In the 8th book of the Ecclesiastical History (c. ii) Eusebius states that it is no part of his plan to relate all the wickedness and dissensions of the Christians before the persecution, or to name those who were untrue to the faith ; adding, "we shall only, upon the whole, in- troduce those events into our histor}- that may be prof- itable first to us of the present da}', and hereafter to pos- terity." In tlie Martyr. Pahstin. (ch. xii)he states as a historical principle that the " events most suitable to be recorded in a history of the martyrs are those which redound to their honor." Gibbon {Decline and Fall, ch. xvi) remarks that " such an acknowledgment will naturally excite a suspicion that a writer who has so openly violated one of the fundamental laws of his-
EUSEBIUS
358
EUSEBIUS
tory has not paid a verj' strict regard to the observ- ance of th<! otiier." Certainly it was an error of judg- ment in Eusebiiis to hold back anything in his ac- counts. The Scripture might have tauglit him better ; it does not omit the faults of patriarchs or saints. If nothing, moreover, is to be told of martyrs but " what redounds to their honor," one's admiration of these honorable facts must be lessened by the fear that what is kept back might counterbalance what is told. Tiie jirinciple of Eusebius is here historically bad. But Gibbon attacks Eusebius still more strongly in his Vindication of Chapters xv and xvi of his history. Eusebius gives as the title of eh. xxxi, bk. xii, of the Prccparat. JEvang., the question "How far it may be lawful to use falsehood as a medicine for the benefit of those who need such a procedure ?" He begins the chapter with a citation from Plato (Z)e Legihus, ii), as follows: "A legislator of any value, even if the fact w-ere not such as our discourse has just established it, if in any case he might make bold to deceive young persons for their advantage ; could he possiblj"^ incul- cate any falsehood more jjrofitable than this, or more potent to lead all without force or compulsion to the practice of all justice 7 ' Truth, my friend, is honora- ble and permanent ; V>ut not, it would seem, verj' easy of persuasion.' To this passage of Plato, Eusebius adds: "You may find a thousand such instances in the Scriptures, where God is described as jealous, or sleeping, or angry, or liable to other human affections, so expressed for the advantage of those icho require such a method (tir' lotptKuci roJv Cio^i'tvujv tov toiovtov t()6- 'H'ov).' " This is all that is said on the subject, and it may be interpreted to mean nothing more than that one's statements must be adapted to the understanding of his hearers or readers. But the use of the word "falsehood" in the heading of the chapter shows that, in the mind of Eusebius, either there was no just ap- preciation of the difference between "falsehood" and "accommodation," or else that his moral sense as to veracity had been vitiated by the ecclesiastical casu- istry which even in his time had begun to show itself. It is easily to be seen, however, that Gibbon really misleads his readers by bis statement of the case : " In this chapter," saj's he, " Eusebius alleges a passage of Plato which approves the occasional practice of pious and salutary frauds; nor is he ashamed to justify the sentiments of the Athenian philosopher by the exam- ple of the sacred writers of the Old Testament." This is not warranted bj' the passage, which is fully cited above. We adopt, nevertheless, the remark of Wad- dington {History of the Church, eh. vi, ad fin.) : " It ■was disgraceful to the less enlightened fathers of the second and third centuries that, even in the midst of trial and tribulation, they borrowed a momentary suc- cor from the profession of falsehood ; but the same ex- pedient was still more shameful to Eusebius, who flourished during the prosperity of the Church, whose age and more extensive learning left him no excuse in ignorance or inexperience, and whose great name and unquestionable i)iety gave sanction and authority to all his opinions. There can be no doubt, then, that the publication of that detestable principle in any one of his writings, however modified and limited by his explanation, must to a certain extent disturb our con- fidence in the rest ; the mind which does not profess to be constantly guided by truth possesses no claim to our implicit submission. Nevertheless, the works of Eusebius must at last be judged by the character which severally jiervades them, not b}' any single principle which the author has once onl_y laid down, to which he has not intended (as it would seem) to give general application, and which he has manifestl}' proposed rather as a jihilosophical speculation than as a rule for his own composition. At least we feel convinced that whoever shall calmly penusc his Ecclesig,slical Histonj will not discover in it any deliberate intention to de- ceive ; in the relation of miraculous stories he is more
sparing than most of the Church historians who suc- ceeded him, and seemingly even than those whom he has copied ; and, upon the whole, we shall not do him more than justice if we consider him as an avowed but honest advocate, many of whose statements must be examined with suspicion, while the greater part bear direct and incontestable marks of truth."