Tertullian: de Idololatria

[1] Principale crimen generis humani, summus saeculi reatus, tota causa iudicii idololatria. Nam etsi suam speciem tenet unumquodque delictum, etsi suoquodque nomine iudicio destinatur, in idololatriae tamen crimine expungitur. Omitte titulos, opera recognosce.

[1] Principal crime of the human race, the highest guilt of the age, the whole cause of judgment, is idolatry. For although each delict holds its own form, and althougheach is destined to judgment by its own name, nevertheless it is expunged under the crime of idolatry. Omit the titles, recognize the works.

Idololatres idem homicida est. Quaeris quem occiderit? Si quid ad elogii ambitionem facit, non extraneum nec inimicum, sed ipsum se. Quibus insidiis?

The idololater is likewise a homicide. You ask whom he has killed? If anything makes for the ambition of the charge, not a stranger nor an enemy, but himself. By what snares?

Erroris sui. Quo telo? Offensa dei.

By his own error. With what weapon? The offense of God.

Quot plagis? Quotquot idololatriis.

How many wounds? As many as idolatries.

[2] Qui negat idololatren perisse, isnegabit idololatren homicidium fecisse. Perinde adulterium et stuprum in eodem recognoscas; nam qui falsis deis seruit, sine dubio adulter est ueritatis, quia omne falsum adulterium est. Sic et stupro mergitur.

[2] He who denies that the idololater has perished, that onewill deny that the idololater has committed homicide. Likewise you may recognize adultery and defilement in the same person; for he who serves false gods is without doubt an adulterer of truth, because every falsehood is adultery. Thus also he is sunk in defilement.

Quis enim immundis spiritibus cooperator non conspurcatus et constupratus incedit? Atque adeo scripturae sanctae stupri uocabulo utuntur in idololatriae exprobratione.

For who, with unclean spirits cooperator, does not walk befouled and ravished? And indeed the holy Scriptures use the word fornication in the reproach of idolatry.

[3] Fraudis condicio eaest, opinor, si quis alienum rapiat aut alii debitum deneget, et utique erga hominem admissa fraus maximi criminis nomen est. At enim idololatria fraudem deo facit honores illi suos denegans et conferens aliis, ut fraudi etiam contumeliam coniungat. Quodsi tam fraus quam stuprum atque adulterium mortem afferunt, iam in his aeque idololatria de homicidii reatu non liberatur.

[3] The condition of fraudis, I suppose, if someone should seize another’s property or deny to another what is owed, and assuredly toward a human being the fraud committed bears the name of a most serious crime. But indeed idolatry works fraud against God, denying to him his own honors and conferring them upon others, so that to the fraud it also joins contumely. And if both fraud and stuprum as well as adultery bring death, then in these matters equally idolatry is not freed from the charge of homicide.

[4] Post talia crimina, tam exitiosa, tam deuoratoria salutis cetera quoquealiquem ad modum et seorsum perinde disposita in idololatria condicionem suam repraesentant. In illa et concupiscentiae saeculi. Quae enim idololatriae sollemnitas sine ambitione cultus et ornatus?

[4] After such crimes, so destructive, so devouring of salvation, the rest alsoin some fashion and separately, being likewise arranged in idolatry, present their own condition. In it too are the concupiscences of the age. For what solemnity of idolatry is without ambition for dress and ornament?

In illa lasciuiae et ebrietatis, cum plurimum uictus et uentris et libidinis causa frequententur. In illa iniustitia. Quid enim iniustius ea quae iustitiae patrem nescit?

In it, lasciviousness and drunkenness, since for the sake of sustenance and the belly and libido they are most of all frequented. In it, injustice. For what is more unjust than that which does not know the father of justice?

In illa etiam uanitas, cum tota eius ratio uana sit. In illa mendacium, cum tota substantia eius mendax sit.

In it also vanity, since its whole reason is vain. In it lying, since its whole substance is mendacious.

[5] Ita fit, ut omnia in idololatria et in omnibus idololatriadeprehendatur. Sed et alias, cum uniuersa delicta aduersus deum sapiant, nihil autem, quod aduersus deum sapiat, non daemoniis et immundis spiritibus deputetur quibus idola mancipantur, sine dubio idololatrian admittit quicunque delinquit. Id enim facit quod ad idolorum mancipes pertinet.

[5] Thus it comes about, that everything is in idolatry and in all things idolatryis detected. But also otherwise, since all offenses savor of being against God, and nothing, which savors of being against God, is not deputed to the demons and unclean spirits to whom idols are made over as slaves, without doubt idolatry is admitted by whoever transgresses. For he does that which pertains to the proprietors of idols.

II.

[1] Sed uniuersa nomina criminum discedant in operum suorum proprietates,remaneat idololatria in eo quod ipsa est. Sufficit sibi tam inimicum deo nomen, tam locuples substantia criminis, quae tot ramos ponigit, tot uenas diffundit, ut de hoc cum maxime materia suscepta sit, quot modis nobis praecauenda sit idololatriae latitudo, quoniam multifariam seruos dei nec tantum ignorata, sed etiam dissimulata subuertit.

[1] But let all the names of crimes be separated into the properties of their own works,let idolatry remain in that which it itself is. For itself suffices a name so inimical to God, so wealthy a substance of crime, which puts forth so many branches, diffuses so many veins , that upon this matter especially a treatment has been undertaken: by how many modes the breadth of idolatry is to be guarded against by us, since in many fashions it overthrows the servants of God, not only when unknown, but even when dissimulated.

[2] Plerique idololatrian simpliciterexistimant his solis modis interpretandam, si quis aut incendat aut immolet aut polluceat aut sacris aliquibus aut sacerdotiis obligetur, quemadmodum si quis existimet adulterium in osculis et in amplexibus et in ipsa carnis congressione censendum aut homicidium in sola sanguinis profusione et in animae ereptione reputandum.

[2] Many people think idolatry is simply to be interpreted by these sole modes, ifsomeone either burns (incense) or immolates or makes a libation or is bound to some rites or priesthoods, just as if someone should think adultery must be assessed in kisses and in embraces and in the very congress of flesh, or homicide to be reckoned only in the mere outpouring of blood and in the snatching away of life.

[3] At enim, dominus quam extensius ista disponat, certi sumus, cum adulterium etiam in concupiscentia designat, si oculum quis impegerit libidinose et animam commouerit impudice, cum homicidium etiam in uerbo maledicti uelconuicii iudicat et in omni impetu irae et in neglegentia caritatis in fratrem.

[3] But indeed, we are certain how much more extensively the Lord disposes these matters, since he designates adultery even in concupiscence, if someone has fixed his eye libidinously and has stirred his soul immodestly, since he judges homicide even in a word of malediction or ofreviling and in every onset of ire and in negligence of charity toward a brother.

[4] Sicut Iohannes docet homicidam esse qui oderit fratrem. Alioquin in modico consisteret et diaboli ingenium de malitia et deidominium de disciplina, qua nos aduersus diaboli latitudines munit, si in his tantum delictis iudicaremur, quae etiam nationes decreuerunt uindicanda.

[4] Just as John teaches that he who hates his brother is a murderer. Otherwise, in a small compass would consist both the devil’s ingenuity from malice and God’sdominion from discipline, by which against the devil’s latitudes he fortifies us, if we were judged only in those offenses which even the nations have decreed to be vindicated.

[5] Quomodo abundabit iustitia nostra super scribas et pharisaeos, ut dominus praescripsit, nisi abundantiam aduersariae eius id est iniustitiae perspexerimus? Quod sicaput iniustitiae idololatria est, prius est, uti aduersus abundantiam idololatriae praemuniamur, dum illam non solum in manifestis recognoscimus.

[5] How will our justice abound beyond the scribes and Pharisees, as the Lord has prescribed, unless we have perceived the abundance of its adversary, that is, injustice? But ifthe head of injustice is idolatry, it is first, that we be fortified beforehand against the abundance of idolatry, while we recognize it not only in manifest things.

III.

[1] Idolumaliquamdiu retro non erat. Priusquam huius monstri artifices ebullissent, sola templa et uacuae aedes erant, sicut in hodiernum quibusdam locis uetustatis uestigia permanent. Tamen idololatria agebatur, non in isto nomine, sed in isto opere.

[1] The idolfor some time back had not existed. Before the artisans of this monster artificers had burst forth, there were only temples and empty shrines existed, as even to the present day in certain places vestiges of antiquity remain. Nevertheless idolatry was being practiced, not in this name, but in this work.

Nam et hodie extra templum et sine idolo agi potest.

For even today, outside the temple and without an idol, it can be practiced.

[2] At ubi artifices statuarum et imaginum et omnis generis simulacrorum diabolus saeculo intulit, rude illud negotium humanae calamitatis et nomen de idolis consecutum est et profectum.Exinde iam caput facta est idololatriae ars omnis quae idolum quoquomodo edit. Neque enim interest, an plastes effingat, an caelator exculpat, an phrygio detexat, quia nec de materia refert, an gypso, an coloribus, an lapide, an aere, an argento, an filo formetur idolum.

[2] But when the Devil introduced into the age the artisans of statues and images and simulacra of every kind, that crude business of human calamity both obtained the name from idols and made progress.From then on already, every art that in any way brings forth an idol became the very head of idolatry. For it makes no difference whether a molder fashions, or a celator carves out, or a Phrygian embroiderer weaves, since it does not matter about the material either—whether the idol is formed of gypsum, or colors, or stone, or bronze, or silver, or thread.

[3] Quando enim et sine idolo idololatria fiat, utique, cum adest idolum, nihil interest, quale sit,qua de materia, qua de effigie, ne qui putet id solum idolum habendum, quod humana effigie sit consecratum.

[3] For since even without an idol idolatry can be done, certainly, when the idol is present, it makes no difference what sort it is,of what material, of what effigy, lest anyone think that only that should be held an idol which has been consecrated with a human effigy.

[4]Ad hoc necessaria est uocabuli interpretatio. Ei]doj Graece formam sonat; ab eo per diminutionem ei!dwlon deductum; aeque apud nos forma formulam fecit. Igitur omnis forma uel formula idolum se dici exposcit.

[4]To this the interpretation of the vocable is necessary. Ei]doj in Greek signifies form; from it, by diminution ei!dwlon is derived; likewise among us forma has made formulam. Therefore every forma or formula demands to be called an idol.

Inde idololatria omnis circa omne idolum famulatus et seruitus. Inde et omnis idoli artifex eiusdem et unius est criminis, nisi parum idololatrian populus admisit, quia simulacrum uituli et non hominis sibi consecrauit.

Hence
all idolatry is the attendance and servitude around every idol. Hence also every artificer of an idol
is of the same one crime, unless the people committed too little idolatry, since
they consecrated for themselves a simulacrum of a calf and not of a man.

IV.

[1] Idolumtam fieri quam coli deus prohibet. Quanto praecedit, ut fiat quod coli possit, tanto prius est, ne fiat, si coli non licet. Propter hanc causam, ad eradicandam scilicet materiam idololatriae, lex diuina proclamat, ne feceris idolum, et coniungens, neque similitudinem eorum quae in caelo sunt et quae in terra et quae in mari, toto mundo eiusmodi artibus interdixit seruis dei.

[1] An idolboth to be made and to be worshipped God forbids. Since making what can be worshipped precedes worship, so much the more prior is it that it not be made, if it is not permitted to be worshipped. For this cause, to wit, for the uprooting of the material of idolatry, the divine law proclaims, you shall not make an idol, and, adding, nor a similitude of the things which are in heaven and which are on earth and which are in the sea, he has interdicted such arts to the servants of God throughout the whole world.

[2] AntecesseratEnoch praedicens omnia elementa, omnem mundi censum, quae caelo, quae mari, quae terra continentur, in idololatrian uersuros daemonas et spiritus desertorum angelorum, ut pro deo aduersus deum consecrarentur. Omnia igitur colit humanus error praeter ipsum omnium conditorem. Eorum imagines idola imaginum consecratio idololatria.

[2] Had gone beforeEnoch, foretelling all the elements, the whole census of the world, the things which in heaven, which in the sea, which on the earth are contained, that into idolatry the daemons and the spirits of apostate angels would turn, so that, instead of God, they might be consecrated against God. Therefore human error worships all things except the very maker of all. Their images are idols; the consecration of images is idolatry.

Quicquid idololatria committit, in artificem quemcumque et cuiuscumque idoli deputetur necesse est. Denique idem Enoch simul et cultores idoli et fabricatores in comminatione praedamnat.

Whatever idolatry commits, must needs be imputed to the artisan, whoever he be, and of whatever idol it is. Finally, the same Enoch at once both the worshipers of the idol and the fabricators pre-condemns in a commination.

