at Rome. They are held above themalso Etruscan ones. This is the term for the crowns which, adorned with gems and with oaken leaves of gold, marked as Jove’s, for conducting the tensae with palmated togas they assume.

Sunt et prouinciales aureae, imaginum pro numero capita maiora quaerentes. Sed tui ordines et tui magistratus et ipsum curiae nomen ecclesia est Christi. Illius es concriptus in libris uitae.

There are also provincial golden ones, seeking larger heads in proportion to the number of images. But your orders and your magistrates and the very name of the curia is the Church of Christ. You are enrolled of Him in the books of life.

[2] Illic purpurae tuae sanguisDomini, et clauus latus in cruce ipsius; illic secures, ad caudicem iam arboris positae; illic uirgae ex radice Iesse. Viderint et publici equi cum coronis suis. Dominus tuus, ubi secundum scripturam Hierusalem ingredi uoluit, nec asinum habuit priuatum.

[2] There, for your purple, the bloodof the Lord, and the nail, the side, upon his cross; there the axes, laid to the trunk already of the tree; there the rods from the root of Jesse. Let the public horses, too, with their crowns, see to it. Your Lord, when he wished to enter Jerusalem according to the Scripture, did not even have a private donkey.

« Isti in curribus et isti in equis, nos autem in nomine Domini nostri inuocabimus. »

« Those in chariots and those in horses, but we will call upon the name of our Lord. »

[3] Ab ipso incolatu Babylonis illius in Apocalypsi Iohannis submouemur, nedum a suggestu. Coronatur et uulgus, nunc ex principalium prosperitatum exultatione, nunc ex municipalium sollemnitatum proprietate. Est enim omnis publicae laetitiae luxuria captatrix.

[3] From the very inhabiting of Babylon that in the Apocalypse of John we are removed, not to mention from a rostrum. The common crowd too is crowned, now from the exultation of principal prosperities, now from the propriety of municipal solemnities. For luxury is the huntress of every public rejoicing.

[4] Sed tu, peregrinus mundi huius et ciuis ciuitatis supernae Hierusalem, -- « Noster, inquit, municipatus in caelis », -- habes tuos census, tuos fastos, nihil tibi cum gaudiis saeculi, immo contrarium debes. « Saeculum enim gaudebit, uos uero lugebitis. » Et, puto, felices ait lugentes, non coronatos.

[4] But you, a pilgrim of this world and a citizen of the supernal city Jerusalem, -- « “Our,” he says, “citizenship is in the heavens” », -- you have your own census-rolls, your own fasti, nothing to do with the joys of the age; rather you owe the contrary. « For the world will rejoice, but you indeed will mourn. » And, I think, he says the mourners are blessed, not the crowned.

Coronant et nuptiae sponsos. Et ideo non nubemus ethnicis, ne nos ad idololatriam usque deducant, a qua apud illos nuptiae incipiunt.

Even weddings crown the bridegrooms. And therefore we do not wed pagans, lest they lead us all the way to idolatry, from which among them weddings begin.

[5] Habes legem a patriarchis quidem, habes apostolum in Domino nubere iubentem. Coronat et libertas saecularis. Sed tu iam redemptus es a Christo, et quidem magno.

[5] You have the law
from the patriarchs indeed, you have the apostle commanding to marry in the Lord
to marry. Even secular liberty crowns. But you already
have been redeemed by Christ, and indeed at a great price.

Seruum alienum quomodo saeculum manumittet? Etsi libertas uidetur, sed et seruitus uidebitur: omnia imaginaria in saeculo et nihil ueri. Nam et tunc liber hominis eras, redemptus a Christo, et nunc seruus es Christi, licet manumissus sis ab homine.

How
will the world manumit another’s slave? Even if freedom appears, yet slavery will also be seen: everything is imaginary in the world and nothing true. For even then you were free of man, redeemed by Christ, and now you are a slave of Christ, although you have been manumitted by a man.

[6] Si ueram putes saeculi libertatem, ut et corona eam consignes, redisti in seruitutem hominis, quam putas libertatem, amisisti libertatem Christi, quam putasti seruitutem. Numquid et agonisticae causae disputabuntur, quas statim tituli sui damnant, sacras et funebres scilicet? Hoc enim superest, ut Olympius Iuppiter et Nemaeus Hercules et misellus Archemorus et Antinous infelix in christiano coronentur, ut ipse spectaculum fiat quod spectare non debet.

[6] If you think the world’s freedom true freedom, so that you also crown it with a wreath, you have returned into the slavery of man, which you suppose to be freedom; you have lost the freedom of Christ, which you supposed to be slavery. Are even agonistic causes to be argued, which their own titles forthwith condemn, sacred and funerary, to wit? For this is what remains: that Olympian Jupiter and Nemean Hercules and poor little Archemorus and unlucky Antinous be crowned upon a Christian, so that he himself become a spectacle which he ought not to behold.

