Chapter XLVI.

We have sufficiently met, as I think, the accusation of the various crimes on the ground of which these fierce demands are made for Christian blood.  We have made a full exhibition of our case; and we have shown you how we are able to prove that our statement is correct, from the trustworthiness, I mean, and antiquity of our sacred writings, and from the confession likewise of the powers of spiritual wickedness themselves.  Who will venture to undertake our refutation; not with skill of words, but, as we have managed our demonstration, on the basis of reality? But while the truth we hold is made clear to all, unbelief meanwhile, at the very time it is convinced of the worth of Christianity, which has now become well known for its benefits as well as from the intercourse of life, takes up the notion that it is not really a thing divine, but rather a kind of philosophy.  These are the very things, it says, the philosophers counsel and profess—innocence, justice, patience, sobriety, chastity. Why, then, are we not permitted an equal liberty and impunity for our doctrines as they have, with whom, in respect of what we teach, we are compared? or why are not they, as so like us, not pressed to the same offices, for declining which our lives are imperilled? For who compels a philosopher to sacrifice or take an oath, or put out useless lamps at midday? Nay, they openly overthrow your gods, and in their writings they attack your superstitions; and you applaud them for it. Many of them even, with your countenance, bark out against your rulers, and are rewarded with statues and salaries, instead of being given to the wild beasts. And very right it should be so. For they are called philosophers, not Christians. This name of philosopher has no power to put demons to the rout. Why are they not able to do that too? since philosophers count demons inferior to gods. Socrates used to say, “If the demon grant permission.” Yet he, too, though in denying the existence of your divinities he had a glimpse of the truth, at his dying ordered a cock to be sacrificed to Æsculapius, I believe in honour of his father,66    [Tertullian’s exposition of this enigmatical fact (see the Phædo) is better than divers other ingenious theories.] for Apollo pronounced Socrates the wisest of men. Thoughtless Apollo! testifying to the wisdom of the man who denied the existence of his race. In proportion to the enmity the truth awakens, you give offence by faithfully standing by it; but the man who corrupts and makes a mere pretence of it precisely on this ground gains favour with its persecutors. The truth which philosophers, these mockers and corrupters of it, with hostile ends merely affect to hold, and in doing so deprave, caring for nought but glory, Christians both intensely and intimately long for and maintain in its integrity, as those who have a real concern about their salvation. So that we are like each other neither in our knowledge nor our ways, as you imagine.  For what certain information did Thales, the first of natural philosophers, give in reply to the inquiry of Crœsus regarding Deity, the delay for further thought so often proving in vain?  There is not a Christian workman but finds out God, and manifests Him, and hence assigns to Him all those attributes which go to constitute a divine being, though Plato affirms that it is far from easy to discover the Maker of the universe; and when He is found, it is difficult to make Him known to all. But if we challenge you to comparison in the virtue of chastity, I turn to a part of the sentence passed by the Athenians against Socrates, who was pronounced a corrupter of youth. The Christian confines himself to the female sex. I have read also how the harlot Phryne kindled in Diogenes the fires of lust, and how a certain Speusippus, of Plato’s school, perished in the adulterous act. The Christian husband has nothing to do with any but his own wife. Democritus, in putting out his eyes, because he could not look on women without lusting after them, and was pained if his passion was not satisfied, owns plainly, by the punishment he inflicts, his incontinence.  But a Christian with grace-healed eyes is sightless in this matter; he is mentally blind against the assaults of passion. If I maintain our superior modesty of behaviour, there at once occurs to me Diogenes with filth-covered feet trampling on the proud couches of Plato, under the influence of another pride: the Christian does not even play the proud man to the pauper. If sobriety of spirit be the virtue in debate, why, there are Pythagoras at Thurii, and Zeno at Priene, ambitious of the supreme power:  the Christian does not aspire to the ædileship. If equanimity be the contention, you have Lycurgus choosing death by self-starvation, because the Lacons had made some emendation of his laws: the Christian, even when he is condemned, gives thanks.67    [John xxi. 19. A pious habit which long survived among Christians, when learning that death was at hand: as in Shakespeare’s Henry IV., “Laud be to God, ev’n there my life must end.” See 1 Thess. v. 18.] If the comparison be made in regard to trustworthiness, Anaxagoras denied the deposit of his enemies: the Christian is noted for his fidelity even among those who are not of his religion.  If the matter of sincerity is to be brought to trial, Aristotle basely thrust his friend Hermias from his place:  the Christian does no harm even to his foe. With equal baseness does Aristotle play the sycophant to Alexander, instead of exercising to keep him in the right way, and Plato allows himself to be bought by Dionysius for his belly’s sake. Aristippus in the purple, with all his great show of gravity, gives way to extravagance; and Hippias is put to death laying plots against the state: no Christian ever attempted such a thing in behalf of his brethren, even when persecution was scattering them abroad with every atrocity.  But it will be said that some of us, too, depart from the rules of our discipline. In that case, however, we count them no longer Christians; but the philosophers who do such things retain still the name and the honour of wisdom.  So, then, where is there any likeness between the Christian and the philosopher? between the disciple of Greece and of heaven? between the man whose object is fame, and whose object is life? between the talker and the doer? between the man who builds up and the man who pulls down? between the friend and the foe of error? between one who corrupts the truth, and one who restores and teaches it? between its chief and its custodier?

CAPUT XLVI.

