४ sect was the eucharist. And it was in celebrating the eucharist that they committed the abominations with which the fathers have reproached them. We might indeed suspect the testimony of the fathers, it being well known that in declaiming against heretics they are apt to exaggerate, and did not always scrupulously adhere to truth. But that the Manichees • abandoned themselves, in the celebration of their eucharist, to the most impure and infamous practices, is not only attested by them, but has been often proved by unexceptionable witnesses, nay, and owned by themselves, before the civil magistrates, in Italy, in Gaul, in Paphlagonia, • and Africa,' But is not that a new charge? Is not this different from what we have been considering? The Manichees abandoned themselves, in the celebration of the eucharist, to the most impure * and infamous practices.' Those expressions seem to me to imply promiscuous lewdness, or the general practice of impurity at their eucharist. But pope Leo, as we have seen, speaks only of one girl debauched by a youth,' for a certain purpose. And in a like manner August. de Hær. cap. 46. T: 8. a But Mr. Bower has some other evidence beside that of the fathers, and says it has been proved by unexceptionable witnesses, and has been owned by themselves.' I suppose Mr. B. may have an eye to a passage in Augustine, which is to this purpose: It is said that some of them have confessed it before magistrates, not only in Paphlagonia, but likewise in Gaul. This I heard at Rome from a catholic Christian.' Upon which I would observe, first, that Augustine does not there speak of the Manichees abandoning themselves to impure practices,' but of a particular fact, like to that mentioned by Leo. Secondly, Mr. B's expressions are too strong and positive. Augustine only says that he had heard such a thing from a catholic at Rome. Thirdly, this fact, or these facts are laid at remote places. If Augustine had had proofs of them at home, or near at hand, he needed not to have gone so far as Paphlagonia and Gaul in quest of them. Fourthly, Mr. B. speaks of its being proved and owned by themselves before civil magistrates in Italy and Africa.' Which I do not see in Augustine, but only Gaul and Paphlagonia; unless some other passage be also referred to. Mr. B. concludes the note upon which I have made these animadversions, saying: The • Waldenses, who sprung up in the twelfth century, were stigmatized by their enemies with the 'odious name of Manichees, but that their doctrine was different from that of the Manichees, nay, that it was altogether orthodox, I will shew in a more proper place.' When Mr. B. comes to that part of his work, I suppose he will have the task of shewing, not only that the Waldenses were unjustly stigmatized with the Manichæan doctrine, but likewise, that they were not guilty of the impure and infamous practices generally imputed to the Manichees. And perhaps he may also discern at length, that those crimes were unjustly charged upon the real Manichees, or such as owned themselves disciples of Mani. But however that may be, I have taken the liberty to make these remarks for supporting what I had said formerly, and which I still think to be right: not with a design to detract from the merit of Mr. Bower's laborious and useful work, which I heartily wish he may carry on with continued and increasing acceptance and esteem. • Hoc se facere quidam confessi esse in publico judicio perhibentur, non tantum in Paphlagonia, sed etiam in Galliâ, sicut a quodam Romæ Christiano catholico audivi. De Natura Boni. c. 47. T. 8. CHA P. LXIV. ARNOBIUS. I. His history, and work, and time. II. His character. III. Select passages: 1. The sum and design of the Christian religion. 2. Arguments for the truth of the Christian religion. 3. Objec tions against it. 4. His notion concerning the divinity of Christ, and the Spirit. 5. Whether he was a Manichee? 6. Miracles in his time. 7. Ends of Christ's death. 8. Of Free-will. 9. Heathens offended at Cicero's works. 