INTRODUCTION.
A FRAGMENT OF THE THIRTY-FOURTH BOOK OF DIODORUS SICULUS.
FROM MANETHO RESPECTING THE ISRAELITES.
"For
if indeed Julian had caused all those that were under his dominion
to
be richer than Midas, and each of the cities greater than Babylon
once was, and had also surrounded each of them with a golden wall,
but had corrected none of the existing errors respecting divinity,
he
would have acted in a manner similar to a physician, who receiving
a
body full of evils in each of its parts, should cure all of them
except the eyes."—Liban. Parental, in Julian, p. 285.
INTRODUCTION.
"I
HAVE often wished," says Warburton in a letter to Dr. Forster,
October 15, 1749, "for a hand capable of collecting all the
fragments remaining of Porphyry, Celsus, Hierocles, and Julian, and
giving them to us with a just, critical and theological comment, as
a
defy to infidelity. It is certain we want something more than what
their ancient answerers have given us. This would be a very noble
work*."The
author of the following Collectanea has partially effected what Dr.
Warburton wished*
See Barker's Parriana, vol. ii. p. 48.to
see accomplished; for as he is not a
divine, he has not
attempted in his Notes to confute Celsus, but has confined himself
solely to an illustration of his meaning, by a citation of parallel
passages in other ancient authors.As
the answer, however, of Origen to the arguments of Celsus is very
futile and inefficient, it would be admirable to see some one of
the
learned divines with which the church at present abounds, leap into
the arena, and by vanquishing Celsus, prove that the Christian
religion is peculiarly adapted to the present times, and to the
interest of the priests by whom it is professed and
disseminated.The
Marquis D'Argens published a translation in French, accompanied by
the Greek text, of the arguments of the Emperor Julian against the
Christians; and as an apology for the present work, I subjoin the
following translation of a part of his preliminary discourse, in
which he defends that publication."It
may be that certain half-witted gentlemanmay
reproach me for having brought forward a work composed in former
times against the Christians, in the vulgar tongue. To such I might
at once simply reply, that the work was preserved by a Father of
the
Church; but I will go further, and tell them with Father Petau, who
gave a Greek edition of the works of Julian, that if those who
condemn the authors that have published these works, will temper
the
ardour of their zeal with reason and judgement, they will think
differently, and will distinguish between the good use that may be
made of the book, and the bad intentions of the writer."Father
Petau also judiciously remarks, that if the times were not gone by
when dæmons took the advantage of idolatry to seduce mankind, it
would be prudent not to afford any aid, or give the benefit of any
invective against Jesus, or the Christian religion to the organs of
those dæmons; but since by the blessing of God and the help of the
cross, which have brought about our salvation, the monstrous dogmas
of Paganism are buried in oblivion,we
have nothing to fear from that pest; there is no weighty reason for
our rising up against the monuments of Pagan aberration that now
remain, and totally destroying them. On the contrary, the same
Father
Petau says, that it is better to treat them as the ancient
Christians
treated the images and temples of the gods. At first, in the
provinces in which they were in power, they razed them to the very
foundations, that nothing might be visible to posterity that could
perpetuate impiety, or the sight of which could recall mankind to
an
abominable worship. But when the same Christians had firmly
established their religion, it appeared more rational to them,
after
destroying the altars and statues of the gods, to preserve the
temples, and by purifying them, to make them serviceable for the
worship of the true God. The same Christians also, not only
discontinued to break the statues and images of the gods, but they
took the choicest of them, that were the work of the most
celebrated
artists, and set them up in public places to ornament their cities,
as well as to recall to the memory of those who beheld them, how
grossthe
blindness* of their ancestors had been, and how powerful the grace
that had delivered them from it."The
Marquis d'Argens further observes: "It were to be wished, that
Father Petau, having so judiciously considered the works of Julian,
had formed an equally correct idea of the person of that Emperor. I
cannot discover through what caprice he takes it amiss, that a
certain learned Professor** has praised the civil virtues of
Julian,
and condemned the evidently false calumnies that almost all the
ecclesiastical authors have lavished upon him; and amongst the rest
Gregory and Cyril, who to the good arguments they have adduced
against the false reasoning of Julian, have added insults which
ought
never to have been used by any defender of truth. They have
cruelly*
The Heathens would here reply to Father Petau. Which is
the greater blindness of the two,— ours, in worshipping the
images of deiform processions from the ineffable principle
of things, and who are eternally united to him; or that of
the Papists, in worshipping the images of worthless men
** Monsieur de la Bletric.calumniated
this Emperor to favour
their good cause,
and confounded the just, wise, clement, and most courageous prince,
with the Pagan philosopher and theologian; when they ought simply
to
have refuted him with argument, in no case with insult, and still
less with calumnies so evidently false, that during fourteen
centuries, in which they have been so often repeated, they have
never
been accredited, nor enabled to assume even an air of
truth."A
wise Christian philosopher, La Mothe, Le Vayer, in reflecting on
the
great virtues with which Julian was endowed, on the contempt he
manifested for death, on the firmness with which he consoled those
who wept around him, and on his last conversation with Maximus and
Priscus on the immortality of the soul, says, "that after such
testimonies of a virtue, to which
nothing appears to be wanting but the faith to give its professor a
place amongst the blessed*,
we have cause to wonder that*
According to this
wise Christian philosopher
therefore,
not only all the confessedly wise and virtuousHeathens
that lived posterior, but those also who lived anterior to the
promulgation of the Christian religion, will have no place
hereafter
among the blessed.Cyril
should have tried to make us believe, that Julian was a mean and
cowardly prince*. Those who judge of men that lived in former ages
by
those who have lived in more recent times, may feel little surprise
at the proceedings of Cyril. It has rarely happened that long
animosity and abuse have not been introduced into religious
controversies."After
what has been above said of Julian, I deem it necessary to observe,
that Father Petau is egregiously mistaken in supposing that Cyril
has
preserved the whole of that Emperor's arguments against the
Christians: and the Marquis D'Argêns is also mistaken when he says,
that "the passages of Julian's text which are*
This is by no means wonderful in Cyril, when we consider
that he is, with the strongest reason, suspected of being
the cause of the murder of Hypatia, who was one of the
brightest ornaments of the Alexandrian school, and who was
not only a prodigy of learning, but also a paragon of
beauty.abridged
or omitted, aire very few." For Hieronymus in Epist. 83.
