CHAPTER XLV
ali a
Tertullian's Apology for the Christians. against Christians, like that which other malefactors are charged withal?
Does not the prison sweat with your heathen criminals continually ? Do not the mines continually groan with the load of heathens?
Are not your wild beasts fatted with heathens?
And is not the whole herd of condemned wretches which some public benefactors! keep alive for the entertainment of the amphitheatre, are not they all of your religion?
Now, among all these malefactors, there is not a Christian to be found for any crime but that \ of his name only, or if there be, we disown him for a Christian.
CHAPTER XLV.
'CONCERNING ONE GREAT REASON FOR THE INNOCENCE OF
CHRISTIANS ABOVE THAT OF ALL OTHER PEOPLE.
Ws then are the only harmless people among you, and where is the A, wonder, if it cannot well be otherwise?
As in-truth it cannot, considering our education; for the innocence we are taught, we are taught from God, and we know our lesson perfectly well, as being revealed to us by the Master of all perfection, and we observe it faithfully as the command of an all-seeing Lawgiver, who we know is not to be despised but at the hazard of eternal happiness.
Whereas your systems of virtue are but the conjectures of human . philosophy, and the power which commands obedience merely human; and so neither the rule nor the power indisputable, an consequently the one too imperfect to instruct us fully, and the other too weak to command us effectually, both which are abundantly provided for by a revelation from God.
Where is the philosopher? who can so clearly demonstrate the true good as to 1 Munerarii.
Such sports and plays which were exhibited by private men at their own charges in order to ingratiate with the people, were called Ludi honorarii ; and those of this nature were for the most part either fencing or stage-plays.
Fencing is that which is here meant, and because freely bestowed called Munus, and the bestowers of them AZwnerariz.
In allusion to this is that of St. Jerome, 'A/unerarius Pauperum, et Egentium Candidatus Epist. ad
Pammach.
ES 2 Tanta est Prudentia Hominis ad demonstrandum bonum, quanta Auctoritas — ad exigendum, tam illa falli facilis, guam ista contemni.
'' Where is the philosopher who can so clearly demonstrate the true good as to fix the notion beyond dispute? and what human power is able to reach the conscience, and bring down
, -« as Poe ue 4 le ——— a? a . eo Loe LS eee
~ _Lertullian's Apology for the Christians.
fix the notion beyond dispute ? and what human power is able to teach the conscience, and bring down that notion into practice ?
For human wisdom is as subject to error as human power'is to Contempt.
And therefore let us enter a little into a comparison between your laws and ours.
Tell me then, which do you take to be the fullest and completest law, that which says, Thou shalt do no murder, or that which restrains the very passion of anger?
Which expresses greatest purity and perfection, the law which prohibits the outward act of adultery, or that which condemns the bare lust of the eye?
Which is the wisest provision for innocence, to forbid evil-doing, or not to permit so much as evil-speaking >"
Which is the most instructing lesson for the good of mankind, to debar men from doing injury, or not so much as to allow the injured person the common privilege of returning evil for evil ?
But this is not all, for I must give you to understand that these very laws of yours, which are but in the way to perfection, are no more in good truth than a transcript of the old law of God, older by much than any law of your making, but I have already laid
' before you the antiquity of Moses.
But as our law is more perfect in its precepts, so is it more cogent in its penalties ; for pray tell me what is the force of human the notion into practice?
For human wisdom is as subject to error as human power is to contempt."
It is plain, in fact, from the sad state of darkness which overspread the world at the coming of our Saviour, that human reason unassisted was not sufficient for the establishment of true moral righteousness, or to make one entire and perfect system of the law of nature.
But supposing such a body of ethics possible to be collected from the writings of the philosophers as we find in the"gospel, how far must such a collection fall short from a complete,
Steady, indisputable rule of morality!
It is all at most but human wisdom, and that (as Tertullian says) is as subject to error as human power is to contempt, and both consequently subject to dispute.
Had the sayings of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, etc., any authority ? They were only the sayings and opinions of mere men, and so might be rejected or embraced as men thought fit ; or if any part of _ the doctrine of a philosopher must go for law, the whole must pass for such too, or else his authority ceases.
Such a system. therefore of morality as was not only perfectly agreeable to right reason, but also of divine indisputable authority in every point, was wanting to the. world before the coming of our Saviour, . allowing mere human philosophy as perfect as you please in point of truth.
_ Such a system, I say, was wanting which was not only right in every rule, but of infallible wisdom and authority in every precept, and easy and intelligible in all things necessary to every understanding ; and the gospel, and only the gospel, is such a system, dictated by divine wisdom, and confirmed by divine authority, by such a wisdom as is not subject to error, and by such a power as cannot be
_ disputed, -