10. An argument for free inquiry. IV. His testimony to the scriptures. V. Extracts out of another Arnobius's Commentary upon the Psalms. a SAYS Jerom in his Catalogue: Arnobius in the time of the emperor Dioclesian, taught rhetoric at Sicca in Africa, with great reputation, and wrote those volumes against the Gentiles, which are well known.' b In his letter to Magnus, shewing the merit of Christian writers, and particularly their Latin authors, he says: Arnobius published seven volumes against the Gentiles, and his scholar Lactantius as many: who also wrote two other volumes, Of the Wrath, and the Workmanship of God: which if you read, you will find in them an epitome of what is valuable in the Dia-logues of Cicero.' с In another place Jerom passeth a severe and ill-natured censure upon Arnobius's performance, saying, that he is unequal and prolix, and for want of divisions of his work confused. Arnobius is likewise mentioned by Jerom with some other learned ecclesiastical writers; who, he says, ought to be read with discretion, taking what is good in them, and rejecting what is bad. f In Jerom's Chronicle at the 20th year of Constantine, or the year of Christ 326, are these words: Arnobius a rhetorician is famous in Africa, who while he taught the youth rhetoric 'at Sicca, and was yet a heathen, was admonished in his dreams to embrace Christianity. But ' when he applied to the bishop of the place for baptism, he rejected him, because he had been wont to oppose the Christian doctrine. Whereupon he composed an excellent work against his old religion, and thus at length, as by hostages of his piety, he obtained the seal of the ' covenant.' According to this account, Arnobius's work against the Gentiles was composed by him whilst à catechumen only and before he was a complete Christian. Nay, Tillemont from this passage argues, that Arnobius was not baptized, nor so much as a catechumen. And Cave too, without hesitation says, that he was not then so much as a catechumen, instructed in the first • rudiments of the faith.' But each of those suppositions appears to me inconsistent with Arnobius's ordinary style, who› • Arnobius, sub Diocletiano principe Siccæ apud Africam Aorentissime rhetoricam docuit, scripsitque adversus Gentes quæ vulgo extant volumina. De V. I. c. 79. b Septem libros adversus Gentes Arnobius edidit, totidemque discipulus ejus Lactantius, qui de Irâ quoque & Opificio Dei duo volumina condidit; quos si legere volueris, dialogorum Ciceronis in eis επιτομην reperies. Ep. 83. • Arnobius inæqualis & nimius, & absque operis sui partitione confusus. Ad Paulin. Ep. 49. al. 13. T. 4. p. 567. Cave, in his English life of Arnobius, at the end of his second volume of The Lives of the Fathers, says: His style ⚫ though censured by Jerom, is yet sufficiently elegant.-Nor is his work so confused and immethodical, as that father seems to insinuate: as is evident to any that will be at the pains attentively to read it, and observe how his design is laid, his argument prosecuted, and how the several parts of ⚫ it do naturally enough one depend upon another.' So Cave. • Ego Origenem propter eruditionem sic interdum legen-.. dum arbitror, quomodo Tertullianum, Novatum, Arnobium, & nonnullos ecclesiasticos scriptores Græcos pariter & Latinos: ut bona eorum eligamus, vitemusque contraria. Hier. Ep. 56.. al. 76. T. 4. p. 589. Arnobius rhetor clarus in Africâ habetur; qui quum in civitate Siccæ ad declamandum juvenes erudiret, & adhuc ethnicus ad credulitatem somniis compelleretur, neque ab episcopo obtineret fidem, quam semper oppugnaverat, elucubravit adversus pristinam religionem luculentissimos libros, & tandem, velut quibusdam obsidibus pietatis, fœdus impetravit. Chr. 1. ii. p. 181. 8-puisque c'est la production d'un homme qui n'étoit baptisé, ou qui même n'étoit pas encore catécumène. Tillem. Arnobe. Mem. Ec. T. 4, P. 2. p. 1209. See Cave's life of Arnobius in English, as above note". continually speaks of himself as a Christian, and reckons himself one of them. Many such passages might be alleged; and I put a few in the margin : but it is the whole strain of the work. It may be argued likewise, that he was not barely a catechumen at that time, from the des cription he gives of the Christian worship in their assemblies: not only discourses, but prayers likewise; at which last, as is generally said, catechumens were not allowed to be present. Indeed I do not see how Arnobius could so confidently assert the innocence and usefulness of every part of Christian worship, as he does, if he was not fully acquainted with it. Not to add, that it would seem a very extraordinary step, for a man to undertake the public defence of a religion, who did not understand the rudiments of it. I must therefore take the liberty to say, that I cannot but question the genuineness of that passage. That Arnobius was once a blind and zealous idolater, is fully owned and confessed by him-self. And he professeth to have been taught by Christ, or that Christ was his master. But I do not perceive him any where to ascribe his conversion to dreams by which he had been admonished whilst a heathen. Nor does Jerom elsewhere mention, or hint at that matter. It is also observable, that in Jerom's Catalogue, Arnobius is said to have flourished in the time of Dioclesian; whereas