[3] Et rursus: iuro uobis peccatores, quod in diem sanguinisperditionis tristitia parata est. Qui seruitis lapidibus et qui imagines facitis aureas et argenteas et ligneas et lapideas et fictiles et seruitis phantasmatibus et daemoniis et spiritibus infernis et omnibus erroribus non secundum scientiam, nullum ab iis inuenietis auxilium.

[3] And again: I swear to you, sinners, that for the day of bloodof perdition, sadness has been prepared. You who serve stones and who make images golden and silver and wooden and stone and fictile, and you serve phantasms and daemons and infernal spirits and all errors not according to science, you will find no help from them.

[4]Esaias uero, testes, ait, uos estis, si est deus absque me. Et non erant tunc qui fingunt et exculpunt, omnes uani, qui faciunt libita sibi, quae illis non proderunt. Et deinceps tota illa pronuntiatio quam artifices, quam cultores detestatur. Cuius clausula est: cognoscite, quod cinis sit cor illorum et terra, et nemo animam suam liberare possit.

[4]Isaiah, indeed, says, “You are witnesses: is there a god apart from me?” And there were not then those who fashion and chisel— all vain— who make whims for themselves, which will not profit them. And thereafter that whole pronuntiatio which detests both the artificers and the worshipers. The closing of which is: “Recognize that their heart is ash and earth, and no one can free his soul.”

+ Vbi aeque Dauid et factores. Tales fiant, inquit, qui faciunt ea.

+ Where likewise David and the makers. “Let them become such,” he says, “who make them.”

[5] Et quod ego, modicae memoriae homo, ultra quid suggeram? Quid recolam de scripturis? Quasi aut nonsufficiat uox spiritus sancti aut ultra deliberandum sit, an maledixerit atque damnauerit dominus ipsos prius artifices eorum, quorum cultores maledicit et damnat?

[5] And what I, a man of slight memory, what more should I suggest? What should I recall from the scriptures? As if either the voice of the Holy Spirit were notsufficient or it should further be deliberated, whether the Lord has first cursed and condemned the very artificers of those whose worshipers he curses and condemns?

[1] Plane impensiusrespondebo ad excusationes huiusmodi artificum, quos numquam in domum dei admitti oportet si quis eam disciplinam norit. Iam illa obici solita uox, non habeo aliud quo uiuam, districtius repercuti potest: uiuere ergo habes? quid tibi cum deo est, si tuis legibus uiuis?

[1] Clearly I will reply more insistentlyI will respond to the excuses of artisans of this sort, whom it is proper never to admit into the house of God, if anyone should know that discipline. Already that stock phrase, “I have nothing else by which to live,” which is usually raised as an objection, can be more strictly beaten back: so then, do you have to live? what have you to do with God, if you live by your own laws?

Tum quod et de scripturis audent argumentari, dixisse apostolum: ut quisque fuerit inuentus, ita perseueret, possumus igitur omnes in peccatis perseuerare ex ista interpretatione.

Then, because they even dare to argue from the Scriptures, that the apostle said: that, as each one shall have been found, so let him persevere, can we therefore all persevere in sins from this interpretation.

[2] Nec enim quisquam nostrum non peccator inuentus est, cum Christus non alia ex causa descenderit quam peccatorum liberandorum. Item eundem praecepisse dicunt secundum suum exemplum,uti manibus suis unusquisque operetur ad uictum. Si hoc praeceptum ab omnibus manibus defenditur, credo et fures balneares manibus suis uiuere et ipsos latrones manibus agere quo uiuant, item falsarios utique non pedibus, sed manibus operari malas litteras, histriones uero non manibus solis, sed totis membris uictum elaborare.

[2] For indeed none of us was found not a sinner, since Christ descended for no other cause than the freeing of sinners. Likewise they say that this same one commanded, according to his own example,that each and every person should work with his own hands for sustenance. If this precept is defended by all hands, I suppose even balneary thieves live by their hands, and the brigands themselves act with their hands whereby they live; likewise the falsifiers certainly do not with their feet, but with their hands, work evil letters, while actors not with hands alone, but with all their limbs, labor out their livelihood.

[3] Pateat igitur ecclesia omnibus, qui manibus et suo operetolerant, si nulla exceptio est aritum quas dei disciplina non recipit. Sed ait quidam aduersus similitudinis interdictae propositionem: cur ergo Moses in eremo simulacrum serpentis ex aere fecit? Seorsum figurae, quae dispositioni alicui arcanae praestruebantur, non ad erogationem legis, sed ad exemplarium causae suae.

[3] Let the church, therefore, be open to all whosupport themselves by their hands and by their own work, if there is no exception of the arts which the discipline of God does not admit. But someone says against the proposition concerning the forbidden likeness: why, then, did Moses in the wilderness make a simulacrum of a serpent out of bronze? Figures of a separate kind—which were pre-arranged for some arcane disposition—are not for the dispensation of the law, but for the exemplary purpose of their own cause.

Alioquin si haec ut aduersarii legis interpretemur, numquid et nos, quod et Marcionitae, inconstantiam adscribimus omnipotenti, quem illi hoc modo destruunt ut mutabilem, dum alibi uetat, alibi mandat?

Otherwise, if we interpret these things as adversaries of the law do, would we also, as the Marcionites do, ascribe inconstancy to the Omnipotent, whom they in this way destroy as mutable, since in one place he forbids, in another he commands?

[4] Si quis autem dissimulat illam effigiem aerei serpentis suuspensi in modumfiguram designasse dominicae crucis a serpentibus id est ab angelis diaboli liberaturae nos, dum per semetipsam diabolum id est serpentem interfectum suspendit, siue quae alia figurae istius expositio dignioribus reuelata est, dummodo apostolus affirmet omnia tunc figurate populo accidisse. Bene, quod idem deus et lege uetuit similitudinem fieri et extraordinario praecepto serpentis similitudinem indixit. Si eundem deum obseruas, habes legem eius, ne feceris similitudinem.

[4] If anyone, however, dissimulates that that effigy of the bronze serpent, suspended, in the manner of afigure, designated the Lord’s cross, which would free us from the serpents, that is, from the angels of the devil, while through itself it suspended the devil—that is, the serpent—slain; or whatever other exposition of this figure has been revealed to more worthy persons, provided that the Apostle affirms that all things then befell the people in a figurative way. Well, that the same God both by the Law forbade a similitude to be made and by an extraordinary precept enjoined the similitude of a serpent to be made. If you observe the same God, you have His law: make not a similitude.

Si et praeceptum factae postea similitudinis respicis, et tu imitare Moysen, ne facias aduersus legem simulacrum aliquod, nisi et tibi deus iusserit.

If also you regard the precept of the likeness afterward made, you too imitate Moses, do not make against the law any simulacrum, unless God also commands you.

VI.

[1] Si nulla lex dei prohibuisset idola fieri anobis, nulla uox spiritus sancti fabricatoribus idolorum non minus quam cultoribus comminaretur, de ipso sacramento nostro interpretaremur nobis aduersas esse fidei eiusmodi artes.

[1] If no law of God had prohibited idols to be made byus, no voice of the Holy Spirit threatened the fabricators of idols no less than the cultors (worshipers), from our very sacrament we would interpret that arts of this kind are adverse to the Faith for us.

[2] Quomodo enim renuntiauimus diabolo et angelis eius, si eos facimus? Quod repudium diximusiis, non dico cum quibus, sed de quibus uiuimus? Quam discordiam suscepimus in eos, quibus exhibitionis nostrae gratia obligati sumus?

[2] For how, indeed, have we renounced the devil and his angels, if we make them? What repudiation have we declared tothem, I do not say with whom, but on whom we live? What discord have we undertaken against those to whom, for the sake of our maintenance, we are obligated?

Potes lingua negasse quod manu confiteris? Verbo destruere quod facto struis? Vnum deum praedicare qui tantos efficis?

Can you deny with the tongue what you confess with the hand?
Do you destroy by word what you build by deed?
Do you proclaim one God, you who effect so many?

Verum deum praedicare qui falsos facis? Facio, ait quidam, sed non colo: quasi ob aliquam causam colere non audeat, nisi ob quam et facere non debeat, scilicet ob dei offensam utrubique.

Do you proclaim the true god who
make false ones? I do, says someone, but I do not worship: as if
for some reason to worship he did not dare,
unless for the same reason he ought not to make them, namely on account of an offense to God
in both cases.

[3] Immo tu colis, qui facis, ut colipossint. Colis autem non spiritu uilissimi nidoris alicuius, sed tuo proprio nec anima pecudis impensa, sed anima tua. Illis ingenium tuum immolas, illis sudorem tuum libas, illis prudentiam tuam accendis.

[3] Nay rather, you do worship, you who make them, so that theycan be worshiped. But you worship not with the spirit of some most vile reek, but with your own, nor with the soul of a beast expended, but with your soul. To them you immolate your ingenuity, to them you pour as a libation your sweat, to them you kindle your prudence.

Plus es illis quam sacerdos, cum per te habeant sacerdotem; diligentia tua numen illorum est. Negas te quod facis colere? Sed illi non negant, quibus hanc saginatiorem et auratiorem et maiorem hostiam caedis, salutem tuam tota die.

You are to them more than a priest, since through you they have a priest; your diligence is the numen of them. Do you deny that you worship what you do? But they do not deny it, for whom you slaughter this more fattened and more gilded and greater sacrificial victim, your salvation all day long.

VII.

[1] Ad hanc partem zelus fidei perorabit ingemens: Christianum ab idolis in ecclesiam uenire, de aduersaria officina in domum dei uenire, attollere ad deum patrem manus matres idolorum, his manibus adorare, quae foris aduersus deum adorantur, eas manus admouere corpori domini, quae daemoniis corpora conferunt ?

[1] To this point the zeal of faith will plead, groaning: that a Christian comes from the idols into the church, comes from the adversary’s workshop into the house of God; that he lifts up to God the Father the hands, the mothers of idols; that he adores with these hands—the very hands by which those things that outside are adored against God are adored; that he applies those hands to the body of the Lord, which hands offer bodies to demons ?

[2] Nec hoc sufficit. Parum sit, si ab aliis manibus accipiant quodcontaminent, sed etiam ipsae tradunt aliis quod contaminauerunt.

[2] Nor does this suffice. It would be too little, if they were to receive from other hands what they contaminate; but they also themselves hand over to others what they have contaminated.

[3] Adleguntur in ordinem ecclesiasticum artifices idolorum. Pro scelus ! Semel Iudaei Christo manus intulerunt, isti quotidie corpus eius lacessunt. O manus praecidendae ! Viderint iam, an per similitudinem dictum sit: si te manus tua scandalizat, amputa eam.

[3] Are adlected into the ecclesiastical order the craftsmen of idols. O crime! Once the Jews to Christ laid hands, these men every day assail his body. O hands to be cut off! Let them now see, whether it was said by similitude: if your hand scandalizes you, amputate it.

Quae magis amputandae, quam in quibus domini corpus scandalizatur?

Which hands are more to be amputated than those by which the Lord’s body is scandalized?

VIII.

[1] Sunt et aliae conplurium artium species, quae, etsi non contingunt idolorum fabricationem, tamen ea, sine quibus idola, nil possunt, eodem crimine expediunt. Nec enim differt, an extruas uel exornes, si templum, si aram, si aediculam eius instruxeris, si bratteam expresseris aut insignia aut etiam domum fabricaueris. Maior est eiusmodi opera, quae non effigiem confert, sed auctoritatem.

[1] There are also other types of many arts which, although they do not touch the fabrication of idols, nevertheless those things, without which idols, can do nothing, they accomplish under the same charge. For it makes no difference whether you erect or adorn, if you have furnished its temple, its altar, its aedicule, if you have pressed out the metal leaf or the insignia or even have built a house. Greater is the work of such a kind, which confers not the effigy but the authority.

[2] Si ita necessitas exhibitionisextenditur, habent et alias species, quae sine exorbitatione disciplinae id est sine idoli confictura opem uictus praestent. Scit albarius tector et tecta sarcire et tectoria inducere et cisternam liare et cymatia distendere et multa alia ornamenta praeter simulacra parietibus incrispare. Scit et pictor et marmorarius et aerarius et quicumque caelator latitudines suas et utique multo faciliores.

[2] If thus the necessity of exhibitionis extended, they have also other kinds which without an exorbitation of the discipline, that is, without the idol’s fashioning, provide help for livelihood. The whitewasher-plasterer knows both to patch roofs and to lay on plasters and to line a cistern and to stretch out cymatia and to incrust walls with many other ornaments besides simulacra, to incrust. The painter too knows, and the marble-worker and the bronzesmith and any engraver-chaser, their own latitudes—and assuredly much easier ones.

