[3371] The construction is a little involved, quæ nulli nec homines scire nec ipsi qui appellantur dii mundi queunt--"which none, neither men can know, nor those...of the world can reach, except those whom," etc.
[3372] In the Latin, vel potestate inversa, which according to Oehler is the ms. reading, while Orelli speaks of it as an emendation of LB. (where it is certainty found, but without any indication of its source), and with most edd. reads universa--"by His universal power."
[3373] So the ms. according to Hildebrand, reading præcipi=bat. Most edd., however, following Gelenius, read faciebat--"made them lame."
[3374] Lit., "to bind fast the motions of the members," adopting the reading of most edd., motus alligare membrorum (ms. c-al-igare).
[3375] The ms. reads nervorum duritia-m, for which Ursinus, with most edd., reads as above, merely dropping m; Hildebrand and Oehler insert in, and read, from a conjecture of Ursinus adopted by Elmenhorst, c-ol-ligare--"to bind into stiffness."
[3376] Ursinus suggested di-, "most terrible," for the ms. durissimis.
[3377] So the ms. reading, multa mala de illarum contra insinuator (mala is perhaps in the abl., agreeing with a lost word), which has been regarded by Heraldus and Stewechius, followed by Orelli, as mutilated, and is so read in the first ed., and by Ursinus and LB. The passage is in all cases left obscure and doubtful, and we may therefore be excused discussing its meaning here.
[3378] Lit., "to the ends of fitting duties."
[3379] In the original, seminaria abscidit,--the former word used of nurseries for plants, while the latter may be either as above (from abscindo), or may mean "cut off " (from abscido); but in both cases the general meaning is the same, and the metaphor is in either slightly confused.
[3380] Lit., "familiar to be accosted,"--the supine, as in the preceding clause.
[3381] So the edd., reading corporalibus affectos malis, but the ms. inserts after malis the word morbis ("with evil bodily diseases"); but according to Hildebrand this word is marked as spurious.
64. What, then, constrains you, what excites you to revile, to rail at, to hate implacably Him whom no man [3382] can accuse of any crime? [3383] Tyrants and your kings, who, putting away all fear of the gods, plunder and pillage the treasuries of temples; who by proscription, banishment, [3384] and slaughter, strip the state of its nobles? who, with licentious violence, undermine and wrest away the chastity of matrons and maidens,--these men you name indigites and divi; and you worship with couches, altars, temples, and other service, and by celebrating their games and birthdays, those whom it was fitting that you should assail with keenest [3385] hatred. And all those, too, who by writing books assail in many forms with biting reproaches public manners; who censure, brand, and tear in pieces your luxurious habits and lives; who carry down to posterity evil reports of their own times [3386] in their enduring writings; who seek to persuade men that the rights of marriage should be held in common; [3387] who lie with boys, beautiful, lustful, naked; who declare that you are beasts, runaways, exiles, and mad and frantic slaves of the most worthless character,--all these with wonder and applause you exalt to the stars of heaven, you place in the shrines of your libraries, you present with chariots and statues, and as much as in you lies, gift with a kind of immortality, as it were, by the witness which immortal titles bear to them. Christ alone you would tear in pieces, [3388] you would rend asunder, if you could do so to a god; nay, Him alone you would, were it allowed, gnaw with bloody mouths, and break His bones in pieces, and devour Him like beasts of the field. For what that He has done, tell, I pray you, for what crime? [3389] What has He done to turn aside the course of justice, and rouse you to hatred made fierce by maddening torments? Is it because He declared that He was sent by the only true King to be your soul's guardian, and to bring to you the immortality which you believe that you already possess, relying on the assertions of a few men? But even if you were assured that He spoke falsely, that He even held out hopes without the slightest foundation, not even in this case do I see any reason that you should hate and condemn Him with bitter reproaches. Nay, if you were kind and gentle in spirit, you ought to esteem Him even for this alone, that He promised to you things which you might well wish and hope for; that He was the bearer of good news; that His message was such as to trouble no one's mind, nay, rather to fill all with less anxious expectation. [3390]
[3382] So the edd., reading nemo h-om-i-n-um, except Hildebrand and Oehler, who retain the ms. om-n-i-um--"no one of all."
[3383] John viii. 46: "Which of you convinceth me of sin?"
[3384] So Heraldus and LB., followed by later edd., reading exiliis for the ms. ex-uis, for which Gelenius, Canterus, and Ursinus read et suis--"and by their slaughters."
[3385] Here, as frequently in Arnobius, the comparative is used instead of the superlative.