in the passage in the Chronicle, he is placed at the twentieth year of Constantine. And if Arnobius had been in the circumstances intimated. in that passage, he must have been intent upon dispatch. But it is manifest from the work itself, that it is no hasty performance, but a laboured composition, fit to see the light and many authors, both Greek and Latin, are here quoted. Nor has Arnobius any where hinted, that he was under any sort of compulsion or necessity to engage in this work. But at the beginning he speaks of his undertaking as perfectly free and voluntary; and says, that some injurious reproaches cast upon the Christians, induced him to write in their defence, с Add these considerations to that before-mentioned, that Arnobius writes as a Christian ; and it must, I think, appear somewhat probable, that Jerom was not the author of that article in the Chronicle; and that it was inserted after his time by some credulous person, not thoroughly acquainted with Arnobius's history, or work. According to Cave, Arnobius flourished about the year 303. However, it is not easy to settle exactly the time of the work he has left us. b Tillemont is inclined to the year 297, or sooner: whom Beausobre follows, supposing Arnobius to have written in 295. Basnage thinks the year 303, or 304, more likely. h The article in Jerom's Chronicle, whether his or not, seems to deserve but little regard. Arnobius must be there wrong placed, at the year of Christ 325 or 326; for in his Catalogue Jerom says, that Arnobius flourished under Dioclesian, and that Lactantius, Arnobius's scholar, was appointed professor of rhetoric at Nicomedia under the same emperor: which must be understood to have been done before the persecution which began in 302 or 303. For after that it cannot be supposed, that Dioclesian would invite a Christian to come and settle in the city, where his palace was. There are some notes of time in the work itself. For Arnobius says, that it was then three hundred years, more or less, since the rise of Christianity. And heathens are brought in object Nihil sumus aliud Christiani, 1. i. p. 41. f. Nationibus enim sumus in cunctis, p. 10. m. Audetis nos ridere! 1. ii. p. 51. Non ergo, quod sequimur, novum est, sed nos sero addidicimus, ib. p. 95. & passim. b Nam nostra quidem scripta cur ignibus meruerunt dari ? cur immaniter conventicula dirui? in quibus summus oratur Deus, pax cunctis & venia postulatur magistratibus, exercitibus, regibus, familiaribus, inimicis, adhuc vitam degentibus, & resolutis corporum vinctione; in quibus aliud auditur nihil, nisi quod humanos faciat, nisi quod mites, verecundos, pudicos, castos, familiaris communicatores rei, & cum omnibus consolida germanitatis necessitudine copulatos. Arnob. 1. iv. p. 152. Lugdun. Bat. 1651. Vid. & lib. 1. p. 14. f. 15. in. Venerabar, o cæcitas! nuper simulacra modo ex fornacibus promta, in incudibus deos, & malleis fabricatos: elephantorum ossa, picturatas veternosis in arboribus tænias si quando conspexeram, lubricatum lapidem & ex olivi unguine sordidatum, tamquam inesset vis præsens, adulabar, affabar, & beneficia poscebam nihil sentiente de trunco. Nunc doctore tanto in vias veritatis inductus, omnia ista, quæ sint, scio: digna de dignis sentio, contumeliam nomini nullam facio divino: & quid cuique debeatur, vel persona, vel capiti, inconfusis gradibus atque auctoritatibus, tribuo. Id. 1. i. p. 22, 23. d Catalogues of authors quoted by Arnobius may be seen in Fabr. Bib. Lat. Vol. iii. p. 391, &c. Nourry Apparat. Tom. ii. p. 537, &c. Quoniam, comperi'nonnullos-statui pro captu & mediocritate sermonis contraire invidiæ, & calumniosas dissolvere criminationes, 1. i. in. f Mem. Ec. T. iv. P. 3. p. 1210. & 1374. i Trecenti sunt anni, minus vel plus aliquid, ex quo cœpimus esse Christiani, & terrarum in orbe censeri, l. i. p. 9 in. ing, that the Christian religion had not a being four hundred years ago. And soon after it is said to be a thousand and fifty years since the foundation of Rome, or thereabout. Following the ordinary computation of that epoch, Arnobius must have written in the year of our Lord 297, or 298. And Pagi was once of opinion, that Arnobius's books were published in the year of Christ 298, or 299, at the latest. But afterwards observing, that Arnobius useth words denoting such sufferings as followed Dioclesian's edict for a general persecution, he was induced to alter his mind, and to conclude, that he did not write till after the year 302. And from hence he was led to infer, that Arnobius followed another, and very uncommon computation of the Roman æra, which placeth the foundation of the city thirteen years later than