Occurrit porro illis, qui non de Deo Christianos sapere, sed ut Philosophiae genus, fidem et spem illorum aestiment, paria in utrisque virtutum genera ponderantes: quibus ostendit, quantum nomen illud philosophorum 0500Binfra christianum subsidat, dum illi inveniantur veritatis ignari et omnium scelerum rei, hi Deum intelligunt, et ab omni malitia, vel ipsis stupentibus inimicis, quam longissime sint remoti.

46. Constitimus , ut opinor, adversus omnium criminum intentionem , quae Christianorum sanguinem flagitat. Ostendimus totum statum nostrum, et 0501A quibus modis probare possimus ita esse, sicut ostendimus, ex fide scilicet et antiquitate divinarum litterarum, item ex confessione spiritualium potestatum. Quis nos revincere audebit, non arte verborum, sed eadem forma, qua probationem constituimus de veritate? Sed dum unicuique manifestatur veritas nostra, interim incredulitas, dum de bono sectae hujus obducitur, quod usui jam et de commercio innotuit, non utique divinum negotium existimat, sed magis philosophiae genus. Eadem, inquit, et philosophi monent et profitentur: innocentiam, justitiam, patientiam, sobrietatem, pudicitiam. Cur 0502A ergo quibus comparamur de disciplina, proinde illis non adaequamur ad licentiam impunitatemque disciplinae? vel cur et illi ut pares nostri non urgentur ad officia, quae nos non obeuntes periclitamur ? Quis enim philosophum sacrificare, aut dejerare, aut lucernas meridie vanas prostituere compellit? Quin imo et deos vestros palam destruunt , et superstitiones vestras commentariis quoque accusant, laudantibus vobis. Plerique etiam in principes latrant sustinentibus vobis. Et facilius statuis et salariis remunerantur, quam ad bestias pronuntiantur. Sed merito; philosophi enim non christiani 0503A cognominantur. Nomen hoc philosophorum daemonia non fugat. Quidni, quum secundum deos philosophi daemonas deputent ? Socratis vox est: si daemonium permittat. Idem et quum aliquid de veritate sapiebat, deos negans, Aesculapio tamen gallinaceum prosecari jam in fine jubebat credo ob honorem patris ejus, quia Socratem Apollo sapientissimum 0504A omnium cecinit. O Apollinem inconsideratum! Sapientiae testimonium reddidit ei viro, qui negabat deos esse. In quantum odium flagrat veritas, in tantum qui eam ex fide praestat offendit; qui autem adulterat et affectat, hoc maxime nomine gratiam pangit apud insectatores veritatis, (qua et illusores et contemptores . Mimice philosophi affectant veritatem 0507A et affectando corrumpunt, ut qui gloriam captant : Christiani eam necessario appetunt et integre praestant, ut qui saluti suae curant. Adeo neque de scientia neque de disciplina, ut putatis, 0508A aequamur. Quid enim Thales ille princeps physicorum sciscitanti Croeso de divinitate certum renuntiavit, commeatus deliberandi saepe frustratus? Deum quilibet opifex christianus et invenit et 0509A ostendit et exinde totum, quod in Deo quaeritur, re quoque assignat; licet Plato affirmet factitatorem universitatis neque inveniri facilem, et inventum enarrari in omnes difficilem. Caeterum si de pudicitia provocemus , lego partem sententiae Atticae in Socratem corruptorem adolescentium pronuntiatam . 0510A Sexum nec femineum mutat Christianus . Novi et Phrynen meretricem Diogenis supra recubantis ardori subantem . Audio et quemdam Speusippum de Platonis schola in adulterio periisse . Christianus uxori suae soli masculus nascitur. Democritus excaecando semetipsum , quod 0511A mulieres sine concupiscentia aspicere non posset, et doleret si non esset potitus, incontinentiam emendatione profitetur. At christianus salvis oculis feminam videt, animo adversus libidinem caecus est. Si de probitate defendam, ecce lutulentis pedibus Diogenes superbos Platonis toros alia superbia deculcat . Christianus nec in pauperem superbit. Si de modestia certem, ecce Pythagoras apud Thurios , Zeno apud Prienenses tyrannidem affectant: Christianus vero nec aedilitatem . Si de animi aequitate 0512A congrediar, Lycurgus ἀποκαρτέρησιν optavit, quod leges ejus Lacones emendassent: Christianus etiam damnatus gratias agit. Si de fide comparem, Anaxagoras depositum hospitibus denegavit: Christianus etiam extra fidelis vocatur. Si de simplicitate consistam, Aristoteles familiarem suum Hermiam turpiter loco excedere fecit : Christianus nec inimicum suum laedit. Idem Aristoteles tam turpiter Alexandro regendo potius adulatur , quam Plato 0513A Dionysio ventris gratia venditatur . Aristippus in purpura sub magna gravitatis superficie nepotatur , et Hippias, dum civitati insidias disponit, occiditur . Hoc pro suis omni atrocitate dissipatis nemo unquam christianus tentavit. Sed dicet aliquis, etiam de nostris excedere quosdam a regula disciplinae; desinunt tum christiani haberi penes nos, philosophi vero illi 0514A eum talibus factis in nomine et in honore sapientiae perseverant apud vos. Quid adeo simile philosophus et christianus, Graeciae discipulus et Coeli, famae negotiator et salutis , verborum et factorum operator, rerum aedificator et destructor, interpolator erroris et integrator veritatis, furator ejus et custos .