[3] Nam qui signumdescribit, quanto facilius abacum linit? Qui de tilia Martem exculpit, quanto citius armarium compingit? Nulla ars non alterius artis aut mater aut propinqua est.

[3] For he who a statuedelineates, how much more easily does he coat an abacus (panel)? He who sculpts Mars from linden-wood, how much more swiftly does he assemble a cupboard? There is no art which is not either the mother of another art or akin to it.

Nihil alterius uacat. Tot sunt artium uenae, quot hominum concupiscentiae. Sed de mercedibus et manus pretiis interest.

Nothing is vacant of another. There are as many veins of the arts as there are desires of men. But there is a difference in wages and in hand-prices.

Perinde interest et de labore. Minor merces frequentiore actu repensatur.

Likewise it matters also concerning labor. A lesser wage is compensated by more frequent action.

[4] Quot parietes signa desiderant? Quot templa et aedes idolis aedificantur? Domus uero et praetoria et balnea et insulae quantae?

[4] How many walls long for statues? How many temples and edifices are built for idols? And houses and praetoria and baths and apartment-blocks—how vast they are?

Soccus et baxa quotidie deauratur, Mercurius et Serapis non quotidie. Sufficiat ad quaestum artificiorum. Frequentior est omni superstitione luxuria et ambitio.

The soccus and the baxa are gilded every day gilded, Mercury and Serapis not every day. Let it suffice for the gain of the crafts. Luxury and ambition are more frequent than all superstition.

Lances et scyphos facilius ambitio quam superstitio desiderabit.

Platters and scyphi will be more readily desired by ambition than by superstition.

[5] Coronas quoque magis luxuria quam sollemnitas erogat. Cum igitur ad haec artificiorum genera cohortemur, quae idolum quidem et quae idolo competunt non adtingant, sint autem et hominibus communia saepe quae et idolis, hoc quoque cauere debemus, ne quid scientibus nobis ab aliquibus de manibus nostris in rem idolorum postuletur. Quod si concesserimus et non remediis iam usitatis egerimus, non puto nos a contagio idololatriae uacare, quorum manus non ignorantium in officio uel in honore et usu daemoniorum deprehenduntur.

[5] Crowns, too, are disbursed more by luxury than by solemnity. Therefore, when we exhort to these kinds of crafts, let them not touch those things which are indeed the idol itself and which belong to the idol; but since there are also things often common to humans which are also to idols, we must beware of this too, that nothing, with our knowledge, be requested by some from our hands for the purpose of idols. But if we have conceded this and have not proceeded with remedies now customary, I do not think we are free from the contagion of idolatry, whose hands, not being ignorant, are caught in the service or in the honor and use of demons.

IX.

[1] Animaduertimus inter artes etiam professiones quasdam obnoxiasidololatriae. De astrologis ne loquendum quidem est. Sed quoniam quidam istis diebus prouocauit defendens sibi perseuerantiam professionis istius, paucis utar.

[1] We have observed among the arts also certain professions obnoxious toidolatry. As for astrologers, there is not even need to speak. But since someone in these days has provoked, defending for himself the perseverance of that profession, I will be brief.

Non allego, quod idola honoret, quorum nomina caelo inscripsit, quibus omnem dei potestatem addixit, quod propterea homines non putant deum requirendum praesumentes stellarum nos immutabili arbitrio agi: unum propono, angelos esse illos desertores dei, amatores feminarum, proditores etiam huius curiositatis, propterea quoque damnatos a deo.

I do not allege that he honors idols, whose names he has inscribed in heaven, to which he has assigned all the power of God, so that on that account men do not think God must be sought, presuming that we are driven by the immutable arbitrament of the stars: I propound one thing, that those angels are deserters of God, lovers of women, betrayers also of this curiosity, therefore also condemned by God.

[2] O diuina sententia usque ad terrampertinax, cui etiam ignorantes testimonium reddunt ! Expelluntur mathematici, sicut angeli eorum, Vrbs et Italia interdicitur mathematicis, sicut caelum angelis eorum. Eadem poena est exilii discipulis et magistris.

[2] O divine sentence,persistent even down to the earth, to which even the ignorant render testimony! Mathematicians are expelled, just as their angels; the City and Italy are interdicted to mathematicians, as heaven to their angels. The same penalty of exile is for disciples and for teachers.

[3] Sed magi [et astrologi] ab oriente uenerunt. Scimus magiae et astrologiae inter se societatem. Primi igitur stellarum interpretes natum Christum annuntiauerunt, primi munerauerunt.

[3] But magi [and astrologers] came from the East. We know the society between magic and astrology. Therefore the first interpreters of the stars announced Christ born, and were the first to give gifts.

Hoc nomine Christum, opinor, sibi obligauerunt. Quid tum? Ideo nunc et mathematicis patrocinabitur illorum magorum religio?

By this name they, I suppose, bound Christ to themselves. What then? Will the religion of those magi therefore now also advocate for the astrologers?

De Christo scilicet est mathesis hodie, stellas Christi, non Saturni et Martis et cuiusque ex eodem ordine mortuorum obseruat et praedicat.

Of Christ of course is astrology today; it observes and proclaims the stars of Christ, not of Saturn and of Mars and of anyone from the same order of the dead.

[4] At enim scientia ista usque ad euangelium fuit concessa, ut Christo edito nemo exinde natiuitatem alicuius de caelo interpretetur. Nam et tus illud et myrram et aurum ideo infanti tunc domino obtulerunt quasi clausulam sacrificationis et gloriae saecularis, quam Christus erat adempturus.

[4] But indeed that science was conceded up to the Gospel, so that, with Christ brought forth, from then on no one should interpret anyone’s nativity from the heaven. For even that frankincense and myrrh and gold they then offered to the infant Lord for this reason, as a closing clause of sacrification and of secular glory, which Christ was about to take away.

[5] Quod igitur isdem magis somnium sine dubio ex dei uoluntate suggessit, ut irent in sua, sed alia, non qua uenerant, uia, id est, ne pristina secta sua incederent, non, ne illos Herodes persequeretur, qui nec persecutus est, etiam ignorans alia uia digressos, quoniam et qua uenerant ignorabat, adeo uiam sectam et disciplinam intellegere debemus.

[5] Therefore the dream, without doubt by the will of God, suggested to those same magi that they should go into their own [land], but by another way, not by the way by which they had come—that is, lest they proceed in their former sect, not lest Herod should persecute them, who did not even persecute them, being even ignorant that they had departed by another way, since he also was ignorant of the way by which they had come; to such a degree we ought to understand “way” as “sect” and “discipline.”

[6] Itaque magis praeceptum, ut exinde aliter incederent. Sic et alia illa species magiae, quae miraculis operatur, etiam aduersus Moysen aemulata patientia dei traxit ad euangelium usque. Nam exinde et Simon Magus iamiam fidelis, quoniam aliquid adhuc de circulatoria secta cogitaret, ut scilicet inter miracula professionis suae etiam spiritum sanctum per manuum inpositionem enundinaret, maledictus ab apostolis de fide eiectus est: alter magus, qui cum Sergio Paulo, quoniam isdem aduersabatur apostolis, luminum amissione multatus est.

[6] Therefore it was commanded to the Magi, that from then on they should proceed otherwise. Thus also that other species of magic, which operates by miracles, even having rivaled against Moses, the patience of God dragged along up to the gospel. For from then on even Simon Magus already now faithful, since he was still thinking something from his circulatorian sect, namely that among the miracles of his profession he might even vend the Holy Spirit through the imposition of hands, was accursed by the apostles and cast out from the faith: another magus, who was with Sergius Paulus, since he was opposing those same apostles, was punished with the loss of his sight.

[7] Hoc et astrologi retulissent, credo, si qui in apostolos incidisset. Attamen cum magia punitur, cuius est species astrologia, utique et species in genere damnatur. Post euangelium nusquam inuenias aut sophistas aut Chaldaeos aut incantatores aut coniectores aut magos, nisi plane punitos.

[7] This also the astrologers would have reported, I believe, if anyone had chanced upon the apostles ; nevertheless, when magic is punished, of which astrology is a species, assuredly the species is condemned in the genus. After the gospel you will find nowhere either sophists or Chaldaeans or enchanters or conjecturers or magi, unless plainly punished.

Vbi sapiens, ubi litterator, ubi conquisitor huius aeui? Nonne infatuauit deus sapientiam huius saeculi?

Where is the wise, where the man of letters, where the inquisitor of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

[8] Nihil scis,mathematice, si nesciebas te futurum Christianum. Si sciebas, hoc quoque scire debueras, nihil tibi futurum cum ista professione. Ipsa te de periculo suo instrueret, quae aliorum climacterica praecanit.

[8] You know nothing,mathematician, if you did not know that you would be a Christian. If you knew, you ought to have known this too, that you would have nothing to do with that profession. It itself would instruct you about its own peril, which foretells the climacterics of others .

Non est tibi pars neque sors in ista ratione. Non potest regna caelorum sperare cuius digitus aut radius abutitur caelo.

No part nor lot is yours in that method. He cannot hope for the kingdoms of the heavens whose digit (finger) or radius abuses heaven.

10.

[1] Quaerendum autem est etiam de ludimagistris, sed et ceteris professoribus litterarum. Immo non dubitandum affines illos esse multimodae idololatriae. Primum quibus necesse est deos nationum praedicare, nomina, genealogias, fabulas, ornamenta honorifica quaeque eorum enuntiare, tum sollemnia festaque eorundem obseruare, ut quibus uectigalia sua supputent.

[1] It must, moreover, be inquired also about the schoolmasters, but also about the other professors of letters. Nay rather, there is no doubting that they are affine to many-moded idolatry. First, they are those for whom it is necessary to proclaim the gods of the nations, to set forth the names, genealogies, fables, honorific ornaments and whatever pertains to them, then to observe their solemnities and feasts, inasmuch as by them they compute their revenues, supputent.

[2] Quis ludimagister sine tabula VII idolorum Quinquatria tamen frequentabit? Ipsam primam noui discipuli stipem Mineruae et honori et nomini consecrat, ut, etsi non profanatus alicui idolo uerbotenus de idolothyto esse dicatur, pro idololatra uitetur. Quid?

[2] What schoolmaster without a tablet of the 7 idols will nevertheless frequent the Quinquatria? He consecrates the very first fee of a new pupil to Minerva, to her honor and to her name, so that, even if not profaned to some idol in so many words, it is said to be of idolothyte to be of idolothyte, and, instead of an idolater, he is shunned. What?

Minus est inquinamenti? Eoque praestat quaestus et nominibus et honoribus idolo nuncupatus?

Is it a lesser defilement? And on that account does the business, both in names and in honors, named for the idol stand preferable?

[3]Quam Minerualia Mineruae, quam Saturnalia Saturni, quae etiam seruiculis sub tempore Saturnalium celebrari necesse est. Etiam strenuae captandae et septimontium, et Brumae et carae cognationis honoraria exigenda omnia, Florae scholae coronandae ; flaminicae et aediles sacrificant creati; schola honoratur feriis.

[3]As much the Minervalia of Minerva, as the Saturnalia of Saturn, which also it is necessary to be celebrated by little slaves during the time of the Saturnalia. Also strenae to be hunted for, and the Septimontium, and the Bruma, and the honoraria of dear kinship, all to be exacted, the schools of Flora to be garlanded ; the flaminica and the aediles sacrifice once appointed; the school is honored with holidays.

[4] Idem fit idoli natali; omnis diaboli pompa frequentatur. Quis haec competere Christiano existimabit, nisi qui putabit conuenire etiam non magistro? Scimus dici posse: si docere litteras dei seruis non licet, etiam nec discere licebit, et, quomodo quis institueretur ad prudentiam interim humanam uel ad quemcumque sensum uel actum, cum instrumentum sit ad omnem uitam litteratura?

[4] The same is done on the idol’s natal day; all the devil’s pomp is frequented. Who will think these things to befit a Christian, unless it be one who will suppose them to be fitting even not as a teacher? We know it can be said: if it is not permitted to teach letters to the servants of God, then neither will it be permitted to learn, and how will anyone be instituted toward prudence, for the meanwhile human, or toward any sense or act, since literature is an instrument for the whole of life literature?

Quomodo repudiamus saecularia studia, sine quibus diuina non possunt?

How shall we repudiate secular studies, without which divine things are not possible?

[5] Videamus igitur necessitatem litteratoriae eruditionis, respiciamus ex parte eam admitti [non] posse, ex parte uitari. Fideles magis discere quam docere litteras capit; diuersa est enim ratio discendi et docendi. Si fidelis litteras doceat, insertas idolorum praedicationes sine dubio, dum docet, commendat, dum tradit, affirmat, dum commemorat, testimonium dicit.