the Varronian account. Consequently Arnobius wrote in the year of Christ 310, which, according to the last mentioned computation, is in the 1050th year of Rome. d I think, that if the demolition of the churches, and the burning of the Christian scriptures, and other afflictions of Christians for the sake of their principles, which Arnobius speaks. of, relate to the persecution under Dioclesian; Arnobius could not write till the year 303, or after. Nevertheless, as he speaks in a loose and general manner, both of the time of the rise of Christianity, and of the foundation of the city; I see no reason to conclude that he made use of a different computation from the common. For though it were then 1056 or 1057 years from the foundation of Rome, (according to the common computation, and that too followed by him;) he might express himself as he has done, or say, it was about 1050 years. e It may be reckoned somewhat strange, that Lactantius, when he mentions the Latin Christian apologists, Minucius, Tertullian, and Cyprian, should take no notice of Arnobius; if he was his master, as Jerom says in his Catalogue, and if he wrote before him. With regard to this difficulty, I would say, Lactantius appears to be so honest and generous a man, that I cannot impute his silence to envy, or any other bad principle. Indeed, according to the whole strain of Arnobius's work, he wrote when Christianity was under discouragements, and therefore before the sun-shine of Constantine's reign: whereas it is a common opinion, that the Institutions of Lactantius, written against the gentiles, were not published, as we now have them, before the year 319, or 320, or 321. But however that may be, I think it probable, that the main part of the Institutions was written during the time of Dioclesian's persecution; when Lactantius might be entirely ignorant of what Arnobius had done, or was doing in Africa, at a great distance from him. For they might be both writing at one and the same time, without any communication of their several designs to each other, and without a possibility of it. Arnobius was a heathen a good while. His work is the work of a man of vast reading, and of a mature age at least. Nor have we any account of any thing done by him afterwards: possibly he was then far advanced in life, and died soon after. And if his books were not composed before the year of our Lord 305, or 306, Lactantius, probably, would be entirely unacquainted with them, when he wrote his Institutions. Moreover, supposing the persecution to have been begun before Arnobius's work was composed, there might be no fair opportunity to make it public, till that affliction ceased. h Cave and some others say, that Arnobius did not write till after the beginning of Dioclesian's persecution. And it is certain, that he not only often speaks of the afflictions endured by Christians, but as if they suffered at the very time: for he prays to God to forgive those that persecuted his servants; and he sometimes speaks of their sufferings in the present tense. If the persecution was begun before he was converted, and set about his work, it must have raged for some good while, before his Apology was finished. Consequently, it could not be written, much less published, quite so soon as some have thought. Upon the whole I am inclined to think, without being positive, that Arnobius did not write till some time after the beginning of the persecution ordered by Dioclesian, possibly about the year 305, or 306. Ante quadringentos annos religio, inquit, vestra non fuit, 1. ii. p. 94. in. Etatis urbs Roma cujus esse in annalibus indicitur? Annos ducit quinquaginta & mille, aut non multum ab his minus, l. ii. p. 94. infr. m. Pagi in Baron. Ann. 302. m. 14, 15, 16. d See before note P. 245. f • Inst. l. v. c. I. p. 459. Scripti enim sunt hi libri anno 303, vel non diu post, exortâ jam persecutione. Cave H. L. in Arnobio. • Da veniam, rex summe, tuos persequentibus servos, &c. 1. i. p. 18. in. Vid. 1. ii. p. 44, 45. Were we inquiring at what time Arnobius flourished as a rhetorician, F should make no scruple to say, that he flourished about the year 290, or sooner. But as our inquiry is, when he wrote for the Christians, we place him somewhat lower. Though Arnobius has quoted a large number of Greek and Roman authors, he has not mentioned any Christian writers. Some think that he made great use of Clement of Alexandria : but he has not named him. b a It is supposed that this work is not come down to us complete; but that somewhat is want ing at the end, if not also at the beginning. Arnobius's books against the Gentiles have never yet been divided into chapters or smaller