Ad Magnum Oratorem Romanum,
testifies that this work consisted of seven books; three of which
only Cyril attempted to confute, as is evident from his own words,
[—Greek—] "Julian wrote three books against the holy
Evangelists." But as Fabricius observes, (in Biblioth. Græc.
tom. vii. p. 89.) in the other four books, he appears to have
attacked the remaining books of the Scriptures, i. e. the books of
the Old Testament.With
respect, however, to the three books which Cyril has endeavoured to
confute, it appears to me, that he has only selected such parts of
these books as he thought he could most easily answer. For that he
has not given even the substance of these three books, is evident
from the words of Julian himself, as recorded by Cyril. For Julian,
after certain invectives both against Christ and John, says, "These
things, therefore, we shall shortly discuss, when we come
particularly to considerthe
monstrous deeds and fraudulent machinations of the Evangelists*."
There is no particular discussion however of these in any part of
the
extracts preserved by Cyril.That
the work, indeed, of Julian against the Christians was of
considerable extent, is evident from the testimony of his
contemporary, Libanius; who, in his admirable funeral oration on
this
most extraordinary man, has the following remarkable passage: "But
when the winter had extended the nights, Julian, besides many other
beautiful works, attacked the books which make a man of Palestine
to
be a God, and the son of God; and in
a long contest, and
with strenuous arguments, evinced that what is said in these
writings
is ridiculous and nugatory. And in the execution of this work he
appears to have excelled in wisdom the Tyrian old man.***
[—Greek—]
** viz. Porphyry, who was of Tyre, and who, as is well
known, wrote a work against the Christians, which was
publicly burnt by order of the Emperor Constantine.In
asserting this however, may the Tyrian be propitious to me, and
benevolently receive what I have said, he having been vanquished by
his son*."With
respect to Celsus, the author of the following Fragments, he lived
in
the time of the Emperor Adrian. and was, if Origen may be credited,
an Epicurean philosopher. That he might indeed, at some former
period
of his life, have been an Epicurean maybe admitted; but it would be
highly absurd to suppose that he was so when he wrote this
invective
against the Christians; for the arguments which he mostly employs
show that he was well skilled m the philosophy of Plato: and to
suppose, as Origen does, that he availed himself of arguments
in*
[—Greek—]which
he did not believe, and consequently conceived to be erroneous, in
order to confute doctrines which he was persuaded are false, would
be
to make him, instead of a philosopher, a fool. As to Origen, though
he abandoned philosophy for Christianity, he was considered as
heterodox by many of the Christian sect. Hence, with some of the
Catholics, his future salvation became a matter of doubt*; and this
induced the celebrated Johannes Picus Mirandulanus, in the last of
his Theological
conclusions according to his own opinion,
to say: "Rationabilius est credere Uriginem esse salvum, quam
credere ipsum esse damnatum,"
i. e. It is more reasonable to believe that Origen is saved, than
that he is damned.I
shall conclude this Introduction with the following extract.*
'In Prato Spiritual!, c. 26, quod citatur, à VIL Synodo,
et à Johanne Diacono, lib. ii. c. 45. vitas B. Gregorii
narratur fevelatio, qua Origines viras est in Gehenna ignis
cum Alio et Netftorio."*—Fobric. BMiotk Grate torn. v. p.
216Directions
of Dr. Barlow, Bishop of Lincoln, to a young divine."It
will be of great use for a divine to be acquainted with the arts,
knavery, and fraud of the Roman inquisitor, in purging, correcting,
or rather corrupting authors in all arts and faculties. For this
purpose we may consult the
Index Expurgatorius.
By considering this Index, we come to know the best editions of
many
good books."1st.
The best books; that is, those that are condemned."2nd.
The best editions; viz. those that are dated before the
Index, and
consequently not altered."3rd.
The Index
is a good common place book, to point out who has written well
against the Church, p. 70."Ockam
is damned in the
Index, and
therefore we may be sure he was guilty of telling some great truth,
p. 41.*"*
The Bishop's rule is as good for one church as for
another, and every church has its Index.