[5] Let us see, therefore, the necessity of literary erudition; let us consider that in part it can be admitted [not], and in part avoided. It befits the faithful rather to learn letters than to teach them; for the rationale of learning and of teaching is different. If a faithful person should teach letters, inserted preachments of idols, without doubt, while he teaches, he commends; while he hands down, he affirms; while he commemorates, he gives testimony.

[6] Deos ipsos hoc nomine obsignat, cum lex prohibeat, ut diximus, deos pronuntiari et nomen hoc in uano conlocari. Hinc prima diabolo fides aedificatur ab initiis eruditionis. Quaere, an idololatrian committat qui de idolis catechizat.

[6] the gods
themselves he seals with this name, since the law forbids, as we said, that the gods be pronounced and
that this name be placed in vain. Hence the first faith to the devil is built from the beginnings
of erudition. Ask whether he commits idololatry who catechizes about idols.

At cum fidelis haec discit, si iam sapit, quid sit, neque recipit neque admittit, multo magis, si dudum sapit. Aut ubi coeperit sapere, prius sapiat oportet quod prius didicit, id est de deo et fide. Proinde illa respuet nec recipiet et erit tam tutus, quam qui sciens uenenum ab ignaro accipit nec bibit.

But when the faithful man learns these things, if he already is wise, what it is, he neither receives nor admits it, much more, if long he has been wise. Or when he begins to be wise, he ought first to be wise in what he first learned, that is, about God and faith. Accordingly he will spit it out and will not receive it, and he will be as safe as one who, knowing the venom, accepts it from an ignorant man and does not drink.

[7] Huic necessitas ad excusationem deputatur, quia aliter discere non potest. Tanto autem facilius est litteras non docere quam non discere, quanto et reliqua scholarum de publicis ac propriis sollemnitatibus inquinamenta facilius discipulis fidelis non adibit quam magister non frequentabit.

[7] To this one necessity is reckoned for an excuse, because otherwise he cannot learn. Moreover, it is by so much easier not to teach letters than not to learn them, as also the remaining pollutions of the schools from public and private solemnities a faithful pupil will more easily not approach than a master will not frequent.

XI.

11.

[1] + De generationibus si cetera delictorum recogitemus, inprimis cupiditatem radicem omnium malorum, qua quidam inretiti circa fidem naufragium sunt passi, cum bis et idololatria ab eodem apostolo dicta sit cupiditas, tum mendacium cupiditatis ministrum -- taceo de periurio, quando ne iurare quidem liceat -- negotiatio seruo dei apta est? Ceterum si cupiditas abscedat, quae est causa adquirendi? Cessante causa adquirendi non erit necessitas negotiandi.

[1] + On genealogies, if we call to mind the rest of the offenses, in the first place cupidity, the root of all evils, by which certain men, ensnared, have suffered shipwreck concerning the faith, since cupidity has by that same apostle been called even idolatry—twice—then mendacity, the minister of cupidity -- I am silent about perjury, since it is not even permitted to swear -- is negotiation (trade) suitable for a servant of God? Moreover, if cupidity withdraws, what is the cause of acquiring? With the cause of acquiring ceasing, there will not be a necessity of negotiating.

[2] Sit nunc aliqua iustitia quaestus secura de cupiditatis et mendacii obseruatione, in crimen offendere idololatriae eam opinor, quae ad ipsam idolorum animam et spiritum, pertinet, quae omne daemonium saginat. Sane non illa principalis idololatria? Viderint, si eaedem merces, tura dico et cetera peregrinitatis ad sacrificium idolorum etiam hominibus ad pigmenta medicinalia, nobis quoque insuper ad solacia sepulturae usui sunt.

[2] Suppose now there is some justice of gain, secure as to the observance regarding greed and lying; I think it incurs the charge of idolatry, which pertains to the very soul and spirit of idols, which fattens every demon. Granted, it is not that principal idolatry? Let them see to it, if the same wares—frankincense, I mean, and the other things of foreignness— ad the sacrifice of idols are also of use to men for medicinal pigments, and to us besides for the solaces of burial.

Certe cum pompae, cum sacerdotia, cum sacrificia idolorum de periculis, de damnis, de incommodis, de cogitationibus, de discursibus negotiationibusne instruuntur, quid aliud quam procurator idolorum demonstraris? Nemo contendat posse hoc modo omnibus negotiationibus controuersiam fieri.

Surely, when the pomps, the priesthoods, the sacrifices of idols are set up with respect to perils, to damages, to inconveniences, to cogitations, to excursions, or to negotiations, what else are you shown to be than a procurator of idols? Let no one contend that in this way a controversy can be made for all negotiations.

[3] Grauiora delicta quaeque pro magnitudine periculi diligentiam extendunt obseruationis, ut non ab his tantum abscedamus, sed et ab iis per quae fiunt. Licet enim ab aliis fiat, non interest, si per me.

[3] Graver delicts, each according to the magnitude of the peril, extend the diligence of observation, so that we withdraw not only from these, but also from those things through which they are done. For although it may be done by others, it makes no difference, if through me.

[4] In nullo necessarius esse debeo alii, cum facit quod mihi non licet. Ex hoc, quod uetor facere, intellegere debeo curandum mihi esse, ne fiat per me. Denique in alia causa non leuioris reatus praeiudicium istud obseruo. Nam quod mihi de stupro interdictum sit, aliis ad eam rem nihil aut operae aut conscientiae exhibeo.

[4] In no case ought I to be necessary to another when he does what is not permitted to me. From this fact, that I am forbidden to do it, I ought to understand that I must take care that it not be done through me. Finally, in another case of no lighter guilt I observe this precedent. For, since to me in the matter of stuprum it is interdicted, to others for that affair I render nothing either of service or of conscience.

[5] Nam quod ipsam carnem meam a lupanaribus segregaui, agnosco me neque lenocinium neque id genus lucrum alterius causa exercere posse. Sic et homicidii interdictio ostendit mihi lanistam quoque ab ecclesia arceri: nec per se non faciet quod faciendum alio subministrat. Ecce magis proximum praeiudicium.

[5] For in that I have segregated my very flesh from brothels, I acknowledge that I cannot exercise either lenociny nor profit of that kind for the sake of another. Thus also the interdiction of homicide shows me that the lanista too is to be the church barred: nor per se does he not do what, to be done, he supplies to another. Behold the nearer precedent.

[6] Si publicarum uictimarum redemptor ad fidem accedat, permittes ei in eo negotio permanere? Aut si iam fidelis id agere susceperit, retinendum in ecclesia putabis? Non opinor, nisi si quis et de turario dissimulabit.

[6] If a contractor of public sacrificial victims should accede to the faith, will you permit him to remain in that business? Or if, already faithful, he has undertaken to do that, will you think him to be retained in the church? I do not think so, unless someone will also dissimulate about the incense-seller.

Scilicet ad alios peruenit procuratio sanguinis, ad alios odorum. Si, antequam idola in saeculo essent, his mercibus adhuc informis idololatria transigebatur, si et nunc fere sine idolo opus idololatriae incendiis odorum perpetratur, ecquid maioris operae et erga daemonia turarius ?

Clearly to some falls the procuration of blood, to others that of odors. If, before idols were in the world, by these wares an as-yet formless idolatry was transacted, if even now almost without an idol the work of idolatry is accomplished by the burnings of odors, is there any greater service, even toward the demons, that the incense-seller renders ?

[7] Nam facilius sine idolo idololatria, quam sine turarii merce. Ipsius fidei conscientiam perrogermus. Quo ore Christianus turarius, si per templa transibit, quo ore fumantes aras despuet et exsufflabit, quibus ipse prospexit?

[7] For more easily without an idol is idololatry, than without the incense-dealer’s merchandise. Let us further question the conscience of the faith itself. With what mouth will a Christian incense-dealer, if he passes through temples, with what mouth will he spit upon and exsufflate the smoking altars, which he himself has provided?

Qua constantia exorcizabit alumnos suos, quibus domum suam cellarium praestat? Ille quidem si excluserit daemonmm, non sibi placeat de fide. Neque enim inimicum exclusit.

With what constancy will he exorcize his pupils, for whom he furnishes his own house as a cellarium? Indeed, even if he has driven out demons, let him not be pleased with himself about the faith. For he has not shut out the enemy.

[8] Facile debuit de eo impetrare, quem cotidie pascit. Nulla igitur ars, nulla professio, nulla negotiatio, quae quid aut instruendis aut formandis idolis administrat, carere poterit titulo idololatriae; nisi si aliud omnino interpretemur idololatrian, quam famulatum idolorum colendorum.

[8] He ought easily to have obtained it from him whom every day he feeds. Therefore no art, no profession, no trade, which in any way administers anything either for the furnishing or for the forming of idols, will be able to be free of the title of idolatry; unless indeed we interpret idolatry altogether as something other than the servitude of idols to be worshiped.

XII.

12.

[1] Male nobis de necessitatibus humanae exhibitionis supplaudimus, si post fidem obsignatam dicimus: non habeo quo uiuam. Iam hic enim plenius illi abruptae propositioni respondebo. Sero dicitur.

[1] We wrongly applaud ourselves about the necessities of human provisioning, if after faith has been sealed we say: I have nothing with which to live. Now here indeed I will answer more fully that abruptly broken proposition. It is said too late.

Ante enim fuit deliberandum ex similitudine prouidentissimi aedificis illius, qui prius sumptus operis cum uiribus suis supputat, ne, ubi coeperit, defectus postea erubescat.

For beforehand there ought to have been deliberation, after the similitude of that most provident builder, who first computes the expenses of the work with his own resources, lest, when he has begun, a defect later make him blush.

[2] Sed et nunc habes dicta domini et exempla adimentia tibi omnem causationem. Quid enim dicis?

[2] But even now you have the sayings of the Lord and examples taking away from you every pretext. What indeed do you say?

Egebo. Sed felices egenos dominus appellat. Victum non habebo: sed nolite, inquit, cogitare de uictu.

I shall be indigent. But the Lord calls the indigent blessed. I shall not have victuals; but, “do not,” he says, “take thought about victuals.”

Et uestitus habemus exemplum lilia. Substantia milti opus erat: atquin omnia uendenda sunt et egentibus diuidenda. Sed filiis et posteritati prouidendum: nemo aratro manum imponens et retro spectans aptus est

And for clothing we have the example, the lilies. I had need of substance; but rather all things must be sold and divided to the needy. But provision must be made for sons and for posterity: no one, laying a hand upon the plough and looking back, is fit for the work

Sed"--> operi. Sed condicionalis eram: nemo duobus dominis seruire potest. Si uis domini discipulus esse, crucem tuam tollas et dominum sequaris necesse est id est angustias et cruciatus tuos uel corpus solum, quod in modum crucis est.

But"--> to the work. But it was conditional: no one can serve two masters. If you wish to be a disciple of the Lord, you must take up your cross and follow the Lord; that is, your anguishes and cruciations, or the body alone, which is in the mode of a cross.

[3] Parentes, coniuges, liberi propter deum relinquendi erunt. De artibus et negotiationibus et de professionibus etiam liberorum et parentum causa dubitas? Iam tunc demonstratum est nobis et pignera et artificia et negotia propter dominum derelinquenda, cum Iacob et Iohannes uocati a domino et patrem nauemque derelinquunt, cum Matthaeus de teloneo suscitatur, cum etiam sepelire patrem tardum fuit fidei.

[3] Parents, spouses, children will have to be left on account of God. About the arts and negotiations and about professions—even for the sake of children and parents—do you doubt? Already then it was shown to us that both pledges and crafts and businesses are to be abandoned for the sake of the lord, when Jacob and John, called by the lord, leave their father and their ship; when Matthew is raised from the tax-booth; when even to bury a father was a slowness of faith.

[4] Nemo eorum, quos dominus allegit, non habeo, dixit, quo uiuam. Fides famem non timet. Scit etiam famem non minus sibi contemnendam propter deum quam omne mortis genus.

[4] No one of those whom the lord chose said, "I do not have where to live." Faith does not fear famine. It knows also that famine is no less to be contemned for God than every kind of death.

Didicit non respicere uitam, quanto magis uictum? Quotusquisque haec adimpleuit? Sed quae penes homines difficilia, penes deum facilia.

Faith has learned not to look back to life; how much more to sustenance? How many have fulfilled these things? But the things which are difficult with men are easy with God.

[5] Sic tamen nobis de mansuetudine et clementia dei blandiamur, ut non usque ad idololatriae affinitates necessitatibus largiamur, sed omnem afflatum eius uice pestis etiam de longinquodeuitemus, non in his tantum quae praemisimus, sed in uniuersa serie humanae superstitionis, siue deis suis siue defunctis siue regibus mancipatae, ut ad eosdem spiritus immundos pertinentis, modo per sacrificia et sacerdotia, modo per spectacula et hoc genus, modo per festos dies.