[3386] "To posterity evil reports of their own time"--sui temporis posteris notas--so emended by Ursinus, followed by Orelli and Hildebrand, for the ms. in temporis posteri-s, retained by LB., and with the omission of s in the 1st ed.; but this requires our looking on the passage as defective.
[3387] The reference is clearly to the well-known passage in Plato's Republic. [See the sickening details, book v. p. 282, Jowett's trans.]
[3388] So Gelenius, LB., and Orelli, reading con-v-ell-e-refor the ms. con-p-ell-a-re, "to accost" or "abuse," which is out of place here. Canterus suggested com-p-il-are, "to plunder," which also occurs in the sense "to cudgel."
[3389] Supply, "do you pursue Him so fiercely?"
[3390] These words are followed in the edition of Gelenius by ch. 2-5 of the second book, seemingly without any mark to denote transposition; while Ursinus inserted the same chapters--beginning, however, with the last sentence of the first chapter (read as mentioned in the note on it)--but prefixed an asterisk, to mark a departure from the order of the ms. The later editors have not adopted either change.
65. Oh ungrateful and impious age, prepared [3391] for its own destruction by its extraordinary obstinacy! If there had come to you a physician from lands far distant and unknown to you before, offering some medicine to keep off from you altogether every kind of disease and sickness, would you not all eagerly hasten to him? Would you not with every kind of flattery and honour receive him into your houses, and treat him kindly? Would you not wish that that kind of medicine should be quite sure, and should be genuine, which promised that even to the utmost limits of life you should be free from such countless bodily distresses? And though it were a doubtful matter, you would yet entrust yourselves to him; nor would you hesitate to drink the unknown draught, indited by the hope of health set before you and by the love of safety. [3392] Christ shone out and appeared to tell us news of the utmost importance, bringing an omen of prosperity, and a message of safety to those who believe. What, I pray you, means [3393] this cruelty, what such barbarity, nay rather, to speak more truly, scornful [3394] pride, not only to harass the messenger and bearer of so great a gift with taunting words; but even to assail Him with fierce hostility, and with all the weapons which can be showered upon Him, and with all modes of destruction? Are His words displeasing, and are you offended when you hear them? Count them as but a soothsayer's empty tales. Does He speak very stupidly, and promise foolish gifts? Laugh with scorn as wise men, and leave Him in His folly [3395] to be tossed about among His errors. What means this fierceness, to repeat what has been said more than once; what a passion, so murderous? to declare implacable hostility towards one who has done nothing to deserve it at your hands; to wish, if it were allowed you, to tear Him limb from limb, who not only did no man any harm, but with uniform kindness [3396] told His enemies what salvation was being brought to them from God Supreme, what must be done that they might escape destruction and obtain an immortality which they knew not of? And when the strange and unheard-of things which were held out staggered the minds of those who heard Him, and made them hesitate to believe, though master of every power and destroyer of death itself He suffered His human form to be slain, that from the result [3397] they might know that the hopes were safe which they had long entertained about the soul's salvation, and that in no other way could they avoid the danger of death.
[3391] So Ursinus suggested in the margin, followed by LB. and Orelli, reading in privatam perniciem p-a-r-atum for the ms. p-r-iv-atum, which is clearly derived from the preceding privatam, but is, though unintelligible also, retained in the two Roman edd. The conclusion of the sentence is, literally, "obstinacy of spirit."
[3392] In the original, spe salutis proposita atque amore incolumitatis.
[3393] Lit., "is"--est.
[3394] So all the edd., reading fastidi-os-um supercilium, which Crusius says the ms. reads with os omitted, i.e., "pride, scorn."
[3395] So the edd., reading fatuita-tem, for the ms. fatuita-n-tem, which may, however, point to a verb not found elsewhere.
[3396] i.e., to friends and foes alike. The ms. reads æqualiter benignus hostibus dicere, which is retained by Orelli, supporting an ellipsis of fuerit, i.e., "He was kind to say," which might be received; but it is more natural to suppose that -t has dropped off, and read diceret as above, with the two Roman editions and LB. Gelenius, followed by Ursinus, emended omnibus docuerit--"with uniform kindness taught to all." It may be well to give here an instance of the very insufficient grounds on which supposed references to Scripture are sometimes based. Orelli considers that Arnobius here refers (videtur respexisse, he says) to Col. i. 21, 22, "You, that were sometimes alienated and enemies in mind by wicked works, yet now hath He reconciled in the body of His flesh through death," to which, though the words which follow might indeed be thought to have a very distant resemblance, they can in no way be shown to refer.
[3397] i.e., from His resurrection, which showed that death's power was broken by Him.