[7] Vniuersas, ut arbitror, causas enumerauimus, nec ulla nobiscum est : omnes alienae, profanae, inlicitae, semel iam in sacramenti testatione eieratae. Haec enim erant pompae diaboli et angelorum eius : officia saeculi, honores, sollemnitates, popularitates, falsa uota, humana seruitia, laudes uanae, gloriae turpes; et in omnibus istis idololatriae, in solo quoque censu coronarum, quibus omnia ista redimita sunt.

[7] We have, as I judge, enumerated all the causes, and none is with us : all are alien, profane, illicit, already once, in the testimony of the sacrament, abjured. For these, indeed, were the pomps of the devil and his angels: the offices of the age, honors, solemnities, popularities, false vows, human servitudes, vain praises, base glories; and in all these, idolatries, even in the mere census of crowns, with which all these things have been wreathed.

[8] Praefabitur quidem Claudius etiam cae- lum sideribus apud Homeri carmina coronatum, certe a Deo, certe homini : igitur et homo ipse a deo coronandus est. Ceterum a saeculo coronantur et lupanaria et latrinae et pistrinae et carcer et ludus et ipsa amphitheatra et ipsa spoliaria ipsaeque libitinae. Quam sacer sanctusque, quam honestus ac mundus sit habitus iste, noli de uno poetico caelo, sed de totius mundi commerciis aestimare.

[8] Claudius indeed will preface, too, that the hea- ven is crowned with stars in Homer’s songs, assuredly by God, assuredly for man: therefore even man himself must be crowned by God. But by the world are crowned both brothels and latrines and bakehouses and the prison and the gladiatorial school and the amphitheatres themselves and the stripping-rooms themselves and the very mortuaries. How sacred and holy, how honorable and clean that usage is, do not estimate from a single poetic heaven, but from the commerces of the whole world.

[9] At enim christianus nec ianuam suam laureis infamabit, si norit quantos deos etiam ostiis diabolus adfinxerit : Ianum a ianua, Limentinum a limine, Forculum et Carnam a foribus atque cardinibus, etiam apud Graecos Thyraeum Apollinem et Antelios daemonas.

[9] But indeed the Christian will not dishonor his own door with laurels, if he knows how many gods the devil has even to the doorways affixed : Janus from the door, Limentinus from the threshold, Forculus and Carna from the doors and the hinges, even among the Greeks a Thyraean Apollo and Antelios daemons.

14.

[1] Tanto abest ut capiti suo munus inferat idololatriae, immo iam dixerim Christo, siquidem caput uiri Christus est : tam liberum quam et Christus, ne uelamento quidem obnoxium, nedum obligamento. Porro et quod obnoxium est uelamento, caput feminae, hoc ipso iam occupatum non uacat etiam obligamento. Habet humilitatis suae sarcinam.

[1] So far is it from the case that he would bring upon his own head a gift to idolatry, indeed I would now even say upon Christ, since the head of the man is Christ: as free as Christ as well, not even obnoxious to a veil, much less to a binding. Moreover, that which is obnoxious to a veil, the head of the woman, by this very fact already occupied is not free also for a binding. It has the burden of its humility.

[2] Si nudo capite uideri non debet propter angelos, multo magis coronato. Fortasse tunc illos coronato scandalizauerit. Quid enim est in capite feminae corona quam formae lena, quam summae lasciuiae nota, extrema negatio uerecundiae, conflatio inlecebrae?

[2] If she ought not to be seen with a bare head because of the angels, much more when crowned. Perhaps then those crowned she would scandalize. For what is on a woman's head a crown but a procuress of beauty, a mark of utmost lasciviousness, the extreme denial of modesty, a kindling of allurement?

Propterea nec ornabitur operosius mulier ex apostoli prospectu, ut nec crinium artificio coronetur.

Therefore neither will the woman be adorned more elaborately, from the apostle’s perspective, so that neither in the hair’s artifice may she be crowned.

[3] Qui tamen et uiri caput est et feminae facies, uir ecclesiae Christus Iesus, quale, oro te, sertum pro utroque sexu subiit? Ex spinis, opinor, et tribulis, in figuram delictorum quae nobis protulit terra carnis, abstulit autem uirtus crucis, omnem aculeum mortis in dominici capitis tolerantia obtundens, certe praeter figuram : contumelia in promptu est, et dedecoratio et turpitudo et his implexa saeuitia.

[3] Who, however, is both the head of the man and the face of the woman, the man of the Church, Christ Jesus, what kind, I beg you, of wreath did he undergo on behalf of both sexes? Of thorns, I suppose, and thistles, as a figure of the delicts which the earth of the flesh brought forth for us; but the virtue (power) of the cross removed them, blunting every sting of death by the endurance of the Lord’s head, assuredly apart from the figure: contumely is at hand, and disgrace and turpitude, and with these intertwined savagery.