[5] Thus nevertheless let us soothe ourselves with the mansuetude and clemency of God, so that we do not, on account of necessities, grant allowances to the affinities of idolatry, but let us shun every breath of it, in the stead of a pestilence, even from afarlet us avoid, not in these only which we have previously set forth, but in the entire series of human superstition, whether enslaved to its own gods or to the dead or to kings, as pertaining to the same unclean spirits, now through sacrifices and priesthoods, now through spectacles and this kind, now through festal days.

XIII.

13.

[1] Sed de sacrificiis et sacerdotiis quid loquar? De spectaculis autem et uoluptatibus eiusmodi suum iam uolumen impleuimus. Hoc loco retractari oportet de festis diebus et aliis extraordinariis sollemnitatibus, quas interdum lasciuiae, interdum timiditati nostrae subscribimus aduersus fidem disciplinamque communicantes nationibus in idolicis rebus.

[1] But of sacrifices and priesthoods what shall I speak? As for spectacles and pleasures of such a kind, we have already filled their own volume. In this place it ought to be taken up again concerning feast days and other extraordinary solemnities, which sometimes to wantonness, sometimes to our own timidity we subscribe, against the faith and the discipline, communicating with the nations in idolic matters.

[2] De hoc quidem primo consistam, an cum ipsis quoque nationibus communicare in huiusmodi seruus dei debeat siue habitu siue uictu uel quo alio genere laetitiae earum. Gaudere cum gaudentibus et lugere cum lugentibus de fratribus dictum est ab apostolo ad unanimitatem cohortante.

[2] On this point indeed I will first take my stand, whether the servant of God ought to communicate with the nations themselves also in festivities of thissort, either in habit or in victuals or in whatever other kind of joy of theirs. To rejoice with those who rejoice and to mourn with those who mourn was said about brothers by the apostle as he exhorted to unanimity.

[3] Ceterum ad haec nihil communionis est lumini et tenebris, uitae et morti, aut scindimus quod est scriptum: saeculum gaudebit, uos uero lugebitis. Si cum saeculo gaudemus, uerendum est, ne cum saeculo et lugeamus.

[3] Moreover as to these points, there is no communion between light and darkness, life and death, or are we rending what is written: the world will rejoice, but you indeed will mourn. If with the world we rejoice, it is to be feared, lest with the world we also mourn.

[4]Saeculo autem gaudente lugeamus et saeculo postea lugente gaudebimus. Sic et Eleazar apud inferos in sinu Abrahae refrigerium consecutus, contra diues in tormento ignis constitutus alternas malorum et bonorum uices aemula retributione compensant. Sunt quidam dies munerum, quae apud alios honoris titulum, apud alios mercedis debitum expungunt.

[4]While the world however, as it rejoices, let us mourn and, when the world afterwards mourns, we shall rejoice. Thus also Eleazar in the infernal regions, in the bosom of Abraham, having obtained refreshment, whereas the rich man, set in the torment of fire, by an emulous retribution compensate the alternate vicissitudes of evils and of goods. There are certain days of gifts, which among some expunge the title of honor, among others the debt of wages.

[5]Nunc ergo, inquis, recipiam meum uel rependam alienum. Si hunc morem sibi homines de superstitione consecrauerunt, tu extraneus ab omni eorum uanitate quid participas idolothyta sollemnia, quasi tibi quoque praescriptum sit de die, quominus id, quod homini debes uel tibi ab homine debetur, citra diei obseruationem luas uel recipias.

[5]Now therefore, you say, shall I reclaim what is mine or repay what is another’s? If men have consecrated this custom to themselves out of superstition, you, an outsider from all their vanity, why do you participate in idolothyte solemnities, as if it were prescribed for you also concerning the day, that you should not, what you owe to a man or what is owed to you by a man, without the observation of the day, discharge or receive.

[6] Da formam, in qua uelis agi tecum. Cur enim et lateas, cum ignorantia alterius tuam conscientiam contamines? Si non ignoraris quod sis Christianus, temptaris et contra conscientiam alterius agis tamquam non Christianus: sin uero et dissimulaueris, temptatus addictus es. Certe siue hac siue illac, reus es confusionis in deo.

[6] Give the form, in which you wish to be dealt with. For why also should you lie hidden, when by the other’s ignorance you contaminate your conscience? If it is not unknown that you are a Christian, you are tempted and you act against the other’s conscience as though not a Christian: but if indeed you also have dissembled, having been tempted you are bound over. Certainly, whether this way or that, you are guilty of confusion before God.

Qui autem confusus super me fuerit penes homines, et ego confundar super illo, inquit, penes patrem meum, qui est in caelis.

But whoever shall have been ashamed of me before men, I too will be ashamed of him, he says, before my Father, who is in the heavens.

XIV.

14.

[1] Sed enim plerique iam induxerunt animo ignoscendum esse, si quando, quae ethnici, faciunt, ne nomen blasphemetur. Porro blasphemia, quae nobis omni modo deuitanda est, haec opinor est, si qui nostrum ad iustam blasphemiam ethnicum deducat aut fraude aut iniuria aut contumelia aliaue materia dignae querelae, in qua nomen merito percutitur, ut merito irascatur et dominus.

[1] But indeed many have already brought into their mind that it is to be forgiven, if ever they do the things which the Gentiles do, lest the Name be blasphemed. Moreover, the blasphemy which is in every way to be avoided by us—this, I suppose, is: if any of us should lead a Gentile to just blasphemy either by fraud or by injury or by contumely or by some other matter of a complaint worthy of mention, in which the Name is struck with good cause, so that the Lord also is deservedly angered.

[2] Ceterum si de omni blasphemia dictum est, uestra causa nomen meum blasphematur, perimus uniuersi, cum totus circus scelestis suffragiis nullo merito nomen lacessit. Desinamus, et non blasphemabitur. Immo blasphemetur, dum sumus in obseruatione, non in exorbitatione disciplinae, dum probamur, non dum reprobamur.

[2] Moreover if it has been said of every blasphemy, for your sake my name is blasphemed, we all perish, since the whole circus with criminal suffrages, by no desert, provokes the name. Let us cease, and it will not be blasphemed. Nay rather, let it be blasphemed, so long as we are in observance, not in the exorbitation of discipline, while we are approved, not while we are reprobated.

[3]O blasphemiam martyrii adfinem, quae tunc me testatur Christianum, cum propterea me detestatur ! Benedictio est nominis maledictio custoditae disciplinae. Si hominibus, inquit, uellem placere, seruus Christi non essem. Sed idem alibi iubet, omnibus placere curemus.

[3]O blasphemy akin to martyrdom, which then testifies me Christian, when for that very reason it detests me ! The malediction of the name is a benediction of guarded discipline. If to men, he says, I were willing to please, I would not be a servant of Christ. But the same man elsewhere bids that we take care to please all.

Quemadmodum ego, inquit, omnibus per omnia placeo.

Just as I, he says, I please all in all things.

[4] Nimirum Saturnalia et Kalendas Ianuarias celebrans hominibus placebat? An modestia et patientia? An grauitate, an humanitate, an integritate?

[4] Surely Saturnalia and the Kalends of January celebrating, to men pleasing? Or by modesty and patience? Or by gravity, or by humanity, or by integrity?

Proinde cum dicit, omnibus omnia factus sum, ut omnes lucrifaciam: numquid idololatris idololatres ? Numquid ethnicis ethnicus? Numquid saecularibus saecularis?

Accordingly, when he says, I have become all things to all, so that I may gain all: was he to idolaters an idolater ? Was he to the pagans a pagan (ethnic)? Was he to the seculars secular?

[5] Sed etsi non prohibet nos conuersari cum idololatris et adulteris et ceteris criminosis dicens, ceterum de mundo exiretis, non utique eas habenas conuersationis inmittit, ut, quoniam necesse est et conuiuere nos et commisceri cum peccatoribus, idem et compeccare possimus. Vbi est commercium uitae, quod apostolus concedit, ibi ** peccare, quod nemo permittit. Licet conuiuere cum ethnicis, commori non licet.

[5] But even if he does not forbid us to associate with idolaters and adulterers and the other criminal persons, saying, otherwise you would go out of the world, he by no means lets loose those reins of association he lets loose, so that, since it is necessary both to co-live with and to commix with sinners, we may likewise be able to co-sin. Where there is the commerce of life, which the apostle grants, there ** to sin, which no one permits. It is permitted to co-live with pagans, it is not permitted to co-die with them.

Conuiuamus cum omnibus; conlaetemur ex communione naturae, non superstitionis. Pares anima sumus, non disciplina, compossessores mundi, non erroris.

Let us live with all; let us rejoice together from the communion
of nature, not of superstition. We are equal in soul, not in discipline, co-possessors
of the world, not of error.

[6] Quod si nobis nullum ius est communionis in huiusmodi cum extraneis, quanto scelestius est haec inter fratres frequentare. Quis hoc sustinere aut defendere potest? Iudaeis dies suos festos exprobrat spiritus sanctus.

[6] But if to us there is no right of communion in things of this kind with outsiders, how much more wicked is it to frequent these among brothers. Who can sustain or defend this? The Holy Spirit reproaches the Jews for their festal days.

Sabbata, inquit, uestra et numenias et ceremonias odit anima mea. Nobis, quibus sabbata extranea sunt et numeniae et feriae a deo aliquando dilectae, Saturnalia et Ianuariae et Brumae et Matronales frequentantur, munera commeant et strenae, consonant lusus, conuiuia constrepunt.

“Your sabbaths and new moons and ceremonies my soul hates,” he says. For us, to whom sabbaths are foreign, and new moons and the holy days once loved by God, the Saturnalia and the January Kalends and the Bruma and the Matronalia are frequented, gifts go to and fro and New-Year’s gifts, games sound in unison, banquets resound with din.

[7] O melior fides nationum in suam sectam, quae nullam sollemnitatem Christianorum sibi uindicat ! Non dominicum diem, non pentecosten, etiamsi nossent, nobiscum communicassent; timerent enim, ne Christiani uiderentur. Nos ne ethnici pronuntiemur, non ueremur. Si quid et carni indulgendum est, habes, non dicam tuos dies tantum, sed et plures.

[7] O better faith of the nations for their own sect, which claims for itself no solemnity of the Christians claims for itself ! Not the Lord’s day, not Pentecost, even if they had known them, with us they would have shared; for they would fear, lest they should seem Christians. We, lest we be pagans pronounced, do not fear. If also anything is to be indulged to the flesh, you have, not say your days only, but even more.

Nam ethnicis semel annuus dies quisque festus est, tibi octauo quoque die. Excerpe singulas sollemnitates nationum et in ordinem exsere: pentecosten implere non poterunt.

For the pagans, each festal day is once in the year, for you every eighth day. Pick out the individual solemnities of the nations and set them out in order : they will not be able to fill pentecost.

XV.

15.

[1] Sed luceant, inquit, opera uestra. At nunc lucent tabernae et ianuae nostrae. Plures iam inuenias ethnicorum fores sine lucernis et laureis, quam Christianorum.

[1] But “let works your shine,” he says. But now shine our shops and doorways. More by now you would find doors of pagans without lamps and laurels than of Christians.

De ista quoque specie quid uidetur? Si idoli honor est, sine dubio idoli honor idololatria est. Si hominis causa est, recogitemus omnem idololatrian in hominis causam esse.

Concerning this species as well, what seems? If it is the honor of an idol, without doubt the honor of an idol is idololatry. If it is for the sake of a man, let us reconsider that all idololatry is on a man's account.

[2] Recogitemus omnem idololatrian in homines esse culturam, cum ipsos deos nationum homines retro fuisse etiam apud suos constet. Itaque nihil interest, superioris an huius saeculi uiris superstitio ista praestetur. Idololatria non propter personas, quae opponuntur, sed propter officia ista damnata est, quae ad daemonas pertinent.

[2] Let us reconsider all idolatry to be a cult toward men, since it is established that the very gods of the nations were formerly men even among their own people. And so it makes no difference, whether to men of a former or of this age that superstition is rendered. Idolatry is condemned not on account of the persons, who are set up, but on account of those offices/rites which are damned, which to daemons pertain.

[3] Reddenda sunt Caesari quae sunt Caesaris. Bene quod apposuit: et quae sunt dei deo. Quae ergo sunt Caesaris?

[3] The things that are Caesar’s are to be rendered to Caesar. Well that he appended: and the things that are God’s to God. What then are Caesar’s?