sections: though, as Nourry says, it might be easily done, and would remove the seeming confusion which there is in the method, and render the reading of this author more agreeable. However, as yet we have only the original division of this work into seven books. There is another of this name, author of Brief Commentaries upon the 150 Psalms, formerly supposed the same with our Arnobius, but now universally allowed by learned men to be a different person, and to have lived in the fifth century, about the year 461. I design at the end of this chapter to insert a brief account of his testimony to the scriptures. II. Having given a general account of Arnobius, and his work, I shall add some things to illustrate his character. f с It has been often said of Arnobius and Lactantius, that they undertook the defence of Christianity before they understood it. In answer to which it is observed by a learned and judicious writer, That this must be understood of the Christian system, as to doctrines and precepts: which it is not to be wondered, if he was not perfectly acquainted with, since he wrote his books before he was admitted by baptism into the church, and fully instructed in those points. But as to the general evidence of Christianity, that he understood very well, and by his knowledge and serious consideration of it, embraced the faith in that discouraging. season the reign of Dioclesian.' I wish that vindication of our Christian apologist had been more complete. For in order to judge of the evidence of a religion, it seems requisite, that a man understand its doctrines; or what it teaches, and consists of. Nor do I perceive how Arnobius could be acquainted with our Lord's works, or miracles, and not also know his words, or the doctrines and precepts of the Christian religion. i I observe then, that Arnobius knew and believed the several following things; 1. He believed in one God Almighty, the creator of all things. 2. He believed, that Jesus Christ came from God, and that he proved his divine commission. 3. He was acquainted with the sublime morality taught by our Saviour on the mount and elsewhere. 4. He believed, that' Jesus' Christ came to save lost sinners: 5. And that he promised eternal life, and gave full assurance of his being able to perform what he promised. 6. He likewise believed and expected the resurrection of the dead. 7. He knew that the gospel of Christ, or the Christian religion, did not make promises of temporal, earthly blessings; but taught men to bear afflictions, and even m Vid. Nourry, Diss. in Arnob. in App. T. ii. p. 430. C. 481, 482, 487. C. D. 491. D. E. & 492. b Id. ib. p. 287. D. E. с Quapropter si quis in novâ aliquâ horum librorum editione, eos, quod non ita difficile est, in capita aut sectiones distribuat; is sane & huic confusioni medebitur, & tædium laboremque lectoris plurimum sublevabit. Id. ib. p. 287. C. d Cave Hist. L. in Arnobio Juniore. • See Mr. Warburton's Divine Legation, Vol. i. p. 3. See Dr. Chapman's Eusebius, Vol. i. p. 272. 5 Neque enim qualitas & deformitas mortis dicta ejus immutat aut facta, 1. i. p. 23. m. Vid. & p. 6. in. " Audetis ridere nos, quod Patrem rerum & Deum veneramur & colimus, quodque illi dedamus & permittamus spes nostras? 1. ii. p. 51. m. & alibi passim. i rei maxima causâ a summo rege ad nos missus, I. i. p. 24. & passim. k Ib. P. 5. & 6. Sed si, inquiunt, Christus in hoc missus a Deo est, ut infelices animas ab interitionis exitio liberaret,- —1. ii. p. 87. 'Ut enim dii certi certas apud vos habent tutelas, licentias, potestates, ita unius pontificium Christi est, dare animis salutem, & spiritum perpetuitatis apponere, 1. ii. p. 89. Si nobis hæc gaudia, hoc est, viam fugiendæ mortis, Plato in Phædone promisisset, aliusve ex hoc choro, possetque eam præstare, atque ad finem pollicitationis adducere; consentaneum fuerat ejus suscipere nos cultos, a quo tantum doni expectaremus & muneris. Nunc cum eam Christus non tantum promiserit, verum etiam virtutibus tantis manifestaverit posse compleri; quid alienum facimus, aut stultitiæ crimen quibus rationibus sustinemus, si ejus nomini, majestatique substernimur, a quo speramus utrumque, & mortem cruciabilem fugere, & vitæ æternitate donari? 1. ii. p. 66, 67. "Audetis ridere nos, quod mortuorum dicamus resurrec tionem futuram? 1. ii. p. 51. • Nihil enim est nobis promissum ad hanc vitam, nec in carunculæ hujus folliculo constitutis opis aliquid sponsum est auxiliique decretum. Quinimo edocti sumus minas omnes, quæcumque sunt, parvi ducere atque æstimare fortunæ. Ac si quando ingruerit vis quæpiam gravior, quâ finem necesse sit consequi vitæ, eam nec timere, nec fugere, 1. ii. p. 98. |