[4] Quae tunc Domini tempora et foedauerunt et lancinauerunt, uti tu nunc laurea et myrto et olea et inlustriore quaque fronde et, quod magis usui est, centenariis quoque rosis de horto Midae lectis et utrisque liliis et omnibus uiolis coroneris, etiam gemmis forsitan et auro? ut et illam Christi coronam aemuleris, quae postea ei obuenit? Atquin et fauos post fella gustauit, nec ante rex gloriae a caelestibus salutatus est quam rex Iudaeorum proscriptus in cruce, minoratus primo a patre modico quid citra angelos, et ita gloria et honore coronatus.

[4] What then both defiled and lacerated the Lord’s temples, that you now with laurel and myrtle and olive and with whatever more illustrious frond, and, what is more for use, with hundred-petaled roses too gathered from Midas’s garden and with both lilies and with all violets, you should wreathe yourself, perhaps even with gems and with gold? so that you may also emulate that other crown of Christ which later befell him? And yet he tasted honeycombs after gall, nor was the King of Glory greeted by the celestials before he had been posted as King of the Jews on the cross, first made lower by the Father a little bit short of the angels, and thus crowned with glory and honor.

Si ob haec caput ei tuum debes, tale, si forte, ei repende, quale suum pro tuo obtulit, aut nec floribus coroneris si spinis non potes, quia floribus non potes.

If on account of these things you owe him your head, then repay him, if perhaps, in such kind as he offered his own in place of yours; or else do not even be crowned with flowers if you cannot with thorns, because with flowers you are not able.

15.

[1] Serua Deo rem suam intaminatam. Ille eam, si uolet, coronabit. Immo et uult, denique inuitat : « Qui uicerit, inquit, dabo ei coronam uitae.

[1] Keep for God his possession uncontaminated. He, if he wills, will crown it. Nay rather, he also wills, finally he invites: «He who conquers, he says, I will give him the crown of life.

» Esto et tu fidelis ad mortem, decerta et tu bonum agonem, cuius coronam et apostolus repositam sibi merito confidit. Accipit et angelus uictoriae coronam, procedens in candido equo ut uinceret; at alius iridis ambitu ornatur caelesti prasio. Sedent et presbyteri coronati, eodemque auto et ipse filius hominis super nubem micat.

» Be you also faithful unto death, fight you too the good agon, the crown of which the apostle with good reason trusts has been laid up for himself. An angel too receives the crown of victory, advancing on a white horse in order to conquer; but another is adorned with the circuit of the rainbow, with a celestial prase. The presbyters also sit crowned, and in the same wise even the Son of Man himself flashes upon a cloud.

[2] Si tales imagines in uisione, quales ueritates in repraesentatione? Illas aspice, illasadora. Quid caput strophiolo aut dracontario damnas, diademati destinatum?

[2] If such images are in vision, what verities are in representation? Look upon those, thoseadore. Why do you condemn the head to a strophiole or a dracontary, destined for a diadem?

Nam reges nos Deo et patri suo fecit Christus Iesus. Quid tibi cum flore morituro? Habes florem ex uirga Iesse, super quem tota diuini Spiritus gratia requieuit, florem incorruptum, immarcescibilem, sempiternum.

For he made us kings to God and to his Father, Christ Jesus. What have you to do with a dying flower? You have the flower from the rod of Jesse, upon whom the whole grace of the divine Spirit rested, a flower incorrupt, immarcescible, everlasting.

[3] Quem et bonus miles eligendo in caelesti ordinatione profecit. Erubescite, commilitones eius, iam non ab ipso iudicandi, sed ab aliquo Mithrae milite. Qui cum initiatur in spelaeo, in castris uere tenebrarum, coronam interposito gladio sibi oblatam quasi mimum martyrii, dehinc capiti suo accommodatam, monetur obuia manu a capite pellere et in humerum, si forte, transferre, dicens Mithran esse coronam suam.

[3] Whom even a good soldier, by electing him in the heavenly ordination, has advanced. Be ashamed, fellow-soldiers of his, now to be judged not by him himself, but by some soldier of Mithras. Who, when he is initiated in a cave, in the camps truly of darkness, the crown offered to him with a sword interposed as a kind of mime of martyrdom, then fitted to his head, is admonished with a hand meeting it to drive it from the head and, if by chance, onto the shoulder, to transfer it, saying that Mithras is his crown.

[4] Atque exinde numquam coronatur, idque in signum habet ad probationem sui, sicubi temptatus fuerit de sacramento, statimque creditur Mithrae miles, si deiecerit coronam, si eam in deo suo esse dixerit. Agnoscamus ingenia diaboli, idcirco quaedam de diuinis affectantis ut nos de suorum fide confundat et iudicet.

[4] And from then on never is he crowned, and he has that as a sign for the probation of himself, if anywhere he should be tempted concerning the sacrament, and immediately he is taken as a soldier of Mithras if he shall have cast down the crown, if he shall have said that it is in his god. Let us recognize the stratagems of the devil, for this reason affecting certain things from the divine things affecting so that he may confound us on the basis of the faith of his own and judge us.