Scilicet de quibus tunc consultatio mouebatur, praestandusne esset census Caesari an non. Ideo et monetam ostendi sibi dominus postulauit et de imagine, cuius esset, requisiuit, et cum audisset Caesaris, reddite, ait, quae sunt Caesaris Caesari, et quae sunt dei deo, id est imaginem Caesaris Caesari, quae in nummo est, et imaginem dei deo, quae in homine est, ut Caesari quidem pecuniam reddas, deo temetipsum.

Namely, about which at that time the consultation was being stirred, whether the census (tribute) ought to be paid to Caesar or not. Therefore the Lord also demanded that a coin be shown to him and inquired about the image, whose it was; and when he had heard “Caesar’s,” he said, “render the things that are Caesar’s to Caesar, and the things that are God’s to God,” that is: the image of Caesar to Caesar, which is on the coin, and the image of God to God, which is in the human being, so that to Caesar you render money, to God your very self.

[4] Alioquin quid erit dei, si omnia Caesaris? Ergo, inquis, honor dei est lucernae pro foribus et laurus in postibus? Non utique quod dei honor est, sed quod eius, qui pro deo eiusmodi officiis honoratur, quantum in manifesto est, salua operatione, quae est in occulto, ad daemonia perueniens.

[4] Otherwise, what will be God’s, if everything is Caesar’s? Therefore, you say, is the honor of God lamps before the doors and laurel on the doorposts? Not, to be sure, what is the honor of God, but what is of him who, in place of God, is honored by such services, in so far as it is in the manifest, with the operation, which is in the occult, being intact, reaching to the daemons.

[5] Certi enim esse debemus, si quos latet per ignorantiam litteraturae saecularis, etiam ostioram deos apud Romanos, Cardeam a cardinibus appellatam et Forculum a foribus et Limentinum a limine et ipsum Ianum a ianua: et utique scimus, licet nomina inania atque conficta sint, cum tamen in superstitionem deducuntur, rapere ad se daemonia et omnem spiritum inmundum per consecrationis obligamentum.

[5] We ought indeed to be certain, if it escapes some through ignorance of secular literature, that even the gods of doorways among the Romans—Cardea, called named from the hinges, and Forculus from the doors, and Limentinus from the threshold, and Janus himself from the doorway: and of course we know, although the names are empty and fabricated, yet when they are led down into superstition, they draw to themselves daemons and every unclean spirit through the bond of consecration binding.

[6] Alioquin daemonia nullum habent nomensingillatim, sed ibi nomen inueniunt, ubi et pignus. Etiam apud Graecos Apollinem Thyraeum et Antelios daemonas ostiorum praesides legimus. Haec igitur ab initio praeuidens spiritus sanctus etiam ostia in superstitionem uentura praececinit per antiquissimum propheten Enoch. Nam et alia ostia in balneis adorari uidemus.

[6] Otherwise demons have no nameindividually, but they find a name there where there is also a pledge. We also read among the Greeks of Apollo Thyraeus and of the Antelii, demons presiding over doorways. Therefore, the Holy Spirit, foreseeing these things from the beginning, foretold even the doors to be coming into superstition through the most ancient prophet Enoch. For we also see other doors being worshiped in bathhouses.

[7] Si autem sunt qui in ostiis adorentur, ad eos et lucernae et laureae pertinebunt. Idolo feceris, quicquid ostio feceris. Hoc in loco ex auctoritate quoque dei contestor, quia nec tutum est subtrahere, quodcumque uni fuerit ostensum utique omnium causa.

[7] If however there are those who are worshipped at the doorways, to them will pertain both lamps and laurels. Whatever you do to the doorway, you will have done to an idol. In this place I also attest from the authority of God, because it is not safe to withhold whatever shall have been shown to one, assuredly for the cause of all.

Scio fratrem per uisionem eadem nocte castigatum grauiter, quod ianuam eius subito adnuntiatis gaudiis publicis serui coronassent.

I know that a brother was gravely castigated by a vision on that same night, because the servants had crowned his door upon the sudden announcement of public rejoicings.

[8] Et tamen non ipse coronauerat aut praeceperat; nam ante processerat et regressus reprehenderat factum. Adeo apud deum in huiusmodi etiam disciplina familiae nostrae aestimamur. Igitur quod attineat ad honores regum uel imperatorum, satis praescriptum habemus, in omni obsequio esse nos oportere secundum apostoli praeceptum subditos magistratibus et principibus et potestatibus, sed intra limites disciplinae, quousque ab idololatria separamur.

[8] And yet he himself had not crowned nor had he commanded; for he had gone out beforehand and, on returning, had rebuked the deed. To such a degree before God, in matters of this kind, even the discipline of our household we are assessed. Therefore, as it pertains to the honors of kings or emperors, we have sufficiently a prescription, that we ought to be in all obedience, according to the apostle’s precept, subject to magistrates and princes and powers, but within the limits of discipline, in so far as we are separated from idolatry.

[9] Propterea enim et illud exemplum trium fratrum praecucurrit, qui alias obsequentes erga regem Nabuchodonosor honorem imaginis eius constantissime respuerunt probantes idololatrian esse, quicquid ultra humani honoris modum ad instar diuinae sublimitatis extollitur.

[9] For this reason too that example of the three brethren ran before, who, otherwise obsequious toward King Nebuchadnezzar, most steadfastly spurned the honor of his image, proving it to be idolatry, whatever is extolled beyond the measure of human honor into the likeness of divine sublimity.

[10] Sic et Daniel cetera Dario subnixus tamdiu fuit in officio, quamdiu a periculo disciplinae uacaret. Nam ne id subiret, non magis leones regios timuit, quam illi regios ignes. Accendant igitur quotidie lucernas, quibus lux nulla est, affigant postibus lauros postmodum arsuras, quibus ignes imminent; illis competunt et testimonia tenebrarum et auspicia poenarum.

[10] Thus also Daniel, supported by Darius in other respects, remained in office as long as he was free from the peril of discipline. For, to avoid undergoing that, he no more feared the royal lions than those men feared the royal fires. Let them, then, light every day lamps which have no light, let them affix to the doorposts laurels destined thereafter to burn, over which fires impend; for them befit both the testimonies of darkness and the auspices of punishments.

[11] Tu lumen es mundi et arbor uirens semper. Si templis renuntiasti, ne feceris templum ianuam tuam. Minus dixi: si lupanaribus renuntiasti, ne indueris domui tuae faciem noui lupanaris.

[11] You are the light of the world and an ever-green tree. If you have renounced temples, do not make your doorway a temple. I have said less: if you have renounced brothels, do not clothe your house with the face of a new brothel.

XVI.

16.

[1] Circa officia uero priuatarum et communium sollemnitatum, ut togae purae, ut sponsalium, ut nuptialium, ut nominalium, nullum outem periculum obseruari de flatu idololatriae, quae interuenit.

[1] Concerning the offices indeed of private and common solemnities, such as of the toga pura, such as of sponsals, such as of nuptials, such as of nominalia, no danger, moreover, is observed from the breath of idololatry, which intervenes.

[2] Causae enim sunt considerandae, quibus praestatur officium. Eas mundas esse opinor per semetipsas, quia neque uestitus uirilis neque anulus aut coniunctio maritalis de alicuius idoli honore descendit. Nullum denique cultum a deo maledictum inuenio, nisi muliebrem in uiro.

[2] For the causes indeed are to be considered, by which the office is rendered. I opine them to be pure in themselves, since neither manly attire nor a ring nor marital conjunction descends from the honor of any idol. Finally I find no adornment accursed by God, except the womanly in a man.

Maledictus enim, inquit, omnis qui muliebribus induitur. Togauero etiam appellatione uirilis est.

For, “Cursed,” he says, “is everyone who is clothed in womanly garments.” Moreover, the toga also is, by appellation, virile.

[3] Nuptias quoque celebrari non magis deus prohibet quam nomen imponi. Sed his accommodantur sacrificia. Sim uocatus nec adsacrificii sit titulus officii, et operae meae expunctio quantum sibi licet.

[3] God no more forbids that marriages also be celebrated than that a name be imposed. But to these things sacrifices are accommodated. If I be called, let there be no title of office to the sacrifice, and an expunction of my services as much as is permitted.

[4]Vtinam quidem nec uidere possimus quae facere nobis nefas est. Sed quoniam ita malus circumdedit saeculum idololatria, licebit adesse in quibusdam, quae nos homini, non idolo, officiosos habent. Plane ad sacerdotium et sacrificium uocatus non ibo (proprium enim idoli officium est), sed neque consilio neque sumptu aliaue opera in eiusmodi fungar.

[4]Would that indeed we could not even see the things which it is impious for us to do. But since in this way badly idolatry has encompassed the age, it will be permitted to be present at certain things which have us dutiful to the human being, not to the idol. Clearly, if called to the sacerdotal office and to sacrifice, I will not go (for the idol’s office it is), but neither by counsel nor by expense or by any other work will I perform in matters of this sort.

[5] Si propter sacrificium uocatus adsistam, ero particeps idololatriae: si me alia causa coniungit sacrificanti, ero tantum spectator sacrificii.

[5] If on account of the sacrifice I, summoned, stand by, I shall be a participant in idolatry; if another cause conjoins me with the sacrificer, I shall be only a spectator of the sacrifice.

XVII.

17.

[1]Ceterum quid facient serui uel liberti fideles, item officiales sacrificantibus dominis uel patronis uel praesidibus suis adhaerentes? Sed si merum quis sacrificanti tradiderit, immo si uerbo quoque aliquo sacrificio necessario adiuuerit, minister habebitur idololatriae. Huius regulae memores etiam magistratibus et potestatibus officium possumus reddere secundum patriarchas et ceteros maiores, qui regibus idololatris usque ad finem idololatriae apparuerunt.

[1]Moreover, what shall faithful slaves or freedmen do, likewise officials, adhering to their masters or patrons or their presidents who are sacrificing? But if someone has handed over neat wine to one sacrificing, nay rather, if he has even by a word helped in something necessary to the sacrifice, he will be held a minister of idolatry. Mindful of this rule we can also render duty to magistrates and powers, according to the patriarchs and the other elders, who appeared before idolatrous kings until the end of idolatry.

[2] Hinc proxime disputatio oborta est, an seruus dei alicuius dignitatis aut potestatis administrationem capiat, si ab omni specie idololatriae intactum se aut gratia aliqua aut astutia etiam praestare possit, secundum quod et Ioseph et Daniel mundi ab idololatria et dignitatem et potestatem administrauerunt in ornamento et purpura praefecturae totius Aegypti siue Babyloniae.

[2] Hence next a disputation arose, whether a servant of God should take on the administration of some dignity or power, if he can present himself untouched from every appearance of idolatry either by some grace or even by astuteness, according to the fact that both Joseph and Daniel, clean from idolatry, administered both dignity and power in the ornament and purple of the prefecture of all Egypt or of Babylonia.

[3]Cedamus itaque succedere alicui posse, ut in quoquo honore in solo honoris nomine incedat neque sacrificet neque sacrificiis auctoritatem suam accommodet, non hostias locet, non curas templorum deleget, non uectigalia eorum procuret, non spectacula edat de suo aut de publico aut edendis praesit, nihil sollemne pronuntiet uel edicat, ne iuret quidem; iam uero quae sunt potestatis, neque iudicet de capite alicuius uel pudore -- feras enim de pecunia -- neque damnet neque praedamnet, neminem uinciat, neminem recludat aut torqueat, si haec credibile est fieri posse.

[3]Let us then concede accordingly that one can succeed to some post, so that in whatever honor he may go about in the mere name of the honor, and neither sacrifice nor lend his authority to sacrifices accommodate, not assign victims, not delegate the cares of temples, not manage their revenues, not put on spectacles at his own expense or at public expense or preside over those to be put on, pronounce or proclaim nothing solemn, not even swear an oath; and as for the things that belong to authority, neither judge concerning anyone’s life or honor -- let him, to be sure, render decisions about money -- neither condemn nor pre-condemn, bind no one, confine no one or torture anyone, if it is believable that these things can be done.

XVIII.

18.

[1] Iam uero de solo suggestu et apparatu honoris retractandum. Proprius habitus uniuscuiusque est tam ad usum quotidianum quam ad honorem et dignitatem.

[1] Now indeed even the mere dais and the apparatus of honor must be reconsidered. The proper habit of each individual is as much for daily use as for honor and dignity.

Igitur purpura illa et aurum ceruicis ornamentum eodem more apud Aegyptios et Babylonios insignia erant dignitatis, quo more nunc praetextae uel trabeae uel palmatae et coronae aureae sacerdotum prouincialium, sed non eadem condicione.

Therefore
that purple and the gold, an ornament of the neck, were insignia of dignity among the Egyptians and the Babylonians in the same manner, in which manner now the praetextae or trabeae or palmatae and the golden crowns of the provincial priests, but not under the same condition.

[2] Tantum enim honoris nomine conferebantur iis, qui familiaritatem regum merebantur. Vnde et purpurati regum uocabantur a purpura, sicut apud nos a toga candida candidati, sed non ut suggestus ille sacerdotiis quoque aut aliquibus idolorum officiis adstringeretur. Nam si ita esset, utique tantae sanctitatis et constantiae uiri statim habitus inquinatos recusassent, statimque apparuisset Danielem idolis non deseruisse nec Belem nec draconem colere, quod multo postea apparuit.

[2] For they were conferred only under the name of honor upon those who deserved the familiarity of kings. Whence they were also called the purpurates of kings from the purple, just as among us from the toga candida “candidates,” but not so that that preferment be bound also to sacerdotal offices or to any services of idols. For if it were so, men of such sanctity and constancy would at once have refused defiled garments, and at once it would have appeared that Daniel did not serve idols, nor worship Bel nor the dragon, which much later appeared.

[3] Simplex igitur purpura illa nec iam dignitatis erat, sed ingenuitatis apud barbaros insigne. Quemadmodum enim et Ioseph, qui seruus fuerat, et Daniel, qui per captiuitatem statum uerterat, ciuitatem Babyloniam et Aegyptiam sunt consecuti per habitum barbaricae ingenuitatis, sic penes nos quoque fideles, si necesse fuerit, poterit et pueris praetexta concedi et puellis stola, natiuitatis insignia, nec potestatis, generis, non honoris, ordinis, non superstitionis. Ceterum purpura uel cetera insignia dignitatum et potestatum insertae dignitati et potestatibus idololatriae ab initio dicata habent profanationis suae maculam, cum praeterea ipsis etiam idolis induantur praetextae et trabeae et laticlaui, fasces quoque et uirgae praeferantur, et merito.

[3] Simple, therefore, was that purple, and now no longer of dignity was it, but a badge of freeborn status among the barbarians. Just as indeed both Joseph, who had been a slave, and Daniel, who through captivity had altered his status, obtained Babylonian citizenship and Egyptian by the attire of barbarian ingenuousness, so among us also the faithful, if need arise, the praetexta too can be granted to boys and to girls the stola, insignia of birth—not of power, not of lineage, not of honor, not of order, not of superstition. Moreover, the purple or the other insignia of dignities and powers— inserted into dignities and powers that from the beginning were dedicated to idolatry—bear the stain of their own profanation, since, besides this, even the idols themselves are clothed with praetextae and trabeae and broad-clavi, and fasces too and rods are borne before them—and with good reason.

Nam daemonia magistratus sunt saeculi huius; unius collegii insignia fasces et purpuras gestant.

For daemons are the magistrates of this age; they bear the insignia of a single collegium, the fasces and the purple robes.

[4] Quid ergo proficies, si suggestu quidem utaris, opera eius uero non administres? Nemo in inmundis mundus uideri potest. Tunicam si induas inquinatam per se, poterit forsitan illa non inquinari per te, sed tu per illam mundus esse non poteris.

[4] What then will you profit, if you indeed make use of the tribunal, yet do not administer its work? No one in unclean things can seem clean. If you put on a tunic contaminated in itself, perhaps that will not be contaminated by you, but through it you will not be able to be clean.

Iam nunc qui de Ioseph et Daniel argumentaris, scito, non semper comparanda esse uetera et noua, rudia et polita, coepta et explicita, seruilia et liberalia.

Now now you who argue about Joseph and Daniel, know that the old and the new, the rough and the polished, the begun and the explicit, the servile and the liberal, are not always to be compared.

[5] Nam illi etiam condicione serui erant: tu uero nullius seruus, in quantum solius Christi, qui te etiam captiuitate saeculi liberauit, ex forma dominica agere debebis. Ille dominus in humilitate et ignobilitate incessit domicilio incertus: nam filius, inquit, hominis non habet ubi caput collocet; uestitu incultus, neque enim dixisset, ecce qui teneris uestiuntur, in domibus regum sunt; uultu denique et aspectu inglorius, sicut et Esaias pronuntiauerat.

[5] For they also were by condition slaves: but you, truly, are a servant of no one, inasmuch as of Christ alone, who also liberated you from the captivity of the age; according to the Lordly form you ought to act. That Lord went about in humility and ignobility, uncertain as to domicile: for “the Son,” he says, “of Man has not where to lay his head;” in attire unadorned, for he would not have said, “behold, those who are clothed in soft things are in the houses of kings;” in countenance, finally, and in aspect inglorious, just as also Isaiah had proclaimed.

[6] Si potestatis ius quoque nullum ne in suos quidem exercuit, quibus sordido ministerio functus est, si regem denique fieri conscius sui regni refugit, plenissime dedit formam suis derigendo omni fastigio et suggestu quam dignitatis quam potestatis.

[6] If he exercised no right of power even over his own, whom he fulfilled with a menial ministry, if, being conscious of his kingdom, he at length refused to be made king, he most fully gave a form to his own by leveling every height and platform, both of dignity and of power.

[7] Quis enim magis iis usus fuisset, quam dei filius? Quales et quanti eum fasces producerent, qualis purpura de umeris eius floreret, quale aurum de capite radiaret, nisi gloriam saeculi alienam et sibi et suis iudicasset? Igitur quam noluit, reiecit, quam reiecit, damnauit, quam damnauit, in pompa diaboli deputauit.

[7] For who would have used these more than the Son of God? What sort and how great fasces would have led him forth, what purple would have blossomed from his shoulders, what gold would have radiated from his head, unless he had judged the glory of the age to be alien both to himself and to his own? Therefore, that which he did not want, he rejected, that which he rejected, he condemned, that which he condemned, he assigned to the devil’s pomp.

Non enim damnasset, nisi non sua: alterius autem esse non possunt, nisi diaboli, quae dei non sunt.

For he would not have condemned, unless [they were] not his own: moreover they cannot be another’s, unless the Devil’s, the things which are not God’s.

[8] Tu si diaboli pompam eierasti, quicquid ex ea attigeris, id scias esse idololatrian. Vel hoc te commonefaciat omnes huius saeculi potestates et dignitates non solum alienas, uerum et inimicas dei esse, quod per illas aduersus dei seruos supplicia consulta sunt, per illas et poenae ad impios paratae ignorantur. 9. Sed et natiuitas et substantia tua molestae tibi sunt aduersus idololatrian.

[8] If you have abjured the pomp of the devil, whatever you touch of it, know that to be idolatry. Or let at least this remind you: that all the powers and dignities of this age are not only alien, but also inimical to God, because through them punishments have been decreed against the servants of God, and through them also the penalties prepared for the impious are ignored. 9. But both your nativity and your substance are troublesome to you with respect to idolatry.

Ad euitandum remedia deesse non possunt, cum et, si defuerint, supersit unicum illud, quo felicior factus non in terris magistratus, sed in caelis.

For avoiding, remedies cannot be lacking, since also, if they should fail, that single thing remains, by which one becomes happier, not a magistrate on earth magistrate, but in heaven.

XIX.

19.

[1] Possit in isto capitulo etiam de militia definitum uideri, quae inter dignitatem et potestatem est. At nunc de isto quaeritur, an fidelis ad militiam conuerti possit et an militia ad fidem admitti, etiam caligata uel inferior quaeque, cui non sit necessitas immolationum uel capitalium iudiciorum.

[1] It could in this chapter also seem to have been determined concerning military service, which lies between dignity and power. But now the question is on this: whether a faithful person can be converted to military service and whether military service can be admitted to the faith, even the caligated (rank-and-file) or any lower one, for whom there is no necessity of immolations or of capital judgments.

[2] Non conuenit sacramento diuino et humano, signo Christi et signo diaboli, castris lucis et castris tenebrarum; non potest una anima duobus deberi, deo et Caesari. Et uirgam portauit Moyses, fibulam et Aaron, cingitur loro et Iohannes, agmen agit et Iesus Naue, bellauit et populus, si placet ludere.

[2] It does not accord with the divine and the human sacrament, with the sign of Christ and the sign of the devil, with the camps of light and the camps of darkness; one soul cannot be owed to two, to God and Caesar. And Moses carried a rod, and Aaron a brooch, John is girt with a thong, Joshua son of Nun leads the column, and the people fought, if it pleases to play.

[3] Quomodo autembellabit, immo quomodo etiam in pace militabit sine gladio, quem dominus abstulit? Nam etsi adierant milites ad Iohannem et formam obseruationis acceperant, si etiam centurio crediderat, omnem postea militem dominus in Petro exarmando discinxit. Nullus habitus licitus est apud nos illicito actui adscriptus.

[3] How however will he wage war, nay rather how even in peace will he serve as a soldier without a sword, which the Lord took away? For even if soldiers had gone to John and had received a form of observance, if even a centurion had believed, afterwards the Lord, in Peter by disarming, ungirded every soldier. No habit is lawful among us assigned to an illicit act.

XX.

20.

[1] Sed enim cum conuersatio diuinae disciplinae non factis tantum, uerum etiam uerbis periclitetur (nam sicut scriptum est, ecce homo et facta eius, ita, ex ore tuo iustificaberis), meminisse debemus etiam in uerbis quoque idololatriae incursum praecauendum aut de consuetudinis uitio aut timiditatis.

[1] But indeed, since the practice of the divine discipline is endangered not by deeds only, but even by words (for as it is written, behold the man and his deeds; so, out of your mouth you will be justified), we ought to remember that even in words too the incursion of idolatry must be guarded against, either from the vice of custom or of timidity.

[2] Deos nationum nominari lex prohibet non utique: nomina eorum pronuntiemus, quae nobis ut dicamus conuersatio extorquet. Nam id plerumque dicendum est: in templo Aesculapii illum habes, et, in uico Isidis habito, et sacerdos Iouis factus est, et multa alia in hunc modum, quando et hominibus hoc genus nomina inducuntur. Neque enim Saturnum honoro, si ita uocauero eum suo nomine; tam non honoro, quam Marcum, si uocauero Marcum.

[2] The gods of the nations the law forbids to be named—not, of course, that we should pronounce their names which our conversation extorts from us. For this must very often be said: in the temple of Aesculapius you have that man, and, I dwell in the vicus of Isis, and he has been made priest of Jupiter, and many other things in this manner, since even among men names of this kind are introduced. For I do not honor Saturn, if I shall so call him by his own name; I honor him just as little as Marcus, if I call Marcus.

[3] Sed ait: nomen aliorum deorum ne commemoremini neque audiatur de tuo ore. Hoc praecepit, ne deos uocemus illos. Nam et in prima parte legis, non sumes, inquit, nomen domini dei tui in uano id est idolo.

[3] But he says: the name of other gods do not commemorate nor let it be heard from your mouth. This he prescribed, lest we call those “gods.” For also in the first part of the Law, you shall not take, he says, the name of the Lord your God in vain, that is, in an idol.

Cecidit igitur in idololatriam qui idolum nomine dei honorauerit.

Therefore he has fallen into idolatry who has honored an idol by the name of God.

[4] Quodsi deos dicendum erit, adiciendum est aliquid quo appareat, quia non ego illos deos dico. Nam et scriptura deos nominat, sed adicit suos uel nationum; sicut Dauid, cum deos nominasset, ubi ait, dei autem nationum daemonia. Sed hoc mihi ad sequentia magis praestructum est.

[4] But if it will have to be said “gods,” something must be added by which it may appear that I do not call those “gods.” For Scripture also names them gods, but adds “its own” or “of the nations”; just as David, when he had named gods, where he says, but the gods of the nations are demons. But this has been rather pre-structured for the things that follow.

[5] Ceterum consuetudinis uitium est Mehercule dicere, Medius Fidius, accedente ignorantia quorundam, qui ignorant iusiurandum esse per Herculem. Porro quid erit deieratio per eos quos eierasti quam praeuaricatio fidei cum idololatria? Quis enim, per quos deierat, non honorat?

[5] Moreover, it is a vice of custom to say “Mehercule,” “Medius Fidius,” with the ignorance of certain people added, who do not know that it is an oath by Hercules. Furthermore, what will swearing by those whom you have abjured be if not a prevarication of faith together with idolatry? For who, by those by whom he swears, does not honor?

XXI.

21.

[1] Timiditatis est autem, cum te alius per deos suos obligat iuratione uel aliqua testificatione et tu, ne intellegaris, quiescis. Nam aeque quiescendo confirmas maiestatem eorum, cuius causa uideberis obligatus.

[1] It is of timidity, moreover, when another obligates you by his gods with a juration or some testification, and you, lest you be understood, keep quiet. For by keeping quiet you equally confirm their majesty, for the sake of which you will seem obligated.

[2] Quid refert, deos nationum dicendo deos an audiendo confirmes? Iures per idola, an ab alio adiuratus acquiescas? Cur non agnoscamus uersutias satanae, qui, quod ore nostro perficere non potest, id agit, ut suorum ore perficiat per aures inferens nobis idololatriam?

[2] What does it matter, whether by calling the gods of the nations gods or by hearing it you confirm them? Do you swear by idols, or, adjured by another, do you acquiesce? Why should we not acknowledge the wiles of Satan, who, what he cannot accomplish by our mouth, he strives to accomplish by the mouth of his own, through our ears bringing idolatry in upon us?

Certe quisquis ille est, aut amica aut inimica congressione adstringit.

Surely, whoever he is, either by a friendly or by a hostile
encounter he binds you.

[3] Si inimica, iam ad pugnam uocaris et scis tibi dimicandum esse: si amica, quanto securius in dominum transferes sponsionem tuam, ut dissoluas obligationem eius, per quem te malus honori idolorum id est idololatriae quaerebat annectere.

[3] If hostile, you are now called to battle and you know you must fight: if friendly, how much more securely you will transfer your pledge to the Lord, so that you may dissolve the obligation of him, through whom the Evil One was seeking to annex you to the honor of idols, that is, to idolatry.

[4] Omnis patientia eiusmodi idololatria. Honoras eos, quibus impositis obsequium praestitisti. Scio quendam, cui dominus ignoscat, cum illi in publico per litem dictum esset: Iupiter tibi sit iratus, respondisse: immo tibi.

[4] Every patience of this sort is idolatry. You honor those to whose impositions you have rendered obedience. I know a certain man—may the Lord forgive him—when to him in public, in a quarrel, it had been said: "May Jupiter be angry with you," he replied: "Rather, with you."

Quid aliter fecisset ethnicus, qui Iouem deum credidit? Etiamsi non per eundem retorsisset maledictum nec per ullum Iouis similem, confirmauerat Iouem deum, per quem se maledictum indigne tulisse demonstrauerat remaledicens.

What else would a pagan have done, who believed Jupiter to be a god? Even if he had not hurled back the curse through that same one nor through any like to Jupiter, he had confirmed Jupiter as a god, through whom he had shown himself to have borne the curse indignantly, by cursing back.

[5] Ad quid enim indigneris per eum, quem scis nihil esse? Iam si insanis, iam esse confirmas, et erit idololatria professio timoris tui: quanto magis, cum per ipsum remaledicis, eodem Iouis honorem facis, quo et ille, qui te prouocauit? Fidelis autem in eiusmodi ridere debet, non insanire, immo, secundum praeceptum, ne per deum quidem remaledicere, sed plane benedicere per deum, ut et idola destruas et deum praedices et adimpleas disciplinam.

[5] For why indeed should you be indignant by means of him whom you know to be nothing? Now if you rage, you already confirm that he exists, and there will be idolatry in the profession of your fear: how much more, when through him you curse back, you pay the same honor of Jupiter that he too does who provoked you? A faithful man, however, in such matters ought to laugh, not to rage—indeed, according to the precept, not even to curse back by God, but plainly to bless by God, so that you may both overthrow idols and proclaim God and fulfill the discipline.

XXII.

22.

[1] Aeque benedici per deos nationum Christo initiatus non sustinebit, ut non semper reiciat immundam benedictionem et eam sibi in deum conuertens emundet. Benedici per deos nationum maledici est per deum.

[1] Likewise, to be blessed through the gods of the nations one initiated into Christ will not endure, but will always reject the unclean benediction and, converting it to God for himself, cleanse it. To be blessed through the gods of the nations is to be maledicted against God.

[2] Si cui dedero eleemosynam uel aliquid praestitero beneficii, et ille mihi deos suos uel coloniae genium propitios imprecetur, iam oblatio mea uel operatio idolorum honor erit, per quae benedictionis gratiam compensat.

[2] If to anyone I have given alms or have rendered some benefit, and he should for me imprecate his gods or the genius of the colony as propitious, already my oblation or operation will be an honor of idols, through which he compensates the favor of a benediction.

[3] Cur autem non sciat me dei causa fecisse, ut et deus potius glorificetur et daemonia non honorentur in eo quod propter deum feci? Si deus uidet, quoniam propter ipsum feci, pariter uidet, quoniam propter ipsum fecisse me nolui ostendere, et praeceptum eius idolothytum quodammodo feci.

[3] But why should he not know that I have done it for God’s sake, so that God rather may be glorified and the daemons not be honored in that which I have done on account of God ? If God sees that I have done it on account of him, he equally sees that, on account of him, I was unwilling to show that I had done it, and I have made his precept, in a certain manner, an idol-offering.

[4] Multi dicunt, nemo se debet promulgare; puto autem nec negare. Negat enim, quicumque dissimulat in quacumque causa pro ethnico habitus, et utique omnis negatio idololatria est, sicut omnis idololatria negatio siue in factis siue in uerbis.

[4] Many say, no one ought to promulgate himself; but I think neither ought one to deny. For he denies, whoever dissimulates in whatever cause, being regarded as a pagan; and assuredly every denial is idolatry, just as every idolatry is a denial, whether in deeds or in words.

XXIII.

23.

[1] Sed est quaedam eiusmodi species in facto et in uerbo bis acuta et infesta utrimque, licet tibi blandiatur, quasi uacet in utroque, dum factum non uidetur, quia dictum non tenetur. Pecuniam de ethnicis mutuantes sub pignoribus fiduciati iurati cauent et se negant; se scire uolunt scilicet tempus persecutionis et locus tribunalis et persona praesidis.

[1] But there is a certain kind of case of this sort in deed and in word doubly sharp and hostile on both sides, although it may flatter you, as if it were free in both, since the deed does not appear, because a spoken statement is not held to account. Borrowing money from the pagans under pledges, on fiduciary securities, they sworn give guarantees and themselves deny; themselves want to know, of course, the time of the persecution and the place of the tribunal and the person of the governor.

[2] Praescribit Christus non esse iurandum. Scripsi, inquit, sed nihil dixi: lingua, non littera occidit. Hic ego naturam et conscientiam aduoco: naturam, quia nihil potest manus scribere, etiamsi lingua in dictando cessat immobilis et quieta, quod non anima dictauerit; quamquam et ipsi linguae anima dictauerit aut a se conceptum aut ab alio traditum.

[2] Christ prescribes that one is not to swear an oath. “I have written,” he says, “but I have said nothing: the tongue, not the letter, kills.” Here therefore I summon nature and conscience: nature, because the hand can write nothing—even if the tongue in dictating ceases, motionless and quiet—which the soul has not dictated; although even to the tongue itself the soul has dictated either what it has conceived from itself or what has been handed down by another.

[3] Iam, ne dicatur, alius dictauit; hic conscientiam appello, an quod alius dictauit anima suscipiat et siue comitante siue residente lingua ad manum transmittat. Et bene, quod in animo et conscientia delinqui dominus dixit. Si, inquit, concupiscentia uel malitia in cor hominis ascenderit, pro facto teneris.

[3] Now, lest it be said, another dictated; here I appeal to conscience, whether what another dictated the soul receives and, whether the tongue accompanying or sitting, transmits to the hand. And well, that the Lord said that delinquency is in mind and conscience. "If," he says, "concupiscence or malice has ascended into the heart of a man, you are held as for the deed."

[4] Cauisti igitur, quod in cor tuum plane ascendit, quod neque ignorasse te contendere potes neque noluisse.

[4] You have been cautious,
therefore, about that which has plainly ascended into your heart, which you can contend neither to have been ignorant of nor to have been unwilling.

[5] Nam cum caueres, scisti, cum scires, utique uoluisti; et est tam facto quam cogitatu. Nec potes leuiore crimine maius excludere, ut dicas falsum plane effici cauendo quod non facis.

[5] For when you were being cautious, you knew; when you knew, assuredly you willed; and it is as much in deed as in cogitation. Nor can you with a lighter crime exclude the greater, so that you say it is plainly made false by guarding against what you do not do.

Tamen non negaui, quia non iuraui. Quin immo, etsi nihil tale fecisses, sic tamen dicereris deierare, fecisse si consenseris. Non ualet tacita uox in stilo et mutus in litteris sonus.

However I did not deny, because I did not swear. Nay rather, even if you had done nothing of the sort, thus nevertheless you would be said to perjure yourself, to have done it, if you have consented. A silent voice does not avail in the stylus and a mute sound in letters.

[6] At enim Zacharias temporali uocis orbatione multatus cum animo conlocutus linguam inritam transit, cum manibus suis a corde dictat et nomen filii sine ore pronuntiat: loquitur in stilo, auditur in cera manus omni sono clarior, littera omni ore uocalior. Quaere, an dixerit qui dixisse compertus est.

[6] But indeed
Zechariah, punished with a temporary deprivation of voice, having conversed with his mind, bypasses a useless tongue, with his hands he dictates from his heart and pronounces the name of his son without a mouth: he speaks in the stylus, he is heard in the wax, the hand clearer than any sound, the letter more vocal than any mouth. Inquire whether he has spoken, who is ascertained to have spoken.

[7] Dominum oremus, ne qua nos eiusmodi contractus necessitas circumsistat et, si ita euenerit, det fratribus operandi copiam uel nobis abrumpendae omnis necessitatis constantiam, ne illae litterae negatrices uicariae oris nostri in die iudicii aduersus nos proferantur signatae signis non iam aduocatorum, sed angelorum.

[7] Let us pray the Lord,
that no such constricted necessity surround us, and, if it so
should happen, may he grant to the brethren the means of working, or to us the constancy for breaking off every
necessity constancy, lest those negatory letters, vicarious for our mouth,
be brought forward against us on the day of judgment, sealed with seals no longer
of advocates, but of angels.

XXIV.

24.

[1] Inter hos scopulos et sinus, inter haec uada et freta idololatriae uelificata spiritu dei fides nauigat, tuta si cauta, secura si attonita. Ceterum inenatabile excussis profundum est, inextricabileinpactis naufragium est, inrespirabile deuoratis hypobrychium in idololatria. Quicumque fluctus eius offocant, omnis uertex eius ad inferos desorbet.

[1] Between these crags and bays, between these shallows and straits of idolatry, faith, with sails set by the Spirit of God, sails along—safe if cautious, secure if awestruck. Otherwise, once things are shaken off, the deep is unswimmable; once dashed-on, the shipwreck is inextricable; inrespirable, once the hypobrychium has been swallowed, in idolatry. Whoever its waves choke, every whirlpool of it sucks down to the infernal regions.

[2] Nemo dicat: quis tam tuto praecauebit? Exeundum de saeculo erit. Quasi non tanti sit exire, quam idololatren in saeculo stare.

[2] Let no one say: who will guard himself so securely? One will have to go out of the world. As though it were not worth so much to go out, rather than to stand as an idololater in the world.

Nihil esse facilius potest, quam cautio idololatriae, si timor eius in capite sit. Quaecumque necessitas minor est periculo tanto comparata.

Nothing can be easier than caution against idolatry, if fear of it is at the head. Whatever necessity is lesser is, when set against so great a peril, compared.

[3] Propterea spiritus sanctus consultantibus tunc apostolis uinculum et iugum nobis relaxauit, ut idololatriae deuitandae uacaremus. Haec erit lex nostra, quo expedita hoc plenius administranda, propriaChristianorum, per quam ab ethnicis agnoscimur et examinamur, haec accedentibus ad fidem proponenda et ingredientibus in fidem inculcanda est, ut accedentes deliberent, obseruantes perseuerent, non obseruantes renuntient sibi.

[3] Therefore the Holy Spirit, while the apostles were then consulting, relaxed for us the bond and the yoke, that we might be free for avoiding idolatry. This will be our law, so that, being unencumbered, this may be administered more fully—proper to Christians—by which we are recognized and examined by the ethnics; this is to be set forth to those acceding to the faith and to be inculcated into those entering into the faith, so that those acceding may deliberate, those observing may persevere, those not observing may renounce it for themselves.

[4]Viderimus enim si secundum arcae typum et coruus et miluus et lupus et canis et serpens in ecclesia erit. Certe idololatres in arcae typo non habetur. Nullum animal in idololatren figuratum est.

[4]Let us see indeed whether, according to the ark’s type, both the raven and the kite and the wolf and the dog and the serpent will be in the church. Certainly idololaters, in the ark’s type, are not held. No animal has been figured as an idololater.

Quod in arca non fuit, in ecclesia non sit.

What was not in the ark